Thank you to my new friends here--and prolly farewell, too

Started Jul 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
Robin Casady
Forum ProPosts: 11,715
Like?
Re: B&H was fantastic
In reply to Water Ouzel, Jul 6, 2013

Water Ouzel wrote:

Robin Casady wrote:

I think you are making some leaps of logic here. While B&H probably sent it in good faith, there is no way to tell why your camera has so many actuations. I think the most likely scenario is that Nikon had nothing to do with it. B&H accepts returns. They don't trash returned cameras. Nor do they sell them as used. They send them out to customers as new. I think you simply got a camera returned to B&H.

Since they accept returns. Return it to them. Have them send you another new camera. Repeat the process until you get one that shows only one actuation. Or, buy from some other store.

-- hide signature --

Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
— Bertrand Russell

I can see how your own call on the probabilities might be correct. There are, of course, some leaps in your call, too. I understand that B&H takes returns. This camera has more than 10 times their stated limit of actuations for a valid return and came in pristine packaging. It's not possible to be certain where the oversight occurred. Your conclusion--keep swapping product til one works for 30 days--would be more compelling absent the current swell of issues with Nikon QA and CS. But thanks. Food for thought.

I doubt that B&H pays someone to check the shutter count on every Nikon returned to them. They are a high volume, low margin store. On a Nikon D800 they probably make less than $200. It is one thing to declare a policy and another thing to enforce it. The policy discourages people from using their return policy as a cheap camera rental service, and allows them to deny a return if they suspect abuse. To strictly enforce it would mostly make their customers unhappy and cost them money in labor.

So, what is the most way a camera with 2743 got into B&H's supply of "new" cameras?

1. B&H accepted it back from a customer and put it back in stock. Maybe they checked the contents of the box, maybe they didn't. Probably didn't take a photo and check the EXIF. This is typical behavior for stores that accept returns, such as Best Buy, Amazon, Macys, etc.

2. B&H bought refurbs from Nikon and accidentally put them into "new" stock. Mistakes happen.

3. B&H, or some other store, received it as a return and shipped it back to Nikon. Nikon refurbished it and sold it as new. This seems unlikely because Nikon has a program for selling refurbished cameras.

I would go with #1 as the most likely.

-- hide signature --

Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
— Bertrand Russell

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow