Free Maintenance Service Initiative

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by markwilkins, Jul 13, 2015.

  1. Nikon just sent me a message saying that my relatively early D800 (with a 3007xxx serial number) had been "selected" for Nikon's "Free Maintenance Service Initiative."
    What will this Free Maintenance Service include? This Free Maintenance Service will include the free inspection of your camera and its operation by a Nikon trained technician and if Nikon’s trained technician identifies any service necessary or desirable to perform on your Nikon D800 camera, we will perform that service free of charge to you (excluding normal warranty exclusions such as misuse, abuse, alteration, negligence or accident). We will also clean and return your Nikon D800 camera at no charge to you.​
    Has anyone else received one of these? If so, what's your serial number? Cynical me wonders whether this might be a repair campaign in lieu of a recall, or maybe just that they want to bring earlier D800s up to speed on engineering changes for some reliability-related reason. Any thoughts? (Or, better yet, does anyone know what motivated this?)
    Unfortunately for me, I'm no longer living in the U.S., so it's a little inconvenient to take advantage of this before the deadline. However, I'm seriously considering it.
  2. I too rec'd this today. I've an early D800 (3009xxx). Was Google searching to make sure it was legit when I found this thread.

    My guess is that because there are fewer existing warrantied owners (vs. all owners - open-ended recall) out there, it makes some sense to reach out. Maybe the recent Honda airbag recall mandate got them off their duffs?
  3. Wish they would do that on the D4.
  4. I'd call Nikon USA to confirm at least before I sent it anywhere!
  5. I agree it sounds a little unusual, but why be cynical? I am sure Nikon is doing this for a reason, but why not just accept this gesture at face value? As long as I can deal with the turn around time, I like sending my cameras to Nikon for a tune up now and then.
  6. Not cynical, but cautious. Anyone can say they are Nikon and ask you to send your expensive camera to some adress somewhere, possibly never to be seen or heard of ever after.
  7. Q.C., it's legit from all indications.
    Why are they really doing this? I agree with Thom Hogan on this. What's behind it?
  8. I received the message today, as well, for my early production D800. I'm a little annoyed (with myself) because, for the first time in the three plus years I've owned it, I just paid to have the sensor cleaned 2 days ago. It sounds like sensor cleaning would have been done for free.
    I do have black specks inside the viewfinder which I'd love to have removed for free. I wonder if Nikon would do that for me. If so, I'll definitely take them up on this offer.
  9. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Auto dealers run these "free" service frequently. They'll inspect your car for free, and if they find something wrong, they will recommend a (usually expensive) repair. Of course, not every car that goes through this free service will end up having an expensive repair. However, it is not surprising that they target some higher-end, somewhat older body but not something very old. Very few people would spend money to fix a D1 by now, or even a D300. They are simply dirt cheap in the used market. A D800 is something that maybe still worth fixing. The D810 is, of course, too new. Pretty much all of them are still under warranty.
    The objective is simple: make money from repairs.
    I have a very early D800E (had to wait two months for it back in June 2012), but I haven't received any such e-mail.
  10. I don't think that's it, since it seems to be targeted at a narrow S/N range of two specific models. Also, Nikon has not done this in the past.
  11. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Mark, my D800E has an early serial number 3002nnn and yet I haven't received any such notification. Of course Nikon is only going to target a small group, by invitation only. Otherwise, they could have easily been flooded by lots of free repairs. This is not like auto repair where you make an appointment in advance and bring your car over at a scheduled time slot. If this suddenly becomes a long 6-week wait to get this free inspection completed, it will be yet another PR nightmare for Nikon.
    Essentially, if Nikon needed to recall some cameras, they would have done so by serial number, as they did last week for the D750: Nikon D750 Service Advisory July 9. When Nikon asks people to send their D800 in for free inspection, they have no control of which camera gets sent. Moreover, if there were still some remaining D800 issues, it would have been all of the internet by now.
