The fully functional D800 AF thread - drop a line!

[TOF guy]

Alejandro Daz del Ro Fery wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

 

[TOF guy]

olyflyer wrote:

Not my impression: there is definitely a group who have no problem with their cameras and don't seem to grasp the idea that they've been a little lucky.

Now... you don't seem to understand that "luck" is based on something very difficult to get, like winning the lottery.

luck does not mean something "very difficult to get". It means something you get and which is a good thing, but you had no control over the circumstances that lead you to get whatever you got. See this link for instance for a correct definition of "luck".

You are assuming that only a few D800 are OK and those went to the "lucky people", the majority is faulty.

The only statistic I believe and which I've quoted several times is that of Thom Hogan: 20 to 30% defective. That means the majority - 70 to 80% is fine.

Now really, could you imagine Nikon continuing to make faulty cameras and that buying the D800 would be like buying lottery?

No, but nobody has stated that buying a D800 is like winning a lottery ticket.

Actually the opposite is true, the whiners

Why can't you write in respectful manner about those who disagree with you is beyond me

just can't grasp that they have been UNLUCKY because the probability is much higher that you'd get a camera with working AF than a faulty one.

Yes, for instance taking Thom's lowest estimate of defective cameras, 20%, then there are 4 times as many D800 which work fine than there are of defective ones. And with the highest estimate given by Thom, 30%, there are than twice as many cameras which are fine than the bad ones. In all cases the odds of somebody buying a D800 are in favor of getting a good one.

My use of the word "a little lucky" is perfectly correct in the context and describes well the situation.

No one is claiming that there are no faulty cameras, I just question the statistics behind all these claims about "high" number of faulty cameras.

And are very vocal about it.

Nonsense. Show me ONE single thread which was allowed to remain positive.

Show me one thread where people report a problem which did not attract the replies of those who defends Nikon.

 

[moving_comfort]

TOF guy wrote:

olyflyer wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
That is not entirely accurate. It is a common knowledge that most people who have a perfectly working body won't post at forums.

Quite the contrary Nikon owners without any issue with their cameras (you for instance) are very vocal about it.

 

[moving_comfort]

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[TOF guy]

olyflyer wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

olyflyer wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

wombat779 wrote:

My D800E (bought November 2012)

You're probably okay from the purchase date

That's also an Internet hoax. I mean, you really have no idea if there was a general problem and even less when it got fixed.

Quite to the contrary I have a very good idea that there was a frequent problem. As to when it was fixed: this forum has been a very good indicator about when it happened.

No one has. I know some bloggers claim to have such inside information but hey,

One source is Nikon Germany,

Could you give me a link?

but that wasn't an official statement (still *is* insider information).

If it comes from Nikon then it is indeed official, so a link would be VERY useful.

You certainly know the link. It comes from Nikon reps in Germany and also states that Nikon Japan does not intend to make an official statement.

As I've accurately described, "one source is Nikon Germany but that wasn't an official statement (still *is* insider information)

Do you always believe everything you read on the internet?

Of course not. That does not mean there is no correct information on the internet at all.

No one ever claimed that there are no faulty cameras. The only thing which is questioned is the number of faulty units. There is no real evidence of any percentage or number of faulty cameras.

Not true. Simple statistical analysis derived from specific experiences show that the number of cameras affected is not small (less than 10% is extremely unlikely). More specifically the number of times a user can buy a camera until he gets a working one. But maybe you don't know how this info can be used, but I do. Thom's estimates does not come from the internet, BTW.

On this forum there are a handful of people who are very much engaged and are very vocal about their problems.

More than a handful.

If the problems are real or not I can not say since I have not had a look at their cameras and I don't know them personally. Never the less, they are very loud here, giving the impression of this AF thing being a huge problem.

20 to 30% is or rather was a huge problem, albeit not a majority problem.

The way I see it is that there is a problem in the USA, Nikon service is not working.

Which aggravates the situation.

I am pretty sure that is the case for every German, French, English and most other people as well, except you, Americans.

I was born and grew up in France Has nothing to do with nationality (of course)

So, why not attacking the REAL problem instead?

Why should people not talk about the problems they have with their camera and at the same time get it fixed by Nikon ? One does not exclude the other, you know. And passing along the experience may be very useful to others.

 

[5tve]

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[Alejandro Daz del Ro Fery]

TOF guy wrote:

Alejandro Daz del Ro Fery wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

 

[Event_shooter]

My 800E is working every day and had paid for itself in the first few weeks, from then on it's been paying me to use it. No complaints here.

 

[Fastmikefree]

Really impressive!!!




I cannot reach half of the values you get, even using the same lens! And my D800 went 3 times to Nikon along with my lenses.




The last they did is to bring the right side about the same as the left AF, but both bad compare to the center AF!




What lighting did you use and distance to the target?




Thanks

 

[Fastmikefree]

Mine is not good,




went 3 times to Nikon.

Now I can get decent results using center AF (even if sometimes inconsistent...) but no way I will get good ones with laft nor right AF.

As I said earlier, the last thing that Nikon did was to bring both left and right AF to about the same value but bad compare to center point.

They said the body was fully calibrated using the 'last' tool, and all lenses checked.

I do love the camera but those issues are more than annoying.

Phil

 

[RumpelHund]

same with me, but this is not the thread for us whiners ;-)

 

[Fastmikefree]

:-( My bad...

 

[moving_comfort]

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[bobn2]

moving_comfort wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[5tve]

moving_comfort wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[bobn2]

5tve wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[Devendra]

henrikbengtsson wrote:

It seems to me that many users are complaining about the Left AF issue on the D800 series. But then again only people with real issues seem to be active on the internet - making it a bit hard to jump to conclusions. I am fully aware of the problem but I thought maybe instead of all the whining it might be fun to hear, "my D800 is allright" (there should be plenty plenty) and whenever someone complains about Nikon (real problem or not), there's always this thread for some perspective.

So drop a line, a "+1" or whatever if your D800 AF is 100%.

 

[5tve]

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

5tve wrote:

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

5tve wrote:

What method are you using to estimate the number of defective cameras , gut instinct ,reading this forum ?

Did you even read my posts? Or did you just felt compelled to respond to make some noise?

I never suggested any percentages for defective cameras. All I consistently said was that the individuals need to be pragmatic when forming an opinion on what percentage of cameras did not perform to specs as the unhappy guys make the most noise. I also said that since most of the owners (well over a quarter million) of the D800 did not complain, majority had a fully working camera for their usage.

 

[5tve]

bobn2 wrote:

5tve wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.

 

[bobn2]

5tve wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

5tve wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

moving_comfort wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta wrote:
If 20% to 30% cameras were defective then it is a significant number. But I am reluctant to believe that number just because Thom Hogan said so. Thom has been wrong with his predictions many times before.

But the number of 20 to 30% is not a prediction.

No - and it's also not hard statistical evidence. Thom would be the first to admit that (and IIRC, he has.)

Continuing to use this "20 - 30%" as a fact in this thread is misleading.

.