D750, should I send in for shutter recall or not?

My situation was the same as yours - no problems, but the camera was on the recall list. Sent it, they replaced the shutter and returned it promptly. If you can afford to be without the camera, in exchange having a new shutter, and starting at zero clicks was certainly appealing to me. Parts won't be around forever!

Hello everyone.

 

I bought my D750 back in Nov 2014 and have not experienced any issues at all.

Recently I stumbled onto the service advisory that applies to my serial number.

 

I've always followed the "don't fix what isn't broken" rule and am reluctant to send it in for a new shutter.

I'm a retired mechanic and use my D750 lightly, about 15k shutter clicks so far.

 

I know this is a decision that only I can make, but would like to hear opinions/advise from those who own and use the D750 a lot more than I do.

 

Should I send a perfectly good working camera in to Nikon USA for a new shutter?

 

Thanks

I bought my D750 in December 2014. I recall that at the time, those D750 "shutter recalls" were for very trivial issues. However, since Nikon got plenty of bad reps for the D600 sensor oil droplet issue in the year prior (to an extend that they needed to quickly introduce a D610 to replace the D600, after merely a year), Nikon was over-reacting and quickly issued multiple recalls.

 

I wouldn't have sent my D750 back for the recall, but it turned out that my D750 had a bad GPS connection so that I used the recall to ship my D750 back to Nikon for the warranty repair. Since it was a recall, Nikon paid for the return shipping.

 

I am more in the camp that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

I am more in the camp that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

Hmm... if it ain't broke, you

ain't tryin' hard enough...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

I wouldn't hesitate to send it in if mine had a lot of usage, like 100k + clicks.

 

What worries me most is that I've read several reports where the same D750 had to go back again for the same shutter problem, in some cases three or four times.

I realize that much of what we see on the web is exaggerated hear say... but even if a small percentage of reported reccurring failures are true, that kind of tells me that the replacement parts are not much better than the original.

 

What I really need to do is spend less time on the internet :rolleyes:

Edited January 9, 2021 by amauri_nunes

Hmm... if it ain't broke, you

ain't tryin' hard enough...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

 

Your reply reminded me of time I was skiing about 35 or so years ago. I was just learning; I started late in life. I was riding an easy intermediate lift at Alpine Meadows. A young lad in his early teens was sharing the chair. We were chatting about skiing when the young fellow said, "Maybe I am not trying hard enough."

 

I asked him, "Why do you think that?"

 

He replied, "All my friends have broken an arm or a leg. I haven't broken anything, yet."

 

I told him, "Arms and legs work better when they are NOT broken. You are doing just fine!" The lift deposited us at the top. He went his way I went mine. Perhaps he listened. At least I did not see Ski Patrol taking anyone off the run on a sled.

I have a D600 and I never sent it in for the oil issue because I've never had an to begin with. I think these issues are sometimes exaggerated on the www.

Luckily for me the D600 issue meant i could pick up a barely used one for peanuts so as to convert it to IR.

I did and it works just fine. The sensor can get a bit dusty, but no oily stuff.

I wouldn't hesitate to send it in if mine had a lot of usage, like 100k + clicks.

 

What worries me most is that I've read several reports where the same D750 had to go back again for the same shutter problem, in some cases three or four times.

I realize that much of what we see on the web is exaggerated hear say... but even if a small percentage of reported reccurring failures are true, that kind of tells me that the replacement parts are not much better than the original.

 

What I really need to do is spend less time on the internet :rolleyes:

My D750 has been to Nikon service four times now for warranty work and is on the third shutter at this point. Early on there were problems with the first shutter being unable to reach speeds over about 1/1250th and locking up. The second shutter was erratic and caused all manner of strange discrepancies between EXIF data and the actual resulting exposure. It seems apparent that this third shutter is dying as well. The shutter was clearly an abysmally bad design. How it appears to me at any rate. Total shutter count on the camera is only just over 24k and the current shutter probably has about 10k on it at most. At no point in its history has the camera ever produced completely repeatable exposures.

