Jump to content

Fake Nikon gear


scott_ferris

Recommended Posts

<p>More a public service announcement than a question.<a href="http://fstoppers.com/fakembd11?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+fstoppersfeed+%28fstoppers%29"> I saw this video yesterday</a> about a fake MB-D11, the post has high res pictures comparing fake and genuine and the video covers a few differences. There is a big difference between $40 and $220!</p>

<p>Hope this helps, Scott.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Scott: I don't think it is 'fake' ... per se ... it is not labeled Nikon ... all the ads I have seen clearly label it for what it is ... I think some reviewers on Amazon have commented on the lack of quality switches (will they last?) and weak painted markings ... but all have said 'it works' ... My real question about this is patent rights ... how is it possible (or legal) to have a knock-off out less than a year after the release of the real thing ... a knockoff that clearly is a out-and-out copy ... and no legal action? Times change. Also, buyer beware ... quality remains LONG AFTER price is forgotten. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Bruce,</p>

<p>What is your definition of fake then?</p>

<p>The subject of the video was sold as genuine Nikon article, in a Nikon branded box (fake) with Nikon documentation (fake) and was sold for $219.00. It had CE labels (fake) and Nikon was clearly stamped on the bottom (fake). It was a counterfeit product passed off as genuine. I am not talking about the Neewer copy that can be bought for $40, I am talking about re-badged Neewer products that are being passed off as genuine.</p>

<p>If you read the comments one guy has already bought one off eBay for $190.</p>

<p>My point was there are legitimate third party items, which if you only have $40 are a great buy, but somebody is re-branding them and re-boxing them in fake Nikon boxes and passing them off as genuine, many retailers and private buyers would be unaware of this if they don't know what to look for.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Scott: I agree ... but why is this not legally actionable thru international trade agreements ... OR, being USA centric (too much) ... how is it allowed to continue ... HERE? In other threads here over the past few months this issue (and thanks for bringing it up!) really underscores the necessity to investigate, consider, mull-over, compare prices, ... and then, NO MATTER WHAT, buy from a reputable, TRUSTED SOURCE ... just spoke with a local 'trused source' dealer who says such things can always be a problem, but "we don't stock the store from EBAY, we stock from Nikon". He also added he's not sure every store everywhere stocks from Nikon, so the alert and warning is probably a good thing. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Bruce,</p>

<p>The short answer is it is illegal, but like so many laws, enforcing it is not easy, and yes, always buy from somewhere you can easily return stuff to. In the video the man was sent a return label straight away, the poor guy on eBay has lost his money.</p>

<p>Another thing, that I think is more important here though and as you pointed out. Whilst I am certain B&H and Adorama etc all get their gear from trusted sources, either genuine USA distributors or grey market ones, many more otherwise good businesses or distributors are not so thorough, they could have excellent reputations but be selling stuff like this quite unaware that they are fakes, I don't believe this is limited to fraudulent eBay sellers.</p>

<p>Matt, </p>

<p>I am, for my sins, a Canon shooter, but I wanted to post the link anyway. But that flask has to be the coolest lens mug/flask/drinks holder I have seen, way better than the Canon ones.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The US Customs Service should be getting the 'just-like-a-Nikon grip' in 'just-like-a-Nikon box' off the store shelves. If one tries to import 'look-alike' Rolex watches, the Customs hammer takes a swing on the 'look-alike' timepieces.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>There are all sorts of counterfeit Nikon camera batteries around, and some of them look very real. You need to know where to look carefully to tell the difference.</p>

<p>I recall that when we discussed that topic a couple of years ago, quite to a member here's surprise, he discovered a battery that came with the new D200 body he bought was a counterfeit. While we (at least I) don't know for sure how that happened, it it possible that someone along the distribution chain made a switch, putting a counterfeit battery inside a new D200 box, and they could sell the genuine Nikon battery elsewhere. It could be some guy at a warehouse or inside a camera store, etc.</p>

