Losing the plot

[gstark]

As we head into the silly season (happy new month, everybody) I want to throw a topic into the ring for serious discussion. I've just had a 20 minute phone call with a person at Nikon Australia, and I really think they're losing the plot.

Not just Nikon Australia, but Nikon.

Worldwide.

Let me set up the full scenario for you though, and please feel free to give this serious thought, consideration and discussion, but as always, this discussion should not degenerate into a pissing contest.

First of all, I've been informed that the attitude of Nikon Australia to grey imports is unchanged from that which applied under Maxwell's.

In all honesty, Nikon, get real. As a consumer, it really doesn't matter to me at all whether I buy the camera through Nikon Oz, or Nikon somewhere else. When I'm buying into the Nikon name, I have a certain level of expectations with that Nikon name, and Nikon's internal politics are meaningless to me. I really do not give a damn, and it's about time that Nikon understood this salient consumer point of view!

But what am I now buying when I buy into the Nikon name?

As many of you know, I'm a long time Nikon user. Both of my kids are adults, and I was using Nikon well before they were born. We have a veritable gaggle of Nikon cameras and glass in this household, and a number of other Nikons have made their way through my hands and this household.

Throughout that time - probably something like 30 years - I've also owned and/or used a number of other brands. This includes Canon, Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, Fuji, Mamiya, Bronica, Ricoh, and a variety of third party lenses including Tamron and Sigma. I think it's probably fair to say that I have a reasonable experience base upon which I can make certain judgements.


When I started in photography, the reason I initially bought Nikon was their reputation for being a robust, almost bullet proof, camera. In those days, the press essentially used little else, and my own personal experience with Nikon and other brands allowed me to confirm, first hand, this reputation.

These days we do not see that sort of dominance by Nikon. Indeed, the vast majority of cameras in use by the press seems to be Canon. And over the last couple of months, I've seen a number of our members switvch from using Nikon to Canon. They're moving, typically, to the 30D or the 5D, both of which are great cameras with certain featuresets that have a certain amount of appeal.

My own recent (personal) experiences with Nikon products includes the following:

My D70 required warranty repairs due to BGLOD.

Leigh's D70 required warranty repairs due to a faulty CF connector.

My D70's top LCD has had the battery indicator segment fail.

In April, at the camera show in Darling Harbour, I mounted a Nikkor 18-200 onto my D70, and after making a few images, the camera started to misbehave. This occurred three times with that lens mounted. It has not recurred since this time.

I was shooting with Nikkofan on Wednesday last. Her 3 month old D200 fails to acquire focus at 55mm with her even newer 17-55 DX. The lens seems to work fine with my D70, and I believe that it works fine with her D70. I believe that Padey has also observed this failure to acquire focus.

I have heard of D200s spontaneously firing attached SB800 units. I observed this on Wednesday last as well.

We're all aware of the BGLOD issues on the D70, the initial banding issues with the D200, and the supply chain problems with the D200, D70 and 18-200 lenses when they were first released.

Lindy has purchased a couple of Nikon PHDs for her daughters. On one, the battery door has broken. The other was delivered as a DOA; it was immediately replaced, but the second one has now sufferred a failure of the shutter unit.

It's been in the repair shop for three weeks now, and we still do not have an ETA for its return. This camera - and the delays to its repair - was the straw that broke the camel's back for me, btw.

Other things Nikon I'm aware of ...

One member recently reported that he had a fuse fail on his D70. That entailed a repair bill of about $100.

For a fuse!

I was flabbergasted to read that one.

Another member recently sufferred the misfortune to drop his D70. Due to the uncertainty of the timely supply of replacement parts, it was decided to replace the camera. While that was a good outcome for the member, the fact remains that Nikon cameras used to have the reputation for being almost bullet proof.

Dropping a Nikon used to mean that your camera would acquire a couple of dents and battle scars. It would be unlikely to have even meant a trip to the repair shop, let alone being written off!

Clearly, I think there are some serious issues here with Nikon, and the news, basically, is not very good. Obviously, while their glass is still very good, their build quality seems to not be anywhere near what it was.

Quite frankly, and using only those few examples that I am close too, I am coming to the opinion that it has fallen through the floor!

I do not seem to see issues of camera recalls in the Canon family. Yes, I see firmware updates, but I see them for Nikon, too, and as long as they're able to be performed by the end user, I don't see that as a major issue.

