DSLRUsers.com

... Obsolete ...

These people are your fist call I think.
Address:
Nikon Service Queensland,
14 Merritt Street,
Capalaba,
QLD. 4157

Phone: (07) 3245 6444
Fax: (07) 3821 0006
Repair & servicing for all Nikon (film-based & digital products), Nikon binoculars, and Nikonos underwater equipment.

Mine failed a week before I went to Africa over Christmas. It was a bit over a year old. As I recall, it cost $250 to have the focus motor replaced.

I wasn't happy either.

... Obsolete ...

Adam,

With all due respect, when, in all reasonableness, would you expect a twelve months warranty to expire?

Whether actively or passively, I would respectfully suggest that it would have been your choice to not use this lens during the period in question. From what you're saying ...

VK4CP wrote:I was never that happy with the 18-200VR from the beginning, and it's been the most disappointing photography item I have ever purchased. This is the main reason I hadn't bothered with it for over a year.

... and thus this seems to have been an active decision on your part to not use this lens. Had you purchased a brand new car, and not used it for an extended period of time, it too may have failed in operation for some reason. I'm not for a moment accepting that this item should have failed, btw. I am suggesting that perhaps there may have been opportunities - now missed - for any failures to have been detected at an earlier point in time, and I feel saddened and disappointed in that you appear to be trying to blame Poon (why else mention him in your original post?) for something that is entirely beyond his control.

If this lens has disappointed you so much, why has it taken you this long - over two years - to raise your disappointment? Most people with this lens seem to be very satisfied with it, considering that it has an excellent degree of sharpness when used within its sweet spot, and accepting that it is not a pro-quality lens.

As to what might constitute an acceptable lifespan for a non-pro item, that is an interesting question, but one that is difficult to quantify. Some people will use this sort of item daily, and the item will wear. Perhaps quite heavily. Others might not use the item much at all. What is an optimal lifespan for such an item, given the potential for such disparate usage patterns?

I honestly haven't got a clue. What I can tell you is that I have seen items dealt with as warranty claims beyond their stated warranty periods, but within what I considered to be reasonable periods beyond that originally stated warranty period.

I'm not convinced that a period in excess of one year beyond the original warranty period falls within what I'd consider to be of that realm.

VK4CP wrote:This sounds like a great case to get Dept of Fair Trading involved.

I maintain that consumers should not have to pay for the repair of what seems to be a sub-standard part that had a significantly shorter than reasonably expected service life.

darklightphotography wrote:Mine failed a week before I went to Africa over Christmas. It was a bit over a year old. As I recall, it cost $250 to have the focus motor replaced.

I wasn't happy either.

DLP, what warranty period came with the new SWM?
And what guarantees were given that the replacement motor would not prematurely fail, like the original?

I think I will sell mine soon after it is fixed, irrespective.

I was never that happy with the 18-200VR from the beginning, and it's been the most disappointing photography item I have ever purchased. This is the main reason I hadn't bothered with it for over a year.

I had it replaced at Adelaide Technical Camera Service, and he's not very much into any kind of paperwork. I sort of assumed 12 months warranty on the parts & labour for the fix. I'm not sure how prevalent the issue is, after all you only see the problems on internet forums.

gstark wrote:<snip>
I honestly haven't got a clue. What I can tell you is that I have seen items dealt with as warranty claims beyond their stated warranty periods, but within what I considered to be reasonable periods beyond that originally stated warranty period.

I'm not convinced that a period in excess of one year beyond the original warranty period falls within what I'd consider to be of that realm.

I spoke to Nikon when mine went, and they said that if it had been up to 4 weeks out of warranty rather than 2 or 3 months they would have fixed it for free.

On a related issue, I had an 18-70 Nikon lens with apparent focus motor failure after it was dropped, and the repair quote was similar. I ended up pulling it apart myself, and now it focuses fine. It was probably a loose connector.

... Obsolete ...

... Obsolete ...

... Obsolete ...

Has anyone else been in the same situation with their 18-200VR?

This was the first lens I purchased with my D80, it got a fair flogging in the first 12-15 months and since then has only been used occasionally, last time I checked it was work fine, the lens at least 2.5 years old now.

In this particular case, the cost of repair is $291.
Broken down as; $205 labor, plus $86 for the SWM.
The warranty on parts and labor is only 6 months.
Turnaround time is quoted as 10 days, sometimes out the door in 2 days, providing they have the required parts in stock.

