Nikon really have ZERO interest in customer service

**************
Sent the message below to Nikon Australia through their web form.

They didn't answer the question - in fact the reply suggests a form letter and that their representative didn't take the time to even read it properly. They can't give an accurate quote for a simple sensor remapping. And for that matter they can't spell "hello".

Oh yeah I want to pay 1.5x as much for warranty from this bunch.

It just irks me. There is no way I'm spending between $330 and $480 (I can't even tell you how much!0 for probably 15 minutes worth of work remapping 3 cameras. Especially since hot pixels will come back. Nor will I be in a rush to buy another camera which I know will also develop hot pixels.

So Nikon will NEVER see a cent from me on this. What they have ensured is that their cameras are a pain to work with. I shoot RAW mostly, and this discourages me from attempting to shoot action in JPG given the amount of extra post processing I'd have to do. It's just maddening. Why do companies make their products like this? On the odd chance that someone's going to send a camera for cleaning every few months or buy a brand new camera rather than just live with the issue? Really? That makes economic sense? Your business plan is to waste your customer's time and/or have your customers produce substandard output? And you wonder why people are abandoning DSLR and going with mobile phones instead?

It took years to get on camera sensor cleaning. Nikon 1 already has in camera pixel mapping. How many more generations before they stop playing these silly games and give us decent mapping in the more expensive line.


**************

Message sent


**************

Hi, Between us my wife and I own several Nikon DSLRs. We are not professionals and have never done paid work. We have 3 D90 cameras that are showing bright pixels at various ISO. which are starting to get annoying. We shoot RAW so software like Pixel Fixer does the job, but it is time consuming and annoying. What would be the cost to have them remapped? We do not need any other work done on the cameras. Would it be possible to make an appointment and have them remapped while one of us waits? I would prefer this to either sending them in one at a time, or sending away all the cameras in one hit. I'm hoping we can work out a reasonable arrangement (price and time wise). Thanks,
Sammy

**************
Reply
**************
Hallo Sammy, Thank you for your email. Please send the unit to us for a remap of the sensor. Approximate cost is about $100.00 - $150.00 + $9.90 return freight and may take up to 1 week for the remapping to be done. this could be done sooner if the technicians do not have much on the current repair queue. Regards
Regards [Name removed]

Customer Service Representative

NIKON AUSTRALIA PTY LTD

What, to me it seems like fine service.

One week (or less) to service a rather old camera outside warranty, that is fast enough for me.
The quote does NOT specify if it is per camera or for all 3.

It might be just 15 min of actual work per cam., but what you seems to forget is the time (=money) and work it takes from arrival, to the technical, the test-bench, the soft-/hardware required and manpower.
And then again the time (= money) required for handling/packaging to return it to you.

I'm with Sammy here, that's a high price. When I shot Olympus DSLRs they had pixel mapping in firmware. I guess one camera not so bad but to have three done, that's quite a hit on cameras a couple of generations old.

Bill

At $100 per camera - an old, out of warranty camera - for the trouble involved in processing it in and out of service and 15 minutes of tech time.


If it's not worth that to you, then don't do it, but I think publically blasting Nikon for what, at least to me is a reasonable service charge is over the top on your part.

Free/cheap service forever? Tech time for any product out of warranty, photographic or otherwise, is expensive...

You are apparently complaining about the cost of the repair not the quality of the customer service. They replied promptly, specifically, and politely to your query. That would seem to be factual. You are free to accept or decline the estimate. But, in this day and age, $100 is often the fee a tech charges just to show up at your door (think appliance service). It is perhaps more difficult for you to accept given the number of cameras you need repaired. Since there is no group discount, I would just send in the worst and judge the quality of the repair. If the difference is really positive for you, then get the others repaired, too.

I just had my Toyota Highlander Hybrid break down after 100,000 miles while out of state. The problem: a broken inverter. The cost: $9,000. Now, I have to drive back to Maryland in a few days to pick it up. Still don't know what an inverter is exactly (called the brain of a hybrid).

As i see it, is not how fast they respond and how long does it take, is what are they asking money for. Now i use an D7000, but i still have my entry level Pentax k-x, and it does have pixel mapping in camera. Same goes for the stupid rubbers, you have to pay for bad glue. I'm not with Nikon for long, but for sure i'm not willing to pay for mapping or rubbers or other things like this. If i'll end up there...I just won't buy Nikon in the future, it's simple.