    My recommendation has always been: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That was why I totally ignored the first D750 recall. If your D800 is still working perfectly, I wouldn't let someone take it apart. If it has some issues and you get the invitation, take advantage of it. However, I would wait a bit to see how long the turn-around time is. If all of a sudden you are out of your camera for a month or two, the wait could be very frustrating.
  12. I just received the exact same notice today on my early (2 yrs ago) D7100. So, it's not just FX cameras. I have a big project next week, so will wait until that is over before I decide whether to take them up on it (probably will.)
    Duane 'ac5aa'
  13. Does free inspection and service include repairs? Other manufacturers have offered 'up-to-spec' services too, which were no more than a clean and adjust to factory specifications/tolerances. If anything was found needing repair (or for which a 'repair advice' - "i would have that get fixed if i were you" - was deemed to be in order), you had to pay. It is a marketing thing that, though offering a welcome service for customers, also generates paid work for the repair centres.
  14. My email was addressed to me and stated the SN of my D7100. Here is part of the text of the note:
    "What will this Free Maintenance Service include? This Free Maintenance Service will include the free inspection of your camera and its operation by a Nikon trained technician and if Nikon’s trained technician identifies any service necessary or desirable to perform on your Nikon D7100 camera, we will perform that service free of charge to you (excluding normal warranty exclusions such as misuse, abuse, alteration, negligence or accident). We will also clean and return your Nikon D7100 camera at no charge to you."
    At the risk of seeming naive, what's not to like about this? They state turnaround time is 5-6 work days.
    Duane 'ac5aa'
  15. Duane - I think I would be inclined to send my camera to Nikon, if I received such an email. However, Shun's point is well taken: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Sending a camera to Nikon is a little bit of a hassle and sometimes can take longer than anticipated. I think it is unlikely anything bad would happen to your camera, though. However, if your camera is clean and fully operational then maybe it isn't worth it. I like the idea of a "tune up" even if there is no specific problem, so I would take advantage of Nikon's offer.
  16. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I drive a fairly old year 2000 Honda Accord. For most of my repair work, I take it to an independent repair shop. They are not cheap, but they never ask me to make unnecessary repairs, as it has always been the case since a friend recommended them to me over 10 years ago. The problem is that they are only open Monday thru Friday.
    For oil changes, my Honda dealer sometimes offers those $30 specials, and I take my car there on Saturdays. After the repair, the dealer usually recommends some other $200, $300 repairs. I tell them no thank you. And the next time I take my car to the other shop, they tell me the repair is unnecessary.
    At the risk of seeming naive, what's not to like about this? They state turnaround time is 5-6 work days.​
    So I would turn it around and ask: what do you have to gain?
    If your D800 or D7100 is in perfect condition, at best you get it back still in perfect condition. However, there is always some risk in round-trip shipping. There is a tiny chance that your camera will be lost. What if it is damaged during shipping and Nikon tells you that it now needs to be repaired. Who is going to pay for that?
    And there is always a small chance that the Nikon technician screws up your camera ....
    Of course, the risk that something goes wrong is small, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. However, if your camera has some small things that can take advantage of some maintenance, I would take advantage of it.
    Now, if Nikon find a list of items to fix and the bill will be $500, are you going to approve repair?
  17. I don't think you're thinking hard enough about why this approach might be better than a recall in the case of one or more known defects in early versions of a particular camera model. A recall amounts to admitting fault, which may have legal implications. A recall requires that they treat everyone the same with respect to fixing problems, and probably has a higher response rate. Doing this, they can spread repairs out over a period of time and decide to issue a recall later. Also, it may well be that they suspect there's a recall-level problem with the cameras in question, but they're not sure, and wish to use a program like this to collect information about them.