 

Last night I found myself awake in the middle of the night and got up for a wee snack. The D750 with 50 f1.4 AIS was on the dining room table so I messed about with it a bit to amuse myself before heading back to bed. The camera has lately taken to occasionally double-firing when set on single and it did it. I looked at the images and noticed the two exposures were not the same, so I set it on high speed continuous and shot a burst of four. On reviewing the images I noted that not only were no two exposures exactly the same, but that the area of greatest exposure moved around vertically. Bracketing was not in use. The lens was wide-open at f1.4 so the aperture could have had no effect. All shots were done in RAW, but have been exported in reduced size in jpeg to post. In all cases the EXIF data is identical except that the file size varied, presumably as a result of the variation in exposure.

 

Look at the images in as rapid a sequence as you can and you will see what I refer to. I realize that the variation in exposure appears minimal, but bear two things in mind - first that the EXIF data is identical and the aperture can have had no effect and secondly that there is a vertically roving area of variation in the exposures in addition to the change in overall exposure. It seems to me therefore that the shutter is not functioning entirely correctly. It is still better than the two shutters that came before it (which were complete disasters), but looks to me to be on a path to failure.

 

What say you?

My D750 has been to Nikon service four times now for warranty work and is on the third shutter at this point.

Sorry to learn that your D750 is on its third shutter. Fortunately mine was fine from the beginning.

 

But to the OP, if your current shutter is fine, this confirms our point that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

A replacement is not necessarily better if your current shutter is fine and the actuation count is not super high.

 

Last night I found myself awake in the middle of the night and got up for a wee snack. The D750 with 50 f1.4 AIS was on the dining room table so I messed about with it a bit to amuse myself before heading back to bed. The camera has lately taken to occasionally double-firing when set on single and it did it. I looked at the images and noticed the two exposures were not the same, so I set it on high speed continuous and shot a burst of four. On reviewing the images I noted that not only were no two exposures exactly the same, but that the area of greatest exposure moved around vertically. Bracketing was not in use. The lens was wide-open at f1.4 so the aperture could have had no effect. All shots were done in RAW, but have been exported in reduced size in jpeg to post. In all cases the EXIF data is identical except that the file size varied, presumably as a result of the variation in exposure.

What type of lighting do you have in the dining room/kitchen? If it is fluorescent or something that has cycles, you could get weird results.

I would check this again under constant sunlight.

Sorry to learn that your D750 is on its third shutter. Fortunately mine was fine from the beginning.

 

But to the OP, if your current shutter is fine, this confirms our point that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

A replacement is not necessarily better if your current shutter is fine and the actuation count is not super high.

 

 

What type of lighting do you have in the dining room/kitchen? If it is fluorescent or something that has cycles, you could get weird results.

I would check this again under constant sunlight.

No, the lighting the image was taken under is old-fashioned incandescent, no other sources involved. The most frustrating thing about the camera is that it doesn't do anything really consistently. I'll take it out for a day of shooting and everything is wonderful. The next time there are inconsistencies all over the place. Sometimes I will turn it on, take a few shots and all is well, turn it off, see another shot or two I'd like, turn it back on and have it suddenly behave oddly in exactly the same circumstances. Each of the first three times Nikon serviced it the behaviour pattern was different after it came back, but in each case the results were sometimes baffling. Sometimes the EXIF data had inexplicable variation, other times bore no relationship to the images produced. Other times the EXIF data would be the same, but the images would vary. At least now it consistently makes usable images most of the time. I've used the camera professionally and to have it start misbehaving in the middle of a shoot was exasperating. I ended up buying a nice low-count D3 from an estate to carry as back-up when a situation absolutely counted. I absolutely adore that camera. I'm afraid my D750 and I are wedded until it eventually gives up the ghost as in no way could I in good conscience sell it except as "for parts or repair" in spite of it working well much of the time. Every other Nikon I own has been flawless. I provided Nikon with a wealth of images to work from so it wasn't a case of it just not malfunctioning in their hands - they had plenty of clear evidence. Truth is they should have sent a replacement and put the camera in the parts bin after the second visit.