I have a theory, ill conceived as it may be, regarding Nikon repairs, typically repair/replacement parts are quite cheap and the labour is what gets the price up. I thought, if I was in charge of repairs and servicing, what would be a good way to extract the most amount of money from punters? work out what the repair cost threshold is for the majority of people and ensure most repairs at that region, typically a repair cost threshold, for me, would be around half the price of a new one depending on teh initial out lay. I had a repair not that long ago where the parts totaled less than 20 bucks and the total repair cost just under half a new item. Anyway off topic...

At that repair cost and with the vision of selling it, i think the prices are typically 500-800 bucks on fleabay it may be an option for you. I have held onto mine mainly due to the convenience factor, when trekking or in a situation where carrying two lens is not an option and weight is paramount, this is where I found this lens to be in its prime. Also utilised around the f5.6-8 range its pretty reasonable and I have got some of my best images from it, mainly since without that lens i would not have even got the picture.

Let us know how you go with teh repair, whether it be thru nikon or third party -I am sure others out tehre will find it beneficial - hopefully this something I will not have to deal with down the track

VK4CP wrote:

gstark wrote:With all due respect, when, in all reasonableness, would you expect a twelve months warranty to expire?

Gary, 12 months. Duration of warranty is not the issue.

Then why did you raise it?

I have read of instances where the SWM has failed with the first few months.

And I am aware of a great number of instances where the SWM remains functional after many years. I would respectfully suggest that fully functional would be likely to be the majority of instances ....

There was (is?) obviously a problem with the motors being fitted at some stage.

I'm not sure that we have evidence of this. Yes, there are some postings on the internet about these, but so too are there postings of all manner of things. I readily accept that it happens. I further contend that in the great majority of cases, these instance would be found, and rectified, within the warranty period.

My biggest beef is that consumers are paying to rectify what are obviously sub-standard items, and this is not limited to Nikon camera equipment alone.

Again, I'm unconvinced that there is evidence of this. Case in point: Apple's iPhone. We are seeing reports of these devices exploding, in the hands of consumers. To my knowledge there have been about five such instances reported. Several have been reported many times. There are now in excess of 26 million iPhones in use throughout the world; five such instances is hardly evidence of a serious problem that requires attention. I do accept that it's something to be aware of, but it's hardly evidence of a serious problem with the product.

We will never know when it actually stopped working.

Absolutely correct.

Had I used it more regularly, and had it failed within the first 12 months, then I would expect the issue would have been resolved satisfactorily.
This is not the case, so it does seem, to me at least, rather pointless bringing that up.

But yet you did.

gstark wrote:...and I feel saddened and disappointed in that you appear to be trying to blame Poon (why else mention him in your original post?) for something that is entirely beyond his control.

No blame being directed at all.

But you raised your apparent expectation that Poon should be expected to honour a warranty for this item. It was you who mentioned, in your initial post, your place of purchase, and it was you who mentioned your (probably correct) expectation that any attempt by you to make a claim under your purchase warranty provided by that vendor would by futile.

Whilst I hope you and others read what is there, I cannot stop you from reading what isn't there.

I'm sorry, but I have only read what you posted.

Simply stating where it came from, as it would be a reasonable question for someone to ask.

Would it? I would agree that this would be very relevant if there is a potential problem being raised with the vendor, but otherwise, I'm sorry, but I'm not so sure.

Not knowing where it came from, someone might make the (somewhat obvious) suggestion of returning it to same.

More than two years after the original purchase? I'm sorry, but I don't accept that.

Knowing that it came from Hong Kong, should indicate that returning it to the supplier is not a desirable first option

For any item that is of similar age, I would be suggesting a local repair option. I would not even be raising the issue of a warranty in any discussions, as that simply is not relevant to the problem at hand.

If there is an issue of suitability for the purpose for which the purpose for which it was intended - which is perhaps such an issue might be more appropriately directed - then the manufacturer is the appropriate point of contact.

So Gary, there is no reason for you to take what appears to be an overly protective stance on this supplier issue.

Again, it was you who initiated the discussion, and in so doing, you raised the name of the supplier. I do not believe that this issue has anything at all to do with the supplier, and I believe that I am entitled to put forward my point of view.

You may (or may not) agree with my point of view, and that is fine. But just as you are able to put forward your points, I believe I should be able to make my points where appropriate.

As you have read above, I have also experienced a faulty lens from B&H too.
You don't try to defend B&H, like you do HKS though, so you may be unaware that you are demonstrating some bias here, unfortunately.