FYI

"Hallo" is a perfectly acceptable spelling of the more commonly seen "hello" (see all Enid Blyton books).

Brev00 said:

Brev00 wrote:

You are apparently complaining about the cost of the repair not the quality of the customer service. They replied promptly, specifically, and politely to your query.

Click to expand...

They didn't reply to my query. Nothing at all about multiple cameras, whether to send one in at a time, whether they could all be done together.

This is NOT a repair issue. All cameras are expected to develop hot pixels.

And if I had a Nikon 1, or a different brand of camera, I wouldn't need a tech to map out hot pixels.

Brev00 said:

I just had my Toyota Highlander Hybrid break down after 100,000 miles while out of state. The problem: a broken inverter. The cost: $9,000. Now, I have to drive back to Maryland in a few days to pick it up. Still don't know what an inverter is exactly (called the brain of a hybrid).

Click to expand...

Are you saying you're happy with that? And a camera is not a car.

Alan Hope said:

Alan Hope wrote:

FYI
"Hallo" is a perfectly acceptable spelling of the more commonly seen "hello" (see all Enid Blyton books).

Click to expand...

And is not reading that I have multiple cameras good English too?


I suppose buying multiple cameras from a company means nothing, because Nikon have heaps of customers that buy 3 of the same consumer DSLR for personal use, and can afford to burn good will?

We get what we deserve here. If Nikon does this and people find it perfectly reasonable, and call it good service, they'll continue to do it. Why on earth would they implement in camera pixel mapping when so many people think it's reasonable to be charged $160 for the service? (The only reason is competition, when they've found themselves


I shouldn't need to spend $160 a year on remapping and another $160 a year on sensor cleaning (don't forget they don't officially support the user doing this either!) OR MORE to keep a 3 year old camera taking good pictures.

How many of you did this in the film days? (Yes, you bought the film, but part of the beauty of digital was we were suppose to move away from such expenses).

rbmphoto said:

rbmphoto wrote:

At $100 per camera - an old, out of warranty camera - for the trouble involved in processing it in and out of service and 15 minutes of tech time.

Click to expand...

I doubt it's even 15 minutes per camera, more like in total. But let's say that it is 15 mins per camera. 4 cameras would cost $600 in labour! Is $600/hr reasonable to you? There are NO parts involved here. They're not offering to do multiple cameras at a discount.

rbmphoto said:

If it's not worth that to you, then don't do it, but I think publically blasting Nikon for what, at least to me is a reasonable service charge is over the top on your part.

Click to expand...

Of course it's not worth it to me and of course I'm not going to do it. New hot pixels can appear at any time...even in transit back from having it remapped. I'm going to post process every RAW file and avoid shooting JPG at all. That is the only reasonable course of action.

rbmphoto said:

Free/cheap service forever? Tech time for any product out of warranty, photographic or otherwise, is expensive...

Click to expand...

How about releasing the software so I can do the remapping?

Sammy Yousef said:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Hallo Sammy, Thank you for your email. Please send the unit to us for a remap of the sensor. Approximate cost is about $100.00 - $150.00 + $9.90 return freight and may take up to 1 week for the remapping to be done. this could be done sooner if the technicians do not have much on the current repair queue. Regards

Click to expand...

Regards [Name removed]

Customer Service Representative

NIKON AUSTRALIA PTY LTD


Hallo is a nicer hello, in my opinion

$100-$150 isn't very reassuring; they don't know the exact cost?

Nikon gear is going for a decent price from amazon.co.uk now; don't buy from Australia if you have to buy Nikon again (though I can imagine you are not eager).

Yeah, one of the amazing Olympus features has been their pixel mapping; just brilliant innovation and you'd think the big N would have some offering by now...

There are many professional hourly rates that meet or top that (and that don't involve sex either). But it's not that simple - multiple people are involved and multiple tasks...

Someone's got to receive it, log it in and get it to the tech test the problem, fix the problem, then retest to make sure the work's done correctly (otherwise they'd get hysterical posts in all caps on the internet about how Nikon service was horrible), then get it packed up, logged out, you notified and shipped and warranty the work. And all that whether it's a 5/15/25/35 year old camera, or a new D3x or D4. Minimum repair shop prices seem steep, but they are not, there's a lot of overhead.