    I think that keeping an eye, over the next couple of months, on reports from people who do take them up on this offer will probably yield useful information about what they're doing. If, as Shun suggests, they are simply using it to drum up repair business, then we should hear people reporting that they're being asked to pay for repairs after sending in their cameras. My prediction would be that they return many cameras with significant part replacements for free.
    Edit: One motivation for this may simply be to collect data on the performance of cameras that didn't have certain engineering changes. Even that seems more likely to me, given Nikon's history of not using repairs as a profit center, than scaring up repair business.
  18. I think it is quite simple. Nikon is trying to improve their reputation regarding service quality and by offering free inspection and maintenance they hope customers will be happy (and be more confident in buying new Nikon equipment).
    I suspect a lot of customers don't send their cameras in regularly for service unless they notice an obvious problem, but a DSLR does contain moving parts and sometimes its operation can be improved by maintenance on a regular basis (which Nikon does recommend). In some cases there are improved calibration procedures for the AF (D800), and/or parts replacements that Nikon puts in place when the customer has the camera serviced or cleaned (this was the case with the D7000). By issuing this kind of a suggestion for users to send their cameras in for free service they can fix the remaining cameras which may be improved by some newer components even though the user hasn't been active in this regard. Also, as suggested above, they can monitor how much wear there is in the cameras and what kind of durability issues may have arisen.
    A recall of all cameras is a drastic measure and impractical because in that case most will send their cameras in for service at the same time, overloading the service centers. By making this kind of an initiative Nikon can carry this kind of improvement / maintenance work at a time when they are not being overloaded by some other mass repair.
  19. I'm not saying there's any risk anywhere in this.

    I am saying that I suspect that there is some kind of "secret recall" or some such that Nikon is trying to pull off with this. Or some kind of "test market" thing.

    Wouldn't it be better to say WHY they want to fix your perfectly good camera?
  20. Peter, a DSLR is a bit like a car, it should be regularly checked and serviced even when seems to the user to be running fine. There are moving parts which are subject to wear and may be misaligned over time. This wear depends on how the camera is used over a period of time. Without having a look at the individual camera (or car), how could they know what is (may be) wrong with it? It's an offer to check and perhaps improve the camera if they find something that can be improved/adjusted. One thing that is nice about having service center take a look is that the camera usually comes out much cleaner than it was and the sensor stays clean for a longer time instead of when I clean it there are quickly a few new spots coming up after a short while (I guess they use a vacuum which might explain the difference). Generally speaking I've had excellent experiences with Nikon (authorized) service in my country, while I understand that in some places people have had less good experiences so I can understand that if you've had bad experiences you might be reluctant to use that same facility again if it is not something mandatory. Personally I'd happily take the offer.
  21. Ikka,