Hmmm... I am thinking aloud here, but have you tried a different battery? It could be electrically related, inconsistent power etc.

Sometimes the EXIF data had inexplicable variation

For one of the four images EXIF states TC-16A as the lens being used; for the other three, it says AF Nikkor 50/1.8; the actual lens per the OP was a 50/1.4 AiS. Weird.

Can't you get Nikon to exchange the camera for a new one?

I just checked the EXIF for two of my non-CPU lenses - a Nikkor 200mm f/4 and a Nikkor 24mm f/2.8, both pre-Ai lenses that have been AI'ed. Parameters for both lenses were entered in the non-CPU data in the D750 and the proper lens data was selected before taking the image.

 

In both cases Lightroom lists the proper focal length but identifies the lens as 0.0 mm f/0.0. It probably got focal length used from the camera stored data for the selected lens and, since the lenses have no way of communicating with the camera other than the mechanical aperture tab, the camera has no other information about the lens or make and defaults to 0.0. I suppose it could get the maximum aperture from the stored data, but does not. I wonder where it got any information about the make of the lens that Dieter saw?

 

It looks like you got a lemon. It is time for a call to Nikon and ask to speak to a manager. Fiddlefye, I believe you are in Canada. Does Canada have a lemon law?

I just checked the EXIF for two of my non-CPU lenses - a Nikkor 200mm f/4 and a Nikkor 24mm f/2.8, both pre-Ai lenses that have been AI'ed. Parameters for both lenses were entered in the non-CPU data in the D750 and the proper lens data was selected before taking the image.

 

In both cases Lightroom lists the proper focal length but identifies the lens as 0.0 mm f/0.0. It probably got focal length used from the camera stored data for the selected lens and, since the lenses have no way of communicating with the camera other than the mechanical aperture tab, the camera has no other information about the lens or make and defaults to 0.0. I suppose it could get the maximum aperture from the stored data, but does not. I wonder where it got any information about the make of the lens that Dieter saw?

 

It looks like you got a lemon. It is time for a call to Nikon and ask to speak to a manager. Fiddlefye, I believe you are in Canada. Does Canada have a lemon law?

After this many years I doubt any "lemon law" would cover the issues except perhaps because the camera was sent back to Nikon early on and then again and again. My camera does identify all of my AI and AIs lenses correctly in the data because I have them in the cameras data base and select the correct lens info each time I mount one. The only exception is when I shoot with the 90 f2.5 Tamron macro because 90mm isn't available in the data base - i have it listed as 86mm and it all works just fine.

The D750 with 50 f1.4 AIS was on the dining room table

Unless I've missed something above (more than possible!), why is it not a lens problem?

 

That lens must be getting on somewhat and relies on a spring etc to return that aperture fast and in a burst situation may struggle to hit the exact same spot everytime....resulting in slightly variable brightness.

Unless I've missed something above (more than possible!), why is it not a lens problem?

 

That lens must be getting on somewhat and relies on a spring etc to return that aperture fast and in a burst situation may struggle to hit the exact same spot everytime....resulting in slightly variable brightness.

Because the images were shot wide open at f1.4 and therefore aperture was not involved. Also because as with all of my lenses, it is kept properly serviced and functions perfectly. Even with stopping down if I use the same lens on any of my film Nikons or the D3 I get perfectly consistent results. In addition - it doesn't matter what lens I mount I get the same sort of weird variation from the D750. One of the times I sent the camera back to Nikon they insisted on me sending the lenses that were associated with the images i supplied so they could test them. All lenses tested perfectly (as expected), but I had to do without those lenses (including my 20-35 f2.8 which was most annoying) for nearly three months as a result. As far as I can tell Nikon never accepted that there might be something fundamentally flawed with the camera and that in addition to the repeated bad shutters there were other undiagnosed issues. When they'd replaced the shutter twice and the issues continued you'd think they'd look deeper or replace the camera? Apparently not. I'm afraid that at this point I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that one day before an eternity passes the camera will probably cease functioning and become someone's parts source. Meanwhile I'm saving pennies for a D850 or Z7.

After this many years I doubt any "lemon law" would cover the issues except perhaps because the camera was sent back to Nikon early on and then again and again.

 

 

The "again and again" part is what usually triggers the Lemon Laws, at least down here in the States; Canada may be different. A new D750 costs about $1500 U.S. It might be worth about $500 of your time (no monetary outlay) to research the Lemon Law and make a few phone calls to Nikon.

 

Of course if you are looking for an excuse to justify the purchase of a D850 or Z7, I withdraw my (helpful?) suggestion. :)

 

Since my one and only experience with Nikon repair some ten years ago for a simple clean and lubricate of my F100 which took four trips back to Nikon, I have been less than impressed with Nikon service. However, to their credit, they eventually got it right. It just took persistence on my part.

Edited January 17, 2021 by bgelfand

The "again and again" part is what usually triggers the Lemon Laws, at least down here in the States; Canada may be different. A new D750 costs about $1500 U.S. It might be worth about $500 of your time (no monetary outlay) to research the Lemon Law and make a few phone calls to Nikon.

 

Of course if you are looking for an excuse to justify the purchase of a D850 or Z7, I withdraw my (helpful?) suggestion. :)

 

Since my one and only experience with Nikon repair some ten years ago for a simple clean and lubricate of my F100 which took four trips back to Nikon, I have been less than impressed with Nikon service. However, to their credit, they eventually got it right. It just took persistence on my part.

It took me a couple of tries to get Nikon to accept that there really was an issue, but when I sent them a disc of images with absurd EXIF data etc. they couldn't pretend it was a lens function issue or user error. The camera is making very good images now and nothing that is so far from correct that it can't be recovered, even if there are frustrating oddities yet. I'm leaning toward a Z7 before too long as I'd like to be able to use some of my interesting old glass effectively in the digital realm.

Sorry to learn that your D750 is on its third shutter. Fortunately mine was fine from the beginning.

 

But to the OP, if your current shutter is fine, this confirms our point that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

A replacement is not necessarily better if your current shutter is fine and the actuation count is not super high.

 

(snip)

 

Yes, the OP is only on about 15K counts. A new shutter might not be better than that.

 

Our car has had three airbag recalls on two airbags. One has been replaced twice.

 

If they extended the warranty on the shutter it might be worth doing, but they probably don't.

The fact that a fault known to occur frequent enough to merit a recall hasn't shown itself yet in one sample does not mean it will never pop up in that camera.

They are replacing the part for free. So why would you not send it in?

They are replacing the part for free. So why would you not send it in?

Because it's a fairly major disassembly job to replace the shutter... and whilst I'm sure every care is taken by the technicians, delicate things like ribbon cables can easily get trapped and weakened by over flexing, it does happen.

 

Those won't always show up straight away and it may leave the facility OK. First good jolt and ping, dead camera... and whilst they may fix it, it might die at a very inopportune moment. Of course it could do that all by itself, but if it's fine don't mess.

 

However, I'd find out, if possible, when the recall notice reaches it's end point and reconsider then. If my shutter has had 200K.....;)

OK, I changed my mind. It seems that they are fixing more than just the shutter.

Also, it seems that the problem isn't just that it wears out faster.

 

Also, it seems that they will do it even if the warranty has expired, though as

well as I know not extend the warranty. (That is, no warranty for the new one.)

 

Even so, there is no guarantee that the new one will be better than the

one now in the camera, or will last longer.

What you might trust is that the shutter unit replacing the one in your camera is less likely to show the fault they identified in the old shutters.

Will dis- and reassembly be harmful? When done by the manufacturer? I wouldn't worry.

I wouldn't worry.

I applaud you trust. Sadly, I don't share it.

 

There are countless examples where Nikon have botched a repair. You only have to ask here to see....;)