Reading mode: Light Dark

Z warranties

Go to last post
shuncheung said:
Way back in 1996, a lot of the new Nikon F5 had a false battery indicator problem.
Click to expand...
Yes it did. Galen took one of the very first units with him to a remote location for an ad campaign for another company and he came back so mad he sent his F5 back to Nikon and went back to using his F4, which shocked Nikon. (He was essentially an ambassador for them at the time.)

And when Galen and I hiked the Bay Area Ridge Trail together for an article, his brand new F100 had the "early rewind" problem and I remember hearing the scream from him when it triggered. I ended up lending him mine, because I knew it didn't have the issue, and I went back to using my N90.
shuncheung said:
Essentially the main difference is that Nikon is now getting in front of any little problem and quickly issue service advisories.
Click to expand...
With only one or two exceptions, I've not noticed any difference. Both the F5 and F100 problems were handled the same way Nikon is currently handling problems. It's really only the D600 where there was strong denial of an obvious shutter problem. The D610 was a bit of a cop out, even though they continued to fix D600s. In retrospect, I think the introduction of essentially the same camera with a new number was a mistake on Nikon's part, as it appeared to customers that they were trying to avoid talking about the actual problem.
 
sirhawkeye64 said:
In any case, your last part about the customer satisfaction I feel has been lost a bit, given their market share. It's growing, but they still trail Sony and Canon by a decent amount in that regard, and I would say lack of "customer service" in certain areas is what's hurting them, probably more so than the warranty reduction i guess.
Click to expand...
You know I monitor this closely, and even survey about it from time to time among my user base. I don't get a sense that Nikon's "customer satisfaction" has declined or changed in any substantive way. Moreover, in terms of units going back for repair, other than the service advisories, that number seems to have declined in recent years, though I'd need to correct that with sales volume changes to be sure.
sirhawkeye64 said:
specifically speaking of the APSC line in particular, and the fact we are stiill missing some gear that I think would fully round out the line-up (FF). In terms of FF gear they probably are more or less keeping pace, but they are losing in the sub $1000 market.
Click to expand...
Missing (or non-updated) models is a different story. I'm actually hearing that complaint about many of the camera manufacturers now. The flat overall market volume isn't going to help that. Moreover, there seems to be some sort of parts supply issue that's affecting them all, which is making them slow to iterate some cameras in favor of getting important new models out. This is particularly true in the under US$1500 cameras; the makers are going to put those parts in the higher cost products because there's more profit margin there.
 
I’m gobsmacked by your statement that Nikon only recently started using GAAP. I thought that all companies used GAAP. I guess I was wrong.

As for the D600 being the only product Nikon was in denial about when it came to problems - over half of the lens models produced for the now-discontinued Nikon 1 system were plagued by what users ultimately started referring to as the “stuck aperture problem”. (I am one of those users.) Nikon’s solution was to just sweep the problem under the rug and quietly discontinue the system. They offered a service advisory for only one of those lenses, the original 10-30mm kit lens. The other lenses with this problem - bupkus. Nothing!

Nikon’s manufacturing has been influenced too much by bean counters, IMO, and not enough by engineers. The “stuck aperture problem” with Nikon 1 lenses was caused when a cheap, teeny tiny plastic gear driving the aperture operation developed a crack after a period of time, rendering them useless. I am sure using that part saved Nikon a couple of cents in manufacturing costs compared to a more robust gear. I would like to think that Nikon engineers would have had misgivings about it and used a more robust gear. But, who knows?
 
Thom Hogan said:
shuncheung said:
Way back in 1996, a lot of the new Nikon F5 had a false battery indicator problem.
Click to expand...
Yes it did. Galen took one of the very first units with him to a remote location for an ad campaign for another company and he came back so mad he sent his F5 back to Nikon and went back to using his F4, which shocked Nikon. (He was essentially an ambassador for them at the time.)

And when Galen and I hiked the Bay Area Ridge Trail together for an article, his brand new F100 had the "early rewind" problem and I remember hearing the scream from him when it triggered. I ended up lending him mine, because I knew it didn't have the issue, and I went back to using my N90.
Click to expand...
I forgot about the F100 "rewind fork" issue around 1999. Essentially some of the teeth on the rewind fork would break and the camera would become useless as you cannot rewind the film at the end of the roll. I also bought my F100 late, in January 2000 just before a trip to Tanzania. Mine also had the old type rewind fork before Nikon started using a new part, but fortunately my F100 never developed that problem and eventually I stopped using it as I went full digital.
Thom Hogan said:
Thom Hogan said:
Essentially the main difference is that Nikon is now getting in front of any little problem and quickly issue service advisories.
Click to expand...
With only one or two exceptions, I've not noticed any difference. Both the F5 and F100 problems were handled the same way Nikon is currently handling problems. It's really only the D600 where there was strong denial of an obvious shutter problem. The D610 was a bit of a cop out, even though they continued to fix D600s. In retrospect, I think the introduction of essentially the same camera with a new number was a mistake on Nikon's part, as it appeared to customers that they were trying to avoid talking about the actual problem.
Click to expand...
I don't remember Nikon issuing any service advisory in 2012 for the D800 left focus issue.

The problem with the D600 was that after months of that "oil droplet on sensor" problem swirling around on the internet, and Nikon didn't issue any service advisory, that model number was totally tarnished. Changing the model number to D610 was an effective way to start from a clean slate. I think that is much simpler than "D600 from serial number #### and later are safe without any issues." As far as I know, Nikon did replace some affected D600 with new D610 models. But that was already a PR disaster.