Now, getting back to my point: I'm a very long time Nikon user, and I am really beginning to think that they have lost the plot. Quality has gone down the tube, there seems to be no FF body in the pipeline (yes, I would really like to see one), the repair system seems to have gone to hell in a handbasket ...

I think I'm the sort of user that Nikon does not want to lose, but I am now starting to ask myself the question: why Nikon?

And quite frankly, I don't see an answer.

I think they're losing the plot!

[Oz_Beachside]

Very interesting points Gary, and I concur on quiet a few.

I myself, have this year made the transition from my student gear in film, Pentax, to invest months of pay into gear, going with what I have always considered the premium brand, Nikon.

The common thread I see, publicly, stems from the lack of international warranty support. I, and many other purchases of high end Nikon gear, travel the world. If I am in London, would it not be reasonable for me to expect, that I could purchase a piece of kit, and know, that with my brand of choice, that I can enjoy warranty coverage at home? I operate daily inside the strategy of multinationals, and understand that reasons for regional, or country specific warranty coverage, are 1. the issue of internal cost recovery, and 2. the intent to limit sales channels outside of country controls. However, if this was analysed, I think it would be a small portion (not insignificant mind you), but a small minded way of thinking. 5% of sales lost due to international orders, compared to 5% loss of market share (of the brand) are two EXTREMELY different numbers.

Small mindedness seems to be common in my issues with no international warranty.

My 5 cents on one of the issues raised in your topic...

[Nnnnsic]

This lack of warranty on imported items is especially troublesome in wake of Canon Australia now supporting imported DSLR's... and not Nikon.

Some interesting news for those in the market for a new DSLR.
Earlier this afternoon I had a customer ring up claiming Canon were now covering imported DSLR bodies.
After a couple of calls to Canon they confimed that and they will cover the warranty on imported whent the following requirements are met.

1. The seller is a Registered Australian Company with an ABN.
2. The seller has a physical address in Australia that can be visited by the customer.
3. The model was and Australian realeased camera, ie. Canon EOS 400D, not a Digital Rebel XTi.

From this post at Overclockers Australia (forum membership required).

[petal666]

Sometimes stiff competition isn't always a good thing. Corners are cut and quality suffers to keep market share. Not that I'm saying the cheap Canon DSLR's are any better build.

[Glen]

Gary some very salient points made in your post.

I think they change in quality came with digital bodies, before that I, and probably you and many others, thought the closest thing to a quality film camera was a swiss watch, both in quality and engineering. There are still many manual bodies, like the FG, etc, nearly a quarter of a century old which can attest to this quality. I still use a 601 which is nearly sixteen years old.

With digital bodies, cameras became half mechanical, half computer, with the inherent outdating that implies. I believe Nikon has reduced the quality of the mechanical side to match the expected lifespan of the sensor and electronics. If we look at our group, not one member (to the best of my knowledge) uses the D1 as their primary camera. That camera is only seven years old! So in some ways it would not be unreasonable for Nikon to build cameras to last 8 years. My concern is that many of our members have retired there 6 mp cameras to use 10 or 12 mp cameras, in probably a space of two years, I now think Nikon is seeing this and building gear to last a very short model life, maybe 2 or 3 years!

Whilst I find that abhorrent, maybe we will have to get used to it. I would actually be happy with 8 years, but recent issues like banding, BGLOD, etc indicate Nikon has taken a leaf from Bill Gates book and uses clients for beta testing.

This is one of the reasons I haven't bought a D2X, working full time I could not get enough work out of it before it's useful life was up.

Interestingly, worldwide warranty is available still on Nikon cameras, only film ones. Shows what products they really have confidence in.

[gooseberry]

Some good points re: initial introduction issues with products. Think Nikon need to work on this. And yes, it seems due to the digital transition - back in the good old film days product cycle times were much longer (eg 8 years between pro bodies) so they had much longer to develop and test the product.

Nowadays with the pressure from consumers to get new products out there as quick as possible, product life cycles are down to 18 months for the consumer products, they have much less time developing and testing products then what they were used to.

Also, the number of cameras being sold are in the millions each year (the D70/D70s is probably Nikon's best selling camera of all time).

So Nikon have had to ramp up product life cycle time and production numbers quite quickly, but the reality is they need to fix these issues, otherwise long time supporters are going to look elsewhere.

Edit: fixed typo.