This may be one of those projects that only Nikon can perform, but on many problems than can be addressed by other than the manufacturer, Nikon repair is only a little more expensive than local or regional repair shops (and well worth it IMO).

Not that they'll do it for you, particularly since you seem to be hell bent on running them down , Nikon service typically gives whatever item they are working on a good 'once over' while it's in the shop, returning it to you in much better shape than when you sent it in.

If you think $100 is steep for a minimum service charge - no matter what the length of time involved in the actual repair - even 5 minutes - I'm afraid you're in for a shock as you expand your circles...

And by the way, I thought they responded timely and accurately to your inquiry. The fact that they didn't specifically reject your request to come sit in their facility while the work on three cameras was performed likely wasn't an oversight, but more a tactful rejection of your request...

Sammy Yousef said:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Sammy Yousef said:

Brev00 wrote:

You are apparently complaining about the cost of the repair not the quality of the customer service. They replied promptly, specifically, and politely to your query.

Click to expand...

They didn't reply to my query. Nothing at all about multiple cameras, whether to send one in at a time, whether they could all be done together.

Click to expand...

I thought you quoted an email from them in your op. They were polite and quoted a price for the requested service. From the letter, as I said in my response, I did not think they were offering a bulk discount. It was an estimate for your needed service delivered in a clear and respectful way.

Sammy Yousef said:

This is NOT a repair issue. All cameras are expected to develop hot pixels.

Click to expand...

Everyone gets sick. That doesn't mean a cold is not a health issue. If the problem was there when you bought the lens, it would be a return issue. If it developed within the next year, it would be a warranty issue. Now, three years later, it is a repair issue. Whether it is normal or not is not relevant.

Sammy Yousef said:

And if I had a Nikon 1, or a different brand of camera, I wouldn't need a tech to map out hot pixels.

Click to expand...

But, you don't. If I were George Clooney I wouldn't be posting on dpreview.

Sammy Yousef said:

Sammy Yousef said:

I just had my Toyota Highlander Hybrid break down after 100,000 miles while out of state. The problem: a broken inverter. The cost: $9,000. Now, I have to drive back to Maryland in a few days to pick it up. Still don't know what an inverter is exactly (called the brain of a hybrid).

Click to expand...

Are you saying you're happy with that? And a camera is not a car.

Click to expand...

My point is that issues happen and we have choices on how we are going to respond. Sometimes, the best possible solution costs more money than we allotted. It still isn't the end of the world. If it were the end of the world, complaining wouldn't do much good then either.

If your best option is to process out the hot pixels, then that is at least a solution as annoying as it might be. In the long run, you may not buy another Nikon product. I will definitely think a long time before getting another hybrid car even though I appreciate the environmental difference. It might have been nice to know about this issue before I got the car, but I am still glad I bought it.

rbmphoto said:

rbmphoto wrote:

There are many professional hourly rates that meet or top that (and that don't involve sex either). But it's not that simple - multiple people are involved and multiple tasks...

Click to expand...

Or they could just release the software, or better yet do it in camera.

But no that isn't reasonable, no matter how you spin it. Lots of people do receive and log jobs for much less money.

rbmphoto said:

This may be one of those projects that only Nikon can perform, but on many problems than can be addressed by other than the manufacturer, Nikon repair is only a little more expensive than local or regional repair shops (and well worth it IMO).

Click to expand...

The only reason 3rd party can't do it, is that 3rd party does not have access to the software. This is an artificial and anti-competitive restriction.

rbmphoto said:

Not that they'll do it for you, particularly since you seem to be hell bent on running them down ,

Click to expand...

Are you listening to your own rhetoric? Want multiple cameras serviced at reasonable cost in reasonable time equals "hell bent on running them down"? Really?

rbmphoto said:

Nikon service typically gives whatever item they are working on a good 'once over' while it's in the shop, returning it to you in much better shape than when you sent it in.

Click to expand...

I don't need or want that service. What I want is to be able to shoot JPG without having to fix multiple blobs on each picture.

rbmphoto said:

If you think $100 is steep for a minimum service charge - no matter what the length of time involved in the actual repair - even 5 minutes - I'm afraid you're in for a shock as you expand your circles...