The fact of the matter is that there are always some issues with Nikon products every now and then. It didn't seem better during the film era, and I don't think Z is worse than DSLRs. As new and as complex as the Z9 is, it was mostly trouble free in the first year from Christmas 2021 until late 2022, and then a batch from October to December 2022 had a service advisory that the mount could be defective and lenses couldn't be unmounted. Also there is the GPS date issue that is, unfortunately, still on going.
 
cyuill2007 said:
I’m gobsmacked by your statement that Nikon only recently started using GAAP. I thought that all companies used GAAP. I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
I can't remember when in the teens they switched. But it also took them awhile to fully understand the consequences of that and adjust business practices.
cyuill2007 said:
As for the D600 being the only product Nikon was in denial about when it came to problems - over half of the lens models produced for the now-discontinued Nikon 1 system were plagued by what users ultimately started referring to as the “stuck aperture problem”. (I am one of those users.) Nikon’s solution was to just sweep the problem under the rug and quietly discontinue the system.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure of the timing of that. I didn't become aware of the breaking aperture problem becoming widespread until after the Nikon 1 was discontinued. It's one of those "it's a matter of time" things given the nature of the part. While the actual demise was official in 2018, Nikon stopped making Nikon 1 lenses before that.
 
cyuill2007 said:
I’m gobsmacked by your statement that Nikon only recently started using GAAP. I thought that all companies used GAAP. I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
Nikon certainly used GAAP since the principles were created. As a public company they had little choice.

More likely they found that reserving for repair for five years as required by the GAAP they were already following became too high a profit hit, so they changed their warranty length.
 
PLShutterbug said:
cyuill2007 said:
I’m gobsmacked by your statement that Nikon only recently started using GAAP. I thought that all companies used GAAP. I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
Nikon certainly used GAAP since the principles were created. As a public company they had little choice.
Click to expand...
Nikon as we're referring to it here is a public holding company in Japan. Japanese standards were different, and it took the various Japanese companies different amounts of time to realize that they needed to conform to GAAP. I forget what standard they were using. Somewhere in all the news articles I've written I believe I referred to that, but the current site only holds news for the last few years.
PLShutterbug said:
More likely they found that reserving for repair for five years as required by the GAAP they were already following became too high a profit hit, so they changed their warranty length.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that's the case.
 
jessem101 said:
Parry Johnson said:
I posted a comment about the new Tamron 28-75 G2, but thought I'd repost it here because I'm interested about your thoughts as well. Skip to below if you don't care about my background.

Background: I've bought many new Nikon, Tamron and Sigma lenses in F mount over the years, but not yet a Z. I've had a Z7ii for over two years now. The lens I'll probably buy is the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8, but at the price they're asking (and for a lens that hasn't been updated to G2 for Nikon yet), I'm going to want to use it a lot and for long term. The lenses I use most on that camera are my Nikkor 24-70 G and 79-200 VR2 with an FTZ (of which I have two -- the first one was already sent out for replacement). Basically, I still believe the new Z lenses aren't built to the same ruggedness as similar Z lenses even though optics have improved...

I can't help thinking that one of the best advantages of this lens is the warranty. Here in Canada, Tamron offers five years and Nikon offers only one.

Sure, I'm of the mindset with electronics that, "If anything will go wrong, it'll be within the first few months," but of course that's not always the case. Nikon used to have a two-year warranty on bodies and five on lenses, but since the Z bodies that changed. Really, if the Z system is so tough, why not instill more confidence and bolster their reputation with the old warranty?

So if Nikon or any other company rebrands an after-market lens, I'll be like many consumers and choose the cheaper item that has a better warranty, especially if it's better in performance. Perhaps Nikon is realizing this experiment didn't work like they thought, and the current rebrands will disappear as suddenly as they came.
Click to expand...
When Nikon Switched their warranties to 1 year (a while back), to include their lenses i was very disappointed.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
jessem101 said:
Now have i had issues with my Nikon gear within the first year? no, but except for my Nikon Z9 (the whole GPS/Date recording) and way back when the Nikon D600.
Click to expand...
I have never. had a Nikon lens, even cheap kit zooms fail within 5 years. Thats with heavy paid pro usage, on the pro lenses.
jessem101 said:
These are some of the reasons why i have always supported Sigma and Tamron if or when they come out with a competitive focal length.
Click to expand...
I won't. Esp with Nikon's firmware updates. Taking a gamble that 3rd party lens won't work anymore or have to wait for them to come up with their firmware update. Nikon glass always works. I had a pricey Sigma art years ago, stopped working with an update.
jessem101 said:
For F mount, a ton of my gear was either Sigma or Tamron or other 3rd party lenses. But when Z mount came out, my lenses have gradually switched to Nikon (no other choice).
Click to expand...
 
Thom Hogan said:
cyuill2007 said:
I’m gobsmacked by your statement that Nikon only recently started using GAAP. I thought that all companies used GAAP. I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
I can't remember when in the teens they switched. But it also took them awhile to fully understand the consequences of that and adjust business practices.
Click to expand...
Just did a little bit of searching on my archives. Nikon was using IFRS accounting. It appears that they started the switch to GAAP in the early teens, but the consolidation of IFRS and GAAP didn't fully happen until 2014.
 
BTW, Nikon USA's 1 + 4-year extended warranty for Nikkor lenses ended in January 2021 (I believe the cut-off point was January 31, 2021). From that point on, it is only the standard 1-year warranty. I confirmed with Nikon USA back in April that year: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65024790
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top