I do not provide any facility for members to order products through B&H. As soon as you take the step to mention that you purchased a product from Poon, through the forum ....

This lens was purchased via this site from Hong Kong Supplies (AKA Poon) in June 2007.

then you also involve me. That's not "bias"; it's a direct interest.

And it's an interest that I am proud to have!

This would have been the correct, and neutral position to take, something as Publisher of this forum we expect from you.

No, not quite. As per my quote above, you chose to bring me, as the publisher of this site, into this matter.

gstark wrote:If this lens has disappointed you so much, why has it taken you this long - over two years - to raise your disappointment? Most people with this lens seem to be very satisfied with it, considering that it has an excellent degree of sharpness when used within its sweet spot, and accepting that it is not a pro-quality lens.

Who, exactly, was I supposed to raise my disappointment with?
You? This forum?

Me, absolutely, if there was an issue relating to any aspect of the ordering or delivery processes.

This forum, absolutely, relating to any issues that you have with regard to your usage of the product There are many posts discussing the merits, or lack of, of various pieces of equipment. That is one reason this forum exists.

You do not want a forum of constant whinges

I think that active discussion of the merits, or lack of merits, of the equipment that we use is a very worthwhile pasttime. How else do we learn that x is good and y is not?

gstark wrote:As to what might constitute an acceptable lifespan for a non-pro item, that is an interesting question, but one that is difficult to quantify.

Whilst the maximum life span may be difficult to quantify, the low end of the scale is certainly not.
Longer than 24 months, and most certainly longer than the cases of 3 months I have read about.
If you are suggesting that non-pro items have a life span of less than 3 years, then we are all suckers.

I have made no such suggestion. All I have done is state that it is a difficult question to answer, and I merely further observe that each individual's usage patterns will be different.

I'm too am saddened, but for different reasons.
I am not the first, and probably not the last the suffer a premature failure,

Have we established a bona fide case for "premature failure"? All we appear to have have established is that your instance of the lens has failed at some point prior to it reaching approximately 26 months of age. We do know that most instances of this type of failure have been detected, and rectified, within the stated warranty period. We now seem to be aware of two that were not detected within the warranty period.

VK4CP wrote:although that is on the other side of town, and a 2 hour return trip.

Or a $10 Express Post satchel, plus an ample sufficiency of bubble wrap.

... Obsolete ...

VK4CP wrote:Hi all

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but the search returned a rather disappointing (and somewhat unbelievable) result.

This is not having a go at you, but simply to say that what you are seeing are deficiencies of the search engine. Doing the same search again will also give no results despite this thread already existing. I think this is because the '-' is treated as an operator.

Place + in front of a word which must be found and - in front of a word which must not be found.

A better search would have been "200VR". You'll get a lot more matches (many not relevant) but you will get matches for that lens, including this thread: viewtopic.php?f=44&t=35306&hilit=200VR

... Obsolete ...

... Obsolete ...

Looks like the new 18 - 200 VR11 lens thats coming, is having a price impact on the first gen VR, HK Supplies now has first gen 18 - 200 listed at $699.00.

Cheers Rob

VK4CP wrote:No offense, but semantic games tend to become very tiresome, so perhaps you will understand me not quoting you any further.

No offense taken, Adam, but from my perspective, it's very simple. You mention that you ordered through this site, from Poon, that the product is faulty, and that it's likely that there would not be any warranty coverage, and that you are upset over that. I see that you're involving me in the discussion by mentioning this site, and that you were connecting some dots which I don't think should really have been connected.

Had you stated that you had purchased the lens some two years ago and that you expected that it was now out of warranty (without mentioning how it had been purchased) I would not have been upset. I simply come back to the fact that you mentioned the point of purchase, and that, IMHO, that mention was not really relevant to your query.

Incidentally, I appreciate the suggestion of the Express Post satchel.
I hadn't considered that.
Given the 2 hour return trip + vehicle running costs, that does make sense.

My pleasure. There are often many options available - hell, I even caught a bus into the city a week or so ago!

Just make sure Andersons have parts....

my D700 was there for 4 months and my 17-35 for about 3months.. Waiting on parts. Once they had the parts the repairs was very fast.

The price quoted for repair of the 18-200 seems cheap to me. I would get it done. Maybe if you are unhappy with the 18-200 you could enquire about a calibrating it to you body, there may be an issue there??

I would drive personally drive the 2 hours.. I would prefer not to leave anything up to Auspost. But i guess I am in a different boat it is a 14hr road trip to Andersons .

Good luck and I understand your frustration

MATT