[phillipb]

I agree with a lot of the points made so far, but I don't think that the banding problems or the BGLOD are due to the limited life span built into the cameras. These problems can occur immediately, not after some years of use.
I agree with gooseberry, the testing process is either too short or not comprehensive enough.
Other manufacturers have the same market pressures, why aren't they having similar problems?

[gooseberry]

Actually, other manufacturers have had similar introduction issues on products. for example some initial batches of the Canon 5D had banding issues (banding due to underexposure, opposite to that of the D200)

[moz]

Canon had a similar problem with a supply once too - the 300D launched into a market where a DSLR that sold 50,000 units had done very well. The 300D sold that many a month once demand stabilised - I'm told their production of 70k units/mo was not adequate to supply north american demand from launch until around Feb/March. I got my 300D through a friend in a camera shop who went "what's this 300D box doing on the floor behind the counter... hey, there's a camera in here" and rang me since they didn't have it already ordered and paid for by a customer. Or so he says... but I got the camera

Since then Canon don't seem to have underestimated demand by much at all - their announcements generally amount to "this item will be available retail after the show". Some people have to wait *days* to buy one.

As far as bad design, again, the 300D had a known problem with the focussing mirror locking in place that affected a lot of cameras - dozens in Australia alone. But nothing like Nikon that I know of, and their service has always been reasonable - my 300D was out of action for about 3 weeks, and they shipped it back free after they mistakenly told me to come and pick up the lens I repaired with it before the camera was ready.

I hate to say this, but even Sigma are ahead of Nikon on this - they rechipped my grey market 18-50/2.8 free of charge to work with my 30D, because I bought the lens before the camera came out (it worked fine on my 300D). Sure, Kennedys were very "if it is just rechipping then it's free, otherwise you pay". But a couple of weeks for repair and no bill... I'm happy. My impression is that in that case Nikon would be very "ship it back to where you bought it".

So Gary, are you turning to the light side? Will it be a white Christmas?

[moggy]

I wish I hadn't read your post Gary, I've just gone to use my D70s and it's decided it doesn't want to take photos anymore. Switch it on and everything looks OK until you press the shutter release and nothing happens. Done the usual, swap memory card, change battery, hard reset but it is not writing to the card. Looks like a trip to Nikon Service at Lidcome next week. Bugger!

Very Pissed off Bob.

[gstark]

Small mindedness seems to be common in my issues with no international warranty.

That's being very kind.

As I said, I really don't give a damn about their internal structures and politics. They're irrelevant, and more importantly, tnhey're none of my business. A Nikon warranty should be a Nikon warranty. It is that simple.

And when I bought Nikon, I bought because of the name, and the reputation.

However, and as noted above, with the last four Nikon cameras purchased, there have been six issues thus far, with each camera experiencing at least one issue.

As for the bright spark at Nikon Oz trying to tell me he thinks they make a good quality product ... He's certainly welcome to his opinion. And if that's the best he can offer ... ROTFLMAO!

Four cameras with six problems does equal quality.

Lousy quality!

[gstark]

Interestingly, worldwide warranty is available still on Nikon cameras, only film ones. Shows what products they really have confidence in.

Glen,

Is that right?

If so, I'm going to tackle Nikon Oz with it.

[gstark]

Other manufacturers have the same market pressures, why aren't they having similar problems?

That is a very good question.

[gstark]

So Gary, are you turning to the light side? Will it be a white Christmas?

I'm no stranger to Canon gear, and in all honesty, I'm really quite pissed off with the arrogance and the failure by Nikon to supply cameras that actually work, don't fall apart, and can last longer than walk down to the bloody beach!

Those who know me know that I'm a stubborn bastard, and given the situation with Lindy's daughter's camera and no ETA despite three weeks in the workshop, I really want some answers from them on this.

At the moment, I'm getting the feeling that they're little better than Sony, and we all know how I feel about them.

[gstark]

Very Pissed off Bob.

I don't blame you.

[Killakoala]

That's quite depressing.

[petermmc]

I am sure a lot of us are taking out 3-5 yr warranties with the expectation that things are going to go wrong.

I visited a camera store in Melbourne recently enquiring about a 17-55 Nikon 2.8. He mentioned that a few had come back for focus problems and that he advised all his clients to take problem lenses to some repairer in Melbourne that could do the appropriate adjustments. What he was telling me is that if I part with @$2300, my lens may not focus properly and that I may need it adjusted. Is this crazy or what?

I now have too much invested in Nikon to change and I am not sure that Canon has all the answers as well.