    But they are singling out a very small number, and very specific. There are others they are ignoring.
    You gotta wonder why?
  22. I think they need to phase the invitations so that not every camera is sent into service at the same time. If there are (say) one million D800's and they sent an invitation to all those customers, how exactly would they be able to service those cameras quickly? Recruit 50000 new people and train them as service techs? It's not realistic. They need to work with the personnel they already have and this means any major invitations to service should be made in such a manner that the load of the service centres is evenly distributed over the course of the year.
  23. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    But they are singling out a very small number, and very specific. There are others they are ignoring.
    You gotta wonder why?​
    Peter, I am afraid that you have been reading too much from rumor sites and Thom Hogan, etc.
    Nikon is selecting a small group for a simple reason: repair capacity. When you offer something for free, people tend to take up the offer. As Duane wrote earlier, "what's not to like about this [offer]?" If you open the flood gate to everybody, you will be overwhelmed and would be very costly.
    Nikon has a long history of recalling products. There are mostly two categories:
    1. Hazards: Unlike automobiles that can crash and kill people, for Nikon, the highest risk is battery overheating during recharging. The highly unlikely scenario is that the battery gets very hot and starts a fire. Once you have a fire, it can burn down a house and kills some people. While that is extremely unlikely, Nikon's liability could be huge. That is why Nikon has had several battery recalls: EN-EL3 and EN-EL15: EN-EL15 Rechargeable Li-ion Battery Service Advisory
    2. Some serious problems that would really affect Nikon's reputation. We found out that essentially all early D5000 were recalled. Since that is a consumer-grade DSLR sold in much larger numbers, the scale of that recall was huge:
    Otherwise, Nikon would issue a service advisory and tell people that if your unit has problems, send it back for free repair. That was their initial approach to the D600 oil issue, which eventually became a huge deal. The problem is that whether a particular camera is "affected" is often not very clear cut, leading to a lot of confusion. Since then, Nikon has been more forthcoming about recalls and they have gone to the other extreme. IMO, the D750 recall is really unnecessary.
    Unfortunately, some rumor sites like to sensationalize such events. For example, they described that the D750 having some "silent recall" back in January, while in fact Nikon issued a service advisory with a serial number checker. For those D750 affected, Nikon provided a free shipping label for repair. It was anything but "silent."
    For the current "Free Maintenance Service Initiative," we now know that it covers at least two different models: D800/D800E and D7100
    1. So somehow you believe that both the D800 and D7100 have some "secret" problems Nikon needs to fix.
    2. This initiative is only from Nikon USA. Therefore D800 and D7100 sold in Europe, Asia, South America ... are not affected?? That cannot be the case.
    3. This problem is so serious that Nikon has to fix it preemptively, but for those who choose to ignore this initiative or their D800/D7100 have changed hands so that Nikon USA no longer has info on the current owner, such "serious problem" will suddenly show up after 2, 3 years and hurts Nikon's reputation.
    The fact of the matter is that if the problem is so serious that Nikon needs to repair/replace something preemptively, it will have to be an outright recall. They cannot possible do it silently (such that people may ignore the initiative) and cannot do that in only one country.
    Besides potentially generating some profit from paid repairs, maybe Nikon USA is studying how their cameras fare after 2, 3 years. Note that both the D800 and D7100 were introduced 2, 3 years ago but both have been superseded by newer models: D810 and D7200, respectively.
    P.S. Besides an early D800E, my D7100 is also a fairly early model. However, I still have not received any such initiative from Nikon for either one.
  24. maybe Nikon USA is studying how their cameras fare after 2, 3 years. Note that both the D800 and D7100 were introduced 2, 3 years ago but both have been superseded by newer models: D810 and D7200, respectively.​
    On reflection, I think this is the most realistic guess about what's going on with this.
  25. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Just saw this post on DPReview:
    It looks like at least one person received such an initiative for his old D700 also. So clearly it is not specific for the D800.
  26. I received the same thing for my D800. Hwvr, I already sent it in for repair recently - and was pleasantly surprised that they did it for free.
  27. Speaking as an independent observer (not in the USA, have a D810), an offer of free servicing can only be a good thing, modulo Shun's "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" policy. I do think Nikon should be aware that people are watching them very closely, though, and it might have been in their interests to explain a bit better. If they are doing an "old camera analysis", I don't see any harm in owning up to it. This should have been a good PR story for Nikon service, who frankly could do with one - I can see that Nikon may be frustrated that they get a bad reaction even when they do the right thing, but their PR department really should be more on the ball about this.