Click to expand...

You wonder why work gets outsourced. Remapping pixels isn't rocket science. It's not law. It's not medicine. And by the way I can see most specialist doctors for about $600/hr where I live.

rbmphoto said:

I thought they responded timely and accurately to your inquiry. The fact that they didn't specifically reject your request to come sit in their facility while the work on three cameras was performed likely wasn't an oversight, but more a tactful rejection of your request...

Click to expand...

I didn't think it was an oversight. The rejection was handled poorly, and the fact they won't accomodate a while you wait service is just part of the problem.

You think it is reasonable to send a product in and spend about $175 per camera one or more times a year (by the time you factor in shipping both ways) and be without it for 2 weeks or so. Most people do not....and they wonder why so many are moving to inferior mobile phones for photography? It's not just the inconvenience of carrying the camera - it's the inconvenience of owning one.

Brev00 said:

Brev00 wrote:

Brev00 said:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Brev00 said:

Brev00 wrote:

You are apparently complaining about the cost of the repair not the quality of the customer service. They replied promptly, specifically, and politely to your query.

Click to expand...

They didn't reply to my query. Nothing at all about multiple cameras, whether to send one in at a time, whether they could all be done together.

Click to expand...

I thought you quoted an email from them in your op. They were polite and quoted a price for the requested service. From the letter, as I said in my response, I did not think they were offering a bulk discount. It was an estimate for your needed service delivered in a clear and respectful way.

Click to expand...

It was a work estimate of between $400-$600/hr (not so accurate, and I could see a good lawyer or specialist doctor for about the same) and in practical terms 2-3 weeks per camera, for something that may need to be done multiple times on each camera. Hot pixels are the norm, not a defect on a particular unit. Every camera they sell will as a matter of course develop hot pixels which will as a matter of course detract from the images taken.


The camera itself still sells, and the price is around $500 give or take (IF I am willing to go grey market - no longer available in Australia...gee I wonder why I'd work around your distribution channels when you won't sell to me through them).

That isn't reasonable. They may as well print in the manual: "Warning: JPG on this camera will become unusable after the first year unless you like sub-standard photos. Cost to fix is prohibitive and will leave you without a camera for a substantial period".

Having owned the D200, D2Xs, D3, D700, D40x, D5100, and now the D5200 and the D800E - and several Nikon film cameras before that - over the last 30 years, I've had two items needing service (and one of those was a SB700 when a battery leaked ($165)).

Having shot hundreds of thousands of photos through those bodies (primarily the D200 and D2Xs), I've never had an issue with hot pixels. If you've got hot pixels in three cameras exhibiting that behavior, now claiming required yearly pixel mapping, I'd check your handling and/or cleaning process something's just not right...


But enough time wasted, some people just want to feel the victim...

Good luck!

Mahmoud Mousef said:

Mahmoud Mousef wrote:



Hallo is a nicer hello, in my opinion

Click to expand...

Minor point which I would not have mentioned if not frustrated.

Mahmoud Mousef said:

$100-$150 isn't very reassuring; they don't know the exact cost?

Nikon gear is going for a decent price from amazon.co.uk now; don't buy from Australia if you have to buy Nikon again (though I can imagine you are not eager).

Click to expand...

Actually so long as there is a workaround I'm not ditching the brand over this. I have too much invested in gear and I like the ergonomics and picture quality. Also there are plenty of horror stories with other manufacturers. If I found one I was confident had decent service, and if they supplied comparable product, I'd never buy another Nikon product. Every single time I have had to deal with Nikon authorised repairer over a warranty or non-warranty issue it has taken multiple attempts to get it right, and wasted my time and money as I go back and forth. So there is no way I'm taking the cameras in one by one. So I will buy as cheaply as I can through the grey market or used, since their warranty gives me no peace of mind whatsoever.

Mahmoud Mousef said:

Yeah, one of the amazing Olympus features has been their pixel mapping; just brilliant innovation and you'd think the big N would have some offering by now...

Click to expand...

They do. In their Nikon 1.


So here's what I do. Shoot everything in RAW or RAW+JPG. Always run pixel fixer over every file. I like to keep the original, so this will waste a bit of money in disk space, but not $500 work.