I used to have a spare Nikon Body for my old F3 because I used a lot of prime lenses. Now I have a spare body in case something unpredictably weird happens with the electronics of one. Nikon get your act together and start talking to us about your strategic intent. Leica is starting to look good again.

Peter Mc

[Glen]

Interestingly, worldwide warranty is available still on Nikon cameras, only film ones. Shows what products they really have confidence in.

Glen,

Is that right?

If so, I'm going to tackle Nikon Oz with it.

The warranty page from Nikon Australia's website:








Nikon Warranty Information

Local warranty

Digital equipment (digital SLRs, Coolpix compacts & Coolscan film scanners)

Your Nikon equipment is guaranteed against any manufacturing defects for one year from the date of purchase
The warranty card is issued only at the time of original purchase; it is non transferable.
The warranty card must be presented to the Nikon Service Facility before any repair can be made under warranty.
Establishing the original purchase date should be made by the original consumer purchase via the sales slips or other evidence.
Damage caused by accident, misuse, do-it-yourself repairs, sand, grit or water is not covered by this warranty, which is only valid at Nikon Service Centre.
All mail or transportation costs including insurance are at the expense of the owner. All other claims of any nature are not covered.
Warranty for digital product is only valid in the country of purchase.
**WARNING**
Please be wary of dealers claiming to be able to sell or provide you an international warranty for digital equipment when you are purchasing overseas. THIS IS FALSE. International warranty is unavailable.

International warranty

Conventional equipment (lenses, cameras, Speedlights)

Your Nikon equipment is guaranteed against any manufacturing defects for one year from the date of purchase.
The warranty card is issued only at the time of original purchase; it is non transferable.
The warranty card must be presented to the Nikon Service Facility before any repair can be made under warranty.
Establishing the original purchase date should be made by the original consumer purchase via the sales slips or other evidence.
Damage caused by accident, misuse, do-it-yourself repairs, sand, grit or water is not covered by this warranty, which is only valid at a Nikon Service Centre

[gstark]

Glen,

Thank you.

A couple of points about that. They state that the warranty card must be presented before any repair may be made under warranty. Interesting. I think that is contrary to the law in NSW, and I wonder what the Dept of Fair Trading might care to say about that.

But yes, you're correct, different warranties for different classes of purchasers, effectively. That is in no way satisfactory.

But I wonder too if this can be turned against them: the international waranty doesn't exclude digital slrs. Thus, if you have a DSLR with a local warranty you are covered by the first section, but if you have a DSLR with an international warranty, you would be covered by the second section.

At which point does a camera no longer become a camera?

What would be the validity of their statement "Warranty for digital product is only valid in the country of purchase."? Surely it is only valid within Australia, given that this was taken from the Nikon Oz website?

Regardless, it's just a cop-out.

Or a statement that Nikon no longer makes products they are prepared to guarantee.

[TonyH]

Unfortunately, it confirms my reason for never selling any of my Nikon bodies when I upgrade. You just never know when you'll need your old gear to get you out of the Sh!#...

However, when you pay what they are asking for the cameras you do expect the bloody things to last!

Tony

[Matt. K]

Gary
A timely thread and you have made some very pertinent points! I think you shoud point this thread out to Nikon Australia and ask them to watch this space! They need to get their act together or watch the entire digital SLR community move over to Canon. Professionals have already done this and it's just a matter of time before the rest of the photographic community notice....and follow suit. Nikon cameras are no longer so well constructed that we need to remain faithful to the brand. I know a number of enthusuastic Canon users who get sterling service....including the loan of tele lenses from the Canon distributors! They gush about the service Canon provideds and Nikon has lost them forever. It's a buyers market. Maxwells have already paid the price and Nikon Australia can get a little nervous about the power of consumers using the internet. There are 2000 forum members reading this and god knows how many visitors. It does not take long for the message to get around and sink in.

[Geoff]

Excellent suggestion Matt.

[terminator]

In my opinion on a model for model comparison as far as features, image quality and value for money go, Nikon still lead the way.
They don`t have a full frame model, granted, but this is not a concern to me.
The image quality and feature set of my D200 is easily as good as a 5D at a much cheaper price.
The D200 did have some problems on release, however this camera IS built like a tank. Better built than a 5D and I have had no problems whatsoever.
I took a risk and bought it Grey.
That risk payed off.
I know bad experiences like Gary has stated leave a very bad taste in the mouth (my old D70 ended up in the repair shop also), but I just wanted the most camera for my limited dollar and after reading dozens of reviews, the D200 was it and continues to amaze me one year later.