  28. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I can see that Nikon may be frustrated that they get a bad reaction even when they do the right thing, but their PR department really should be more on the ball about this.​
    Andrew, that is simply the way life is in this internet age. Various rumor sites always come up with some conspiracy theory to generate discussion and web page hits; that is how they make money. I also wouldn't be surprised that Nikon's competition is generating some of those rumors to hurt Nikon's reputation. However, Nikon is not the only one that is affected. A few months ago, I was reading the news on the Canon 5DS on DPReview, and the comments were very one-sidedly negative. (Remember that was announcement news; nobody outside of Canon had any actual experience with the new cameras.) Who knows, perhaps Canon's competition also came up with some of those negative comments.
  29. Various rumor sites always come up with some conspiracy theory to generate discussion and web page hits​
    Considering that Thom Hogan and I (with no financial interest) had the same thought, I think it's unreasonable to accuse him of having that motivation for his comments.
  30. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Mark, I have stopped reading Thom Hogan's web site on a regular basis 4, 5 years ago. Before that, I was a volunteer reviewer (i.e. no pay) for several of his Nikon camera eBaooks, such as the D300 and D700 (which means back in 2008 or so). Hogan is now a regular on Nikon Rumor's forums. IMO, his numerous speculations and false rumors are not exactly helpful to the Nikon user community.
    Incidentally, Nikon's new product announcements as well as product recalls are always very well synchronized world wide. You can take a look at this thread over on DPReview:
    As soon as I posted over there yesterday (with my real name: shuncheung), pointing out that it would make absolutely no sense to have some "silent recall" only in the US, the speculation on that thread died down pretty quickly, although the debate is still on going on other threads on this topic.
    If the objective is to generate web traffic, my posts are clearly counter-productive.
  31. It doesn't matter what Nikon does, Hogan almost always finds a negative angle to it and makes it a central point in his writings. He doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between fact and fiction these days, and the speculation lives a life of its own. It is unfortunate, as I think he could provide useful service to the community if only he would stick to what is truly known. Sometimes I think that the internet amplifies everything which is not constrained by facts.
  32. If there was a recent camera that Nikon should have done this with and did not, it would be the D7000. It could build some customer goodwill for the diminished resale value and perceived troublesome reputation regarding focus issues that they should have been on top of. Instead they fixed the problems with the new replacement D7100 and in so doing flipped off the D7000 buyers.
  33. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Bob H, I think that is mostly due to your personal experience. I bought my D7000 in the second week when it was first available in October 2010, and it has been perfect since. Once I forgot to zip my camera bag all the way up and that D7000 fell onto a parking lot. The EN-EL15 battery was ejected from the compartment. The little yellow latch that holds the battery in place was broken, but otherwise my D7000 is still working perfectly.
    My D800E was also perfect from the beginning. But last year it slipped from a chair onto a hardwood floor. Ever since it needs some pretty extreme AF fine tune. I wish Nikon would include mine in this initiative, but perhaps I should pay for a check up anyway.
  34. So you are buying into this "yet another Nikon product recall" interpretation that's floating around on dpreview and possibly elsewhere too? Don't think it's just a 'check to spec'?<br>Anyway, they aren't offering free repair of damage due to "misuse, abuse, alteration, negligence or accident", Shun.
  35. Thom... expresses opinions, not all of which I agree with (such as the likelihood of a "D4x" appearing and whether connectivity is the biggest fix needed in Nikon cameras - we each are biased by our own needs). He's certainly critical of when he thinks Nikon (and Canon) make mistakes, particularly in management and PR, where he has some experience. Still, he thinks the D810 and D750 are the best cameras available, usually states the background to his opinions, and makes money out of selling Nikon books - I don't think he has an ulterior motive in making Nikon look bad. There may well be people with an ulterior motive on the internet, although companies that do this kind of thing tend to get caught at it. Heck, I work for Samsung (although I don't represent them), so please bear in mind that I guess I'd like everyone to go and buy and NX1 (though I've no intention of switching away from Nikon myself).