<p>In other words, even though we buy from what we think are reliable sources, we can still potentially end up with fake products. I don't think anybody can fake camera bodies and lenses; it is the small accessories that are more at risk.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>That was me, Shun! The body was purchased (at an almost-too-good-to-be-true price) from the soon to go out of business Circuit City, as part of a lens/body bundle. Not that that D200 ever gave me a moment's trouble (and it still works just as well as it ever did!), but in retrospect, a lot felt funny about that transaction, though the serial numbers (not including the battery!) were all legit US imports, says Nikon.<br /><br />That counterfeit battery <em>did</em> fail long before other apparently genuine EN-EL3e's did, by the way. Of course, I've had a genuine Nikon battery just plain die on me, only a month or two into its life after only moderate use, so you never know. And there's no warranty on batteries - something that it surprised me to discover.<br /><br />On the OP's topic, I don't think I'd buy a knock-off grip. Those things need to be tough. A fraudulently marked/sold one, sold as Nikon by a shady vendor ... that would make me say very bad words.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Matt, I know that was you, but I wasn't sure you would appreciate it if I mentioned your name.</p>

<p>Your experience was a surprise to me, but if you think about it, it shouldn't be a surprise at all. Plenty of people along the distriubtion chain have opportunities to swap out genuine components.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Shun:  Thanks for that additional information ... it raises the question ... is this fakery a result of INDIVIDUALS ... let's repack a $50 grip into a $220 box and sell it ... this is generally referred to as fraud at the 'retail' level, a one-off perp,  OR, is someone(s) printing up boxes and warranty cards and operating as a going fraud on the 'wholesale' level (lots of 'em)?  I would think, and hope, if it is the latter, that Nikon USA, or Nikon Inc., would swoop down with the legal equivilent of a Blackhawk helio and lay general waste (in legal terms) to those who would destroy the brand reputation of the Nikon name.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think you only have to look at the country of origin of both the fake and real grips for the answer to Bruce's question. This must be done on a fairly industrial scale to manufacture gold inked boxes to the standard seen on the fstoppers website. That's not the sort of thing you could quickly knock off on an inkjet printer, along with anodised-printed nameplates and impressed rubber grips.</p>

<p>I suspect that these units possibly even come out of the same factory that manufactures the genuine Nikon article, or that the stamping moulds are duplicated somewhere along the way and sold on to another factory.</p>

<p>This also raises the question: "If Neewer can sell this for $40, why does Nikon charge nearly 6 times as much for the same thing?" Development costs? That doesn't really wash for what's basically a plastic box with a couple of batteries and a switch in it, does it? The fact that the battery inserts weren't interchangeable between fake and real is hardly a major difference. And if the guy had bought a second fake, by his own admission he'd be none the wiser. Makes you think, no?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Rodeo,</p>

<p>That is another interesting point, I remember a few years ago reading an article on fake golf clubs, they were special titanium and something composites. Several major brands had a similar club with high price tags, then fakes started appearing that were remarkably similar to the name brands. Well upon investigation it turned out that there was one factory in the world that made these clubs, not just the fakes, but all the different brands clubs! So, if they are made in the same factory, to the same tolerances in the same machines using the same materials, how bad could they be?</p>

<p>Not the issue in this thread because as mentioned the copies don't have the build quality of the original and they were deliberately packaged to be dishonest. But also as he pointed out in the video, for $40 the Neewer ones are very good value.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Trying to stay in good humor about this and not go completely paranoid ... one of the bad things about getting older is that you start thinking you're ALWAYS getting sxxxxxd. Shun mentioned he didn't think this affected lenses and bodies (I hope he's right)... now this golf club thing ... if this fraud had spread to lenses is this a possible new reason for a "bad COPY" of that particular lens?!! I think I'm going to check my gear now ....</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Bruce,</p>

<p>Don't get paranoid about cameras and lenses, well good ones anyway. I believe both Canon and Nikon manufacture all their own cameras and lenses, maybe not all in Japan, but they are all Nikon or Canon factories. To make a believable fake when you are not the actual factory making the original is a huge task for something like a camera or lens. </p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have a fake D7000 vertical grip. But it was sold under the other brand name. It's noticeably not as well made as the Nikon model and anybody who knows Nikon gear would spot it as a 3rd party product right away, but for $40-something, it's quite functional and I'm not going to complain.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Rodeo, development costs are (mostly) paid by the inventor/creator. Take Scott's golf club anology.</p>