[gooseberry]

The Nikon policy in Aus for digital and film equipment is the same as other countries and other manufacturers as well - digital cameras are local warranty; film cameras, lenses, flashes are international warranty.

Leigh's quote from the OCAU site regarding Canon Australia's policy is interesting, if it is correct. It's only slightly better, as the digital camera still needs to be purchased in Australia, but the seller can source it from other Canon distributors. Not seen Canon in other countries offer that as yet.

[pharmer]

They don`t have a full frame model, granted, but this is not a concern to me.
The image quality and feature set of my D200 is easily as good as a 5D at a much cheaper price.
The D200 did have some problems on release, however this camera IS built like a tank. Better built than a 5D and I have had no problems whatsoever.

I've shot thousands of frames on my D200 and now on my 5D - both professionally and for my own enjoyment and I disagree with you completely on the image quality and the build quality issues. The 5D has more detail and has more acuity than the D200 at any ISO. Above ISO400, the 5D walks all over the D200.

I believed the myth of inferior build quality until I got a 5D and used it extensively- aside from the sliding CF card door its just as sturdy as the D200.

[sirhc55]

Buy Kodak and never look back, or for that matter, forward

[Glen]

Buy Kodak and never look back, or for that matter, forward

Termy, the D200 may be a fine camera, but one year isn't much of an ask for a $2k camera. As stated above there are still working examples of 25 yr old cameras, the D1 (built much better than a D200) is rarely seen. The D200 is more a Hummer, some of the old cameras are Abraham's tanks.



I actually think the international warranty issue is because they know the volume of adjustment and repairs is high on Dslr and want to make the people who sell them wear that cost. In film cameras it was a small bonus they offered which was at minimal cost as the cameras were very reliable. I could see how an international warranty could bury a small distributor eg two American aircraft carriers get based in Fiji for a year. If each had 400 Nikon Dslr on board, and they generated the 1/3 fault average we have on this board, that would be 24o extra warranty jobs in Fiji. I doubt they have the resources. Now of course if the gear was fully tested before release, maybe we wouldn't have that 1/3 fault rate....

[sirhc55]

Why on earth would a Japanese giant (e.g Nikon) give an international warranty on an item made in Thailand - obviously they don’t have rocks in their heads.

Correct me if I am wrong but my belief is that the Nikon pro cameras (F, F2, F3, F4, F5 and maybe F6) were all made in Japan

[Glen]

Why on earth would a Japanese giant (e.g Nikon) give an international warranty on an item made in Thailand - obviously they don’t have rocks in their heads.

Correct me if I am wrong but my belief is that the Nikon pro cameras (F, F2, F3, F4, F5 and maybe F6) were all made in Japan

Just like Sigma

[jethro]

My take, Maybe Nikon as most companies in any consumer product have taken the "Planned obselescence" approach to their range. Keep the product moving, keep up the sales isn't this what all the new consumers want? What a crock of shit! Cheaper parts means more profit, cheaper labour means more profit in an ever price concience marketplace. Make them cheap keep them moving, is this the new Nikon way?
Jethro

[terminator]

They don`t have a full frame model, granted, but this is not a concern to me.
The image quality and feature set of my D200 is easily as good as a 5D at a much cheaper price.
The D200 did have some problems on release, however this camera IS built like a tank. Better built than a 5D and I have had no problems whatsoever.

I've shot thousands of frames on my D200 and now on my 5D - both professionally and for my own enjoyment and I disagree with you completely on the image quality and the build quality issues. The 5D has more detail and has more acuity than the D200 at any ISO. Above ISO400, the 5D walks all over the D200.

I believed the myth of inferior build quality until I got a 5D and used it extensively- aside from the sliding CF card door its just as sturdy as the D200.

Maybe image quality IS better but NOT $2000 better...

Maybe build quality is the same. It should be BETTER for $2000 extra.

My point is NIKON make very good cameras at very competitive prices.

If the 5D drops $2000 then it is a killer camera for Pros and Prosumers.
As it is, the 5D is a high end Pro camera.

The D200 is not far behind(better in a lot of areas) for A LOT LESS.
IMHO Nikon still cover the market better than Canon on a features for price basis and while they continue to do so, I will shoot Nikon.

Also I know it is a bitter pill to swallow and I`m ready to be hammered, but any digital camera is going to be obsolete within 3 years just like any PC.
Camera manufacturers know this....