It's the cheapest way to get the results I need, but it's an unnecessary pain.

rbmphoto said:

rbmphoto wrote:

Having owned the D200, D2Xs, D3, D700, D40x, D5100, and now the D5200 and the D800E - and several Nikon film cameras before that - over the last 30 years, I've had two items needing service (and one of those was a SB700 when a battery leaked ($165)).

Click to expand...

Maybe I have higher standards than you. Maybe I shoot different things than you. Maybe I've just had less luck than you.

I've been to Nikon a couple of times. My first experience was with my 1st D70 which had an intermittent shutter issue. In the end it was replaced by the retailer under warranty. But it had to go to Nikon 3 times, and come back in the same state, and I had to take video of the issue for the retailer to believe that it happened. Nikon customer service manager literally mocked me and told me flat out there was no problem (turned out he was leaving the company that week). I wasted months on that.

The next time I had a shutter issue (another D70) it cost around $160 to repair through their authorised repairer. Nice man. But it took him 3 goes as well.

rbmphoto said:

Having shot hundreds of thousands of photos through those bodies (primarily the D200 and D2Xs), I've never had an issue with hot pixels. If you've got hot pixels in three cameras exhibiting that behavior, now claiming required yearly pixel mapping, I'd check your handling and/or cleaning process something's just not right...

Click to expand...

I would bet good money that I can find multiple hot pixels on one or more of your bodies. Pick one of your older cameras. Download pixel fixer. Take a test shot in RAW with all noise reduction and Active D-Lighting off at various ISO. Use it to identify bad pixels. If you have no hot pixels at ISO 3200 on any of your bodies, I'll eat my shorts.

My guess is either

1. You're shooting RAW and using Adobe Photoshop or Elements which I'm told will automatically map out bad pixels.


2. You're never bothered to look closely enough at your images to notice.

rbmphoto said:

But enough time wasted, some people just want to feel the victim...

Click to expand...

That's just nonsense. Some people just want to blame the victim, or be the fan boy. Prey tell how does one handle equipment to increase the risk of hot pixels. It's just pot luck as to where on the frame and how noticeable.

Sammy Yousef said:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Sammy Yousef said:

Brev00 wrote:

Sammy Yousef said:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Sammy Yousef said:

Brev00 wrote:

You are apparently complaining about the cost of the repair not the quality of the customer service. They replied promptly, specifically, and politely to your query.

Click to expand...

They didn't reply to my query. Nothing at all about multiple cameras, whether to send one in at a time, whether they could all be done together.

Click to expand...

I thought you quoted an email from them in your op. They were polite and quoted a price for the requested service. From the letter, as I said in my response, I did not think they were offering a bulk discount. It was an estimate for your needed service delivered in a clear and respectful way.

Click to expand...

It was a work estimate of between $400-$600/hr (not so accurate, and I could see a good lawyer or specialist doctor for about the same) and in practical terms 2-3 weeks per camera, for something that may need to be done multiple times on each camera.

Click to expand...

The estimate was from $330-$480. The per hour stuff is speculative and a way of looking at it that feeds your fire. It is irrelevant, anyway. The work is to be done per camera not per hour. More importantly, perhaps, is whether a $110 repair is too high for a camera that has depreciated quite a bit over time. Especially if you calculate in such a fee on a yearly basis.

You said on another post that you might be perceiving more closely than the other member. Perhaps you are looking too closely. Are your hot pixels visible at normal viewing levels? I would like to see an example or two so we could see the extent of your problem with the image seen both at 100x and at normal view. If others are getting by without seeing such issues, maybe ignorance is actually a pretty inexpensive solution that takes absolutely no time to accomplish.

Sammy Yousef said:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Sammy Yousef said:

They do. In their Nikon 1.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

At last. I hope Olympus is getting some much-needed royalty from that.

Sammy Yousef said:

So here's what I do. Shoot everything in RAW or RAW+JPG. Always run pixel fixer over every file. I like to keep the original, so this will waste a bit of money in disk space, but not $500 work.

It's the cheapest way to get the results I need, but it's an unnecessary pain.

Click to expand...

I hear ya. Lots of people in the same boat as you, if it's any consolation. It amazes me that a high-end imaging company hasn't given it the proper attention it needs for so many years, despite Olympus knocking it out of the park so many years ago, and doing it flawlessly.