    Nikon have had a couple of recalls that they didn't handle in the way that gave their customers complete confidence. This certainly made them look bad, although how bad (to the average user who doesn't follow these things like we do) is another matter. This forum, if any, should have Nikon fan boys in it - we (mostly) shoot Nikon, we know their range, we help new users out of the kindness of our hearts; most of us are supportive of Nikon and want it to do well. But if even we are a little suspicious about the reasoning behind Nikon apparently doing a good thing for their customers, that should tell Nikon something - and not just that we're all paranoid. (You only get paranoid because of a history.)

    I'm happy to give Nikon the benefit of the doubt, an think that they're doing this out of altruism or - more likely - benign research. Either way, if they'd owned up to this, it would be a good story that would improve Nikon's PR. The lack of a positive spin on this makes it seem as though the reasons are something Nikon wants to keep to themselves (because they'd be bad PR), and that makes people worry. So I have to conclude that either there's really something dodgy going on here, or Nikon's PR team just dropped the ball. I don't see the harm in discussing that - it might persuade Nikon to do the right thing and turn this into a good thing for the company (or at least, the customers).
  36. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Andrew, in these days the social media are very much part of any advertising campaign. In the US, there is a web site that provides reviews on various companies and jobs. I used to work for a fairly small company. When I started, they had some 200 employees, but upper management messes up everything and chased away several large customers. It was down to below 100 employees when I left a few years ago, and we are a bit surprised it hasn't shut down altogether. Needless to say, a lot of (former) employees are not happy and wrote very negative reviews on, but every time those negative reviews were immediately countered by some highly positive ones. Some people believe that those positive reviews came from the executive assistants and HR department.
    Therefore, in another two, three weeks, maybe we'll see a bunch of positive comments on this Nikon USA service or we'll also see some negative experience. Unless it comes from a familiar name that has a good posting history on this forum, I would simply take those comments with a grain of salt, as they could well be from some hired guns.
  37. Why does there need to be any spin at all? If you want a good reputation among customers, you provide a quality product and support it with good service. If you do that, there is no need to spin it in any way, people will find out the quality themselves. I think it's much better that there is no theatrics about it.
    Bob, Nikon did fix the AF systems of D7000 bodies systematically at least here in Europe when they came to service for cleaning or other reasons. My friend took his body in for the free clean & check service and among other things Nikon had replaced AF system components (for free). It seems like the current offer for free inspection and repair is a comparable service to the Nikon Europe's "Check and Clean". In the case of the D7000 in Europe it was advertised in a leaflet in the camera's box (also for some other cameras sold at the time). I don't see why there has to be any special PR regarding such activities, it is just a part of the service that they provide to their customers. I don't know if Nikon USA had similar AF system fixes systematically for D7000 bodies as in Europe, or not. If they did not, perhaps you can ask if they can still fix your camera. If they ask for money to do it state that the problem existed on the camera body when it was new (if true). In Europe we have consumer protection laws which extend the responsibility of the manufacturer's importer to product manufacturing flaws even after the warranty period expires. This law concerns products for 2-3 years after purchase (depending on the specific country within the EU, though I recall reading that UK has its own, different legislation with regards to this).
    I also dropped one of my Nikon DSLRs some years ago and the AF system went off after that. Nikon authorized service here repaired the camera, adjusting the AF (to a specification higher than it was when new) even though they knew the camera was no longer under warranty and they also knew it was affected by the impact. Do I come up with conspiracy theories after being systematically treated well by service? No. I accept the good service and continue to be a Nikon customer. In fact for many times I've been given free repairs over the years for items far older than any legal obligation (warranty or otherwise) would bind Nikon to provide.
  38. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Hmmm... it sounds like Ilkka has been paid off to make positive comments on this forum. Is Nikon giving you a free lens or something? :)
    BTW, Nikon USA fixed Mary Doo's D800, for free, out of warranty two months ago: D800 Dead or Alive?
    After I get my D750 GPS connection fixed, maybe I should send my D800E in as well. It is worth spending a couple of hundred dollars to get that back into perfect condition.
  39. Frankly I don't understand all these cynical speculations of a good thing. Looking more like a rumor mill now! ;-)
    I appreciate Nikon for repairing my D800 for free two months ago and now I appreciate Nikon for extending the good will again. Why should one immediately suspect some dark agenda? Would we like it better if Nikon blows $4M on a 30-second spot at the Super Bowl?
  40. Shun, our posts crossed. :)
  41. Shun: Agreed about positive posts and social media - people spread the word in many ways. However, spreading bad rumours about other companies has tended to backfire - it's too easy to find out who people are, and how they're biased. Hence I've been completely clear about my employer if it ever comes up on this forum, while also trying to be clear that I'm a lowly engineer and I'm not speaking for the company - but I wouldn't want someone to claim my posts were derogatory to a competitor in any way.

    Ilkka: Why does there need to be "spin"? Because Nikon have been slow to own up to a few recent issues, most notably the D600 oil and D800 autofocus. Shun mentioned the D5000. I think it's natural that those following Nikon news might be a little nervous that there may be something behind this. I'm certainly not saying there is, but I also think that it's a public service that those who suspect there might be a problem, tell people so. Had Nikon instantly come clean on all previous issues, I'm sure we'd give them the benefit of the doubt and just accept this as a good thing; as it is, some suspicion is natural. No, I don't think Nikon are evil for how they've handled things in the past, and no, they're certainly not the only company who have made PR errors. But I do think Nikon should have been ready for a little backlash here, and a little information explaining why they're doing this - especially if there's nothing to worry about, but even if there was - would have gone a long way to avert concerns. Nikon haven't shown themselves to be completely honest in the recent past, and the solution is to be as honest as possible now, while doing something nice for their customers.