[MHD]

No, I think that is a very fair comment... perhaps not 3 years and perhaps not "Obselete" but definately behind the 8 ball....


I think this is getting somewhat off track, Nikon, Canon, in fact all cameras on the market ARE, by very definition, competitive, or they would not be ON the market (or off it very quick)

The issue here is NOT Canon bodies vrs Nikon bodies but Nikon QC and after sales service and if Nikon Australia has made an impact on this...

Gary says, through his experiences: NO....

And I find their lack of interest in this user group disturbing to say the least as it represents around to 100K worth of business to them and even more POTENTIAL business...

I also am VERY disappointed at NA as well as Nikon Global's refusal to enter the 21st century... In the world of Globalised economies how can they NOT honour Nikon global warranty????

Now, please keep to topic, discuss the issue here, there is plenty of time for Canon vrs Nikon as worn out as that is...

[christiand]

Thanks Scott,

I agree with what you are saying and indeed this thread should not turn into a brand A versus Brand B or even Brand C comparison - I'd say spending time on comparison is flogging a dead horse; lots of other threads are already spending time on that.
Does the Nikon Corporation know about the forum's existance ?

Cheers,
CD

[terminator]

Sorry if I seem to have gone "Off" topic, but in Gary`s original post, he asked "Why Nikon?"
I have just tried to answer this question and believe I have in my case.
How have I gone off topic?

[mic]

Once a Brand you could be truly proud of, but of course with cutting costs and trying to make as much money as they possibly Greedly can. Greedly ?
They forgot about or just didn't care is to put it better, about how a Quality Camera should be and perform like.

Bottom line, they just don't care !

More the better to try and peg back their competitor, a few thousand lemons don't matter that much at first, but in the end it will.

Unless they return to being a True Nikon, I'm affraid it will be game over for them.

WAKE UP NIKON !!

Hear our voices you FOOLS !

Mic.

[sirhc55]

Scott - in many ways this is a Canon vs Nikon debate. Canon give service, Nikon don’t give a flying f*ck

[MHD]

*Cartman voice*
Respect my authorati!
*/cartman voice*


Seriously though, all this is winging and moaning...

What are/can we do about it... Perhaps an open letter??

I like Nikon gear, and I own to much to easily go to Canon...

[Nnnnsic]

I'm not so sure if it's a Nikon vs. Canon issue. Yes, Nikon has problems with their cameras but equally, so does Canon.

I wouldn't hesitate to compare failures like proper researching of products' flaws like the BGLOD on Nikon cameras and a lack of focus point technology that should have been rebuilt for full-framed cameras like Canon's 5D and 1DsMk series of cameras.

Each camera is going to have their own flaws or attributes and that's something you get to deal with. The old logic where unless you spend over $6000 on a Canon, you're not going to get something built like a tank still applies (except with the 10D, 20D, and 30D). With Nikon, it's around the $1700 mark.

You can argue for days and days that by buying a 5D you're getting a full-frame sensor in a camera, but for near the same price you can get a D2x which doesn't need the full-frame, has an incredibly good implementation of focus point technology, and is built in near specification to the $12,000 body that Canon makes, the 1DsMk2.

The problem that exists in my mind isn't so much the cameras but rather the warranty and in getting a version of Nikon of our own, very little seems to have changed.

The difference between Canon and Nikon in this country is one where Canon have a reason and have always had a reason to exist as a large company able to deal with customers because of the amount of product available in this country. Nikon do not have the massive amount of customers in various fields in Australia, but this still doesn't excuse the lack of service given to Australia.

That said, Pentax too don't exist as a company here and run through I think CR Kennedy (not sure... going off the top of my head here) but yet from what I hear, provide better support and pricing than our previous Nikon people Maxwells and our current version of Nikon Australia.

Nikon Australia at present do need to get their act together.

They cannot just sit idly by and change the prices a little bit to make the things that Maxwell screwed up all the better.

They need to be proactive with the community, otherwise Nikon Australia are little more than a version of Maxwell with an authorised yellow and black logo that someone in Japan needs to be informed about.

[moz]

The old logic where unless you spend over $6000 on a Canon, you're not going to get something built like a tank still applies (except with the 10D, 20D, and 30D). With Nikon, it's around the $1700 mark.

So except for the cameras that are cheaper than equivalent Nikons, Canon cameras are more expensive. Thinking...

That said, Pentax too don't exist as a company here and run through I think CR Kennedy but yet from what I hear, provide better support and pricing than Nikon

That's been my experience with Kennedys.