<p>Taylor Made (or whomever) spends years developing new materials for a golf club shaft. To do this, they need to actually make the shafts - and machining <em>any</em> prototype is very expensive, since they probably can't automate the entire process until after they figure out the density and hardness of the material. So they make a bunch of shafts, and then spend a couple months testing them. In the process, they will break a lot of them. When all is said and done, they probably have a couple million dollars into R&D, and all they have to show for it is a <em>design</em> for a new shaft. They need to spend even more to retool their machines to build it. When they go to sell that shaft, or the club, the cost of the R&D is built right into it. Once they've sold that club or shaft for a few years, the cost will go down. Golf clubs designed three years ago will always be MUCH less than "new" clubs, even if they're both right off the shelf.</p>

<p>If Tailore Made wants to copy the club, all they need to do is contact the factory and have a new name put on them. Worst case scenario they buy a bunch to dissect, do some tests to figure out chemical composition, and then contact some companies to buy the same materials. How many different forges could possibly be supplying the exact same titatium alloy recipie to golf club companies?</p>

<p>This is assuming that the "real" company is on the up-and-up, and really is charging based on development and not name recognition. This is not usually the case, but it shows why the inventor of a product will almost always be more expensive than the copies.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>If all you do is copying the result from someone else's hard work, of course it is very easy and very cheap. Take an extreme example: a blank DVD maybe 25 cents at retail and the cost to copy a movie DVD maybe well less than $1. However, whoever produces a movie will have to pay the big name actors and actresses plus many many other costs, including post-production promotion, etc. Part of that cost is eventually divided among the $20 movie DVDs they sell and of course the box office intake.</p>

<p>But if all you do is (illegally) copying DVDs someone else produces, of course your cost is extremely low.</p>

<p>In any case, all of this is an interesting topic that is outside of photography per se.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Scott: I am in good humor about this ... sorry this am I was mobile thru several service areas and could not see the vid ... falsely assumed you were talking about the Neewer. But this whole issue echos the need for all of us to BEWARE ... BTW, in the phone call to my trusted local dealer this am he pretty much emphasized what both you and Shun have said ... complex, difficult things, not so much ... but (now)battery packs, BATTERYS, and MEMORY CARDS ... BE CAREFUL! His point ... it is very false economy and poor judgement to outfit a first class camera body with cheap batteries and possibly bogus memory cards to save a few $$ when so much has been spent on the equipment.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>"If Neewer can sell this for $40, why does Nikon charge nearly 6 times as much for the same thing?" Development costs? That doesn't really wash for what's basically a plastic box with a couple of batteries and a switch in it, does it?"<br>

The real MB-D11 is not plastic but magnesium. The top of the grip that mates against the camera bottom is a plastic cover. The battery cage is all plastic but the grip body itself is all metal and in turn has the same speckled black imron finish the camera body has. Not textured molded plastic.<br>

It does bug me that the real grip does not tighten SOLIDLY against the body regardless of how tight the knurled screw is. There's always some sponginess between the body and the grip. For $300 for the grip and battery one would think that one could place a RRS camera plate on it and have a SOLID connection to the tripod head. I dunno... your mileage may vary. Anybody else notice this? If so what's the fix? I've tried shimming, gaffers tape, tape on the pin etc. To no avail.<br>

Cheers-toby nyc</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Magnesium isn't that expensive. The Nikon grip is made in China. And when was the last time any substantial time and money was required to come up with a battery grip? I'm guessing 40 years ago with the MD-1 - development costs aren't even a factor. At least the things used to have a motor - now they're a battery compartment with a few buttons and knobs. And apparently it doesn't fit snug enough for solid tripod use.</p>

<p>There is no reason for the Nikon grip to cost $220. I'd probably pay $80 but when one that's nearly as good is $40 why pay $220, unless the weather sealing is very important to you?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...