    I don't believe I'm biased against Nikon - I genuinely want the company to do well, and I'm very happy with my camera and the service I've had from Nikon. If anything, I've been biased against Canon - the time it took them to actually produce the 5D2 when they appeared to have had many viable prototypes available and the unnecessary crippling of functionality on the 300D actively discouraged me towards the D700, even when the 5D2 was announced (though I had rational reasons to switch as well) - but I try not to hold a grudge. But I'm perfectly willing to query design decisions in cameras like the Df, and I don't think it's unreasonable to point out other ways they could do things better, if it's done objectively and constructively. The message might get back to them, to everyone's advantage.

    And no, it wouldn't require a Super-Bowl spot. It would just have required a little massaging of the message in the email people have received. That would have cost Nikon almost nothing, and got them good PR for free, rather than more rumblings of concern. The least Nikon are guilty of is not taking proper advantage of a good thing. If there is an ulterior motive, there'll be more fuss when it comes out - because it usually does. Lucy should explain to Charlie Brown why she's not going to pull the football away this time, and then they could be friends (and he'd trust her to hold the ball next time).
  42. Is Nikon giving you a free lens or something? :)

    Do you think that Nikon is giving me a free lens for suggesting, e.g., that Michele should probably keep her 28-70 and 70-200mm lenses instead of replacing them with new ones? Yeah, that would be very nice of Nikon, but so far they haven't come forward with such an offer. That doesn't mean I won't speak highly of Nikon's service because I have had consistently good experiences with it in the 21 years I've been their customer.
    Nikon have been slow to own up to a few recent issues,

    In my experience Nikon is doing their best to fix issues on a case by case basis as cameras come into service. In some regions they seem to have had problems fixing some issues. I agree that some customers got really bad service with the D600 dust issue. However, when Nikon is trying to improve their service, by offering to inspect and repair 3-year old cameras for free, you reject this offer and claim that it is really evil at work and they're hiding something. Please... Nikon has been offering free check and clean services with many cameras before, such as D3000, D3100, D5000, D5100, D90, and D7000 in my country. I know some people who have taken advantage of this and the service has been good. I am sure that Nikon is aware that some D800 and D600 owners have been unhappy and the resale value of their cameras have been lower than expected. An offer to inspect and repair cameras can be seen as trying to make amends and rectify the situation and perhaps in the long term improve customer satisfaction in the product and the company. To portray this as against the customer's best interest is quite ridiculous.
  43. However, when Nikon is trying to improve their service, by offering to inspect and repair 3-year old cameras for free, you reject this offer and claim that it is really evil at work and they're hiding something.​
    I'll note that I was not doing this, I was simply trying to discern their motivation. Whether it's driven by a specific issue or set of issues or just by good PR, I haven't ever asserted that their behavior is "evil."
  44. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I was simply trying to discern their motivation.​
    Mark, I would imagine that a number of us are also trying to figure out Nikon's motivation. While we'll probably never get a definitive answer, most likely it is something along the lines of:
    • good public relations, improve the brand's image
    • get some data about how their higher-end DSLRs are used/ware out after 2, 3 years
    • maybe drum up some additional repair work
    However, I don't believe for a second that this is some kind of stealth/secret recall. Any such suggestion is merely wild speculation without basis.
  45. Shun: I agree, and I don't think it's likely that it's a conspiracy (because it would probably come out). I'd missed that they actually did include some explanation of their (apparent) motivation:
    Why is Nikon providing this Free Maintenance Service Initiative to you? Because as a valued Nikon DSLR camera owner, Nikon wants to learn more from you about how Nikon can better meet the needs and preferences of its DSLR owners concerning the service of its Nikon DSLR cameras. We hope that you will take advantage of this Free Maintenance Service Initiative and will also help us by completing the Nikon Consumer Service Survey at Take Survey Here.​
    It's a little odd - free service is something that a lot of people would like as a way to improve the experience - but that they actually give some kind of motivation is better PR than I'd thought they'd achieved, and fends off some of the conspiracy arguments. I guess it's hard to ask about rate of wear without admitting to a paranoid public that things wear out.

Share This Page