[obzelite]

jeez, and i've been crunching numbers to work out if a 5D could be a possibility.
i get online read this and now my stuff had dropped in value

i was a canon user and swapped to nikon to go digital, but my hesitation to invest in glass has always been due the naggin in the back of mind to go back, and the constant nikon issues you hear ppl raise.

My D200 has an internal flash problem that it doesn't register when you pop it up and needs some manipulating to get it to work, and of course i cant get it fixed in oz, so i pretty much figure I'll take a loss and jump ship.
And i cant be the only one.


edit: can poon get 5D's?

[Glen]

I think ths thread is digressing quite a bit. It is not so much that these cameras have problems, which there is a slight expectation of with regard to shorter development times and model lives, but the way they are dealt with. If when someone came in with a BGLOD issue, if the response was "that will be a one hour wait sir, or would you like it sent out by courier tomorrow?" I doubt we would be discussing this now. Unfortunately the response is that will be 3 to 4 weeks sir. That is for a problem they know what it is and how to fix it!

[moz]

One thing that I do keep thinking here is that the problem is t least partly the collision between computers (12 month product cycle) and cameras (5 years). Companies that are already in the computer business as well as cameras seem to be doing ok - Canon, and to some extent Sony; but companies that are very strong with a 5 year cycle are really struggling (Nikon, Konica, Minolta, Pentax).

It did amuse me a little when the main difference between the Canon 1DII and 1DIIn was an extra 512MB of RAM. Wooo, there's an extra $50 of parts and one extra track on the circuit board. But it does give you some idea of where the functionality gains are coming from - it's not the light tight box end of the system that's for sure.

[gstark]

Sorry if I seem to have gone "Off" topic, but in Gary`s original post, he asked "Why Nikon?"

I certainly did.

But does that question immediately pose the alternative question "why Canon?"

In some respects, yes it certainly does, but the real thrust of my question, and my original post, was that, to me, Nikon's quality, as seen by me, has not simply dropped, but taken a nosedive.

In the past one would buy Nikon because of it's reputation for quality. My question, and my point, was "is this still the case?"

I really don't think so.

You may argue that in your 12 months with the D200 you have been impressed with its quality. Well and good.

I would argue though that in the past, the level of build quality that we've seen on their prosumer cameras was far better than what you see on the D200. I would, for instance, argue that the FE/FM series of cameras was directly targeted at exactly the same class of buyer to whom the D70/D80 is currently addressed.

Comparing an FM with a D70 though is a very bad joke, and the joke, sadly, is on us. It's like comparing a tank with an egg.

I really think it's time that we, as a consiumer group, stood up to these marketing turkeys, and demanded a return to some semblance of quality.

I'm sick of being a beta tester for shoody design.

[sirhc55]

I don’t believe the cameras are ”shoddy” per se Gary but I do believe that Nikon have not embraced the electronic side as well as others.

[gstark]

You can argue for days and days that by buying a 5D you're getting a full-frame sensor in a camera, but for near the same price you can get a D2x which doesn't need the full-frame

But it's not the camera that needs the full frame. FF provides me with a greater range of creative options.

I want the FF capbilities, and the extra possibilities it provides to me.

They need to be proactive with the community, otherwise Nikon Australia are little more than a version of Maxwell with an authorised yellow and black logo that someone in Japan needs to be informed about.

And from my discussions with NA thus far, that is exactly the impression I'm getting. It's essentially Maxwell's rebadged, and that, to me, is not a good thing.

Not even close.

They need to lose their arrogance really quickly.

As I've noted in my initial post in this thread, I've been noticing a number of people - some of whom are long time Nikon users- moving away from Nikon. I really am coming to the conclusion that this is niether an accident, nor a coincidence.

More likely, it's due to Nikon's own failure to respond to the needs of their users, and their failure to build a quality product. Let's face it: with the last four cameras purchased within my household, each has sufferred at least one fault, and there have been four returns to base for rectification of those issues.

There is no way in the world that you can say that a company producing that sort of product is producing a priduct of high quality.

Oh yes, we recived an email yesterday, advising us that Lindy's daughter's camera is now ready for collection.

Three weeks! Not good enough, I say.

[gstark]

I don’t believe the cameras are ”shoddy” per se Gary but I do believe that Nikon have not embraced the electronic side as well as others.

Chris,

Four cameras purchased over a period of about 30 months.

Each suffering at least one fault.

One DOA.

Four returns to Nikon/Maxwell for rectification.

Six faults thus far in those four cameras.

Add to that other issues that I've seen or experienced, outside of my immediate household, such as the focus issues, or the spontaneous flash.

What word would you choose over "shoddy" ?

[gstark]

edit: can poon get 5D's?

Simon,

I'll check and let you know.

[Razor]

One point that hasn't been raised so far is that there is another stakeholder on Nikons agenda. Don't leave retailers off the equation!

Since customs has changed rules to allow GST free import of items valued up to $1000, retailers have lost a significant market share to sellers in Asia where much of this gear is produced.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying this is bad! I am buying from Hong Kong myself but we can't ignore the fact that this makes life harder for camera shops and chains around Australia. Operating a warehouse in Kowloon is significantly cheaper than a retail shop on George St, especially considering the wage factor.

The DSLR market has become more and more competitive over the years and Nikons biggest competitor is offering comparable cameras at a cheaper price (400D vs D80 // 30D vs D200) not least due to the fact that they produce the sensor in house and thereby directly control one of the major cost contributors.

So imho Nikon heavily relies on retailers to sell a more expensive product. Add the fact that every man and his dog (no offence) has a Canon - so they must be better right? This is the line of thinking I've been getting from many people who are interested but don't know better!

Say there was an international warranty and people could bring their D200 from HK to a service agent in Australia for warranty repairs. I believe the direct result would be that many more customers buy from Asia and retailers here would loose even more business. This cannot be in Nikons interest if they want to maintain or even expand their market share in Australia.

The other point raised was that of built quality and I agree with Glen on this. The faster product cycles and obsolence of older gear means that a less rugged body is required. I've had no issues with the quality of my D80 however I can't compare it to the quality of film bodies as I never owned one. In fact I found the quality and feel of my Nikon superior to that of the 400D (Canon is cutting corners too ) which was part of my purchase decision.

Let's face it, the biggest factor for many consumers is price and to a lesser extend features, quality, support etc. If Nikon built their bodies even more solid (all relative of course) then they'd confine themselves to an even smaller market segment which is willing to pay a premium for this. The digital age has changed the market and Nikon is just trying to make the best of it in my opinion.


I absolutely appreciate all the points that have been raised before. I'd probably have a different view if I had quality issues with my gear. Just tried to look at the issue from another perspective

[DaveB]

I've been a Canon DSLR user since 2000, but I do have some exposure to Nikon bodies through my job. My personal preference for photographic tools is the EOS bodies, but putting that aside...

As stated above there are still working examples of 25 yr old cameras, the D1 (built much better than a D200) is rarely seen.

Presumably mainly because not many people are interested in using a 2.7 Mp DSLR these days? The D1 is definitely a solid tank.

focus point technology that should have been rebuilt for full-framed cameras like Canon's 5D and 1DsMk series of cameras.

That's an interesting point of view, and one I wouldn't necessarily disagree with, but I suspect that it's viewing the situation from a different perspective than some people in Canon. The AF systems in all these cameras were originally designed for full-frame (film) cameras. The AF systems of the 1D-series bodies are refinements of that found in the 1v and 3. The AF system of the 10D/300D/350D is taken from the 30/33 film bodies. The AF systems of the 20D/30D/400D/5D are refinements of that.
I think that using them on crop-factor bodies (where the AF points cover more of the frame) has advantages, which you lose when you revert to a full-frame camera. I just wish the designers thought this as well.


As a small extra data point:
In my business we do a lot of work modifying digital cameras (primarily for infra-red use). Admittedly many of the cameras that customers send to us are not new, but of the last 4 D70 cameras we've received, 3 have been DOA (even though the customer swears it worked fine when they shipped it). Due to a few factors I have a very low opinion of the build quality of the D70. I apologise to any D70-lovers out there (especially given the original name of this forum) but there it is.

[gooseberry]

But it's not the camera that needs the full frame. FF provides me with a greater range of creative options.

I want the FF capbilities, and the extra possibilities it provides to me.

Don't want to bring up all those 35FF vs DX arguments, but just curious Gary, what creative options does 35FF give you that DX does not ? 'Cos for me, if I were on the Canon side, I'd prefer a 30D+10-22mm over a 5D, as I can get the 30D+10-22mm cheaper than just the 5D alone, and I get a much better spec'd body to boot, and I don't think I'd be restricted in creativity in using a 30D than a 5D.