Nikon announced a free cleaning and free shutter replacement for all D600 owners.

<I>

<p>Derek, please excuse me for interrupting your post and add some background information.</P>

<P>

Both Nikon Europe and Nikon USA have issued a new service advisory, offering free cleaning and free shutter assembly replacement, including shipping cost, on those D600 bodies that are affected by tiny dust spots on their sensors. This free service includes D600 cameras that have expired warranties.</p>

<ul>

<li>Nikon Europe: <a href="https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55647">https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55647</a></li>

<li>Nikon USA: <a href="http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Service-And-Support/Service-Advisories/hs309y82/Technical-Service-Advisory-for-Users-of-the-Nikon-D600-Digital-SLR-Camera.html">http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Service-And-Support/Service-Advisories/hs309y82/Technical-Service-Advisory-for-Users-of-the-Nikon-D600-Digital-SLR-Camera.html</a></li>

</ul>

<P>

Those service advisories are carefully worded, e.g. the word "oil" never appears on either one of them.

</P>

<p>Shun Cheung</p>

<P>

Derek's original post follows:

</P>

</I>

<HR size=3>

<p>I bought a refurbished D600 last year. It gave me problems with dust and oil from 4000 to 7000 actuations. At 7000 actuations I wet cleaned it and it has been perfect ever since. Is a matter of fact I have had less issues with dust in my D600 than I had with my D200 and D300. <br /><br />

Should I send my camera in anyway? <br /></p>

<p>If you're concerned that there might still be an issue by all means do send it in, but if it is working fine then maybe you'd just use Nikon's resources unnecessarily. Maybe you should just wait until the camera has been used for a while and if it needs a tune-up and cleaning at some point, then ask them to replace the shutter as well, if that will give you peace of mind. Also if you resell the camera to another user later on, it might give the new buyer reassurance that the shutter has been replaced, but still, if it works fine why not use it until there is a problem and then see what needs to be done once a problem occurs.</p>

There is an old saying: if it ain't broke, ....

<p><br /> Oddly enough - no mentioning of oil spots. This FREE cleaning and shutter replacement comes right at the heels of a law firm filing a class action law suit: http://www.zimmreed.com/Nikon-D600-Spot-Issue/64550/<br /> Nikon could have saved themselves a lot of bad PR and loss of customer confidence had they taken this step much earlier.</p>

<p>@Derek: there are some who had the shutter replaced just to have the problem re-occur. So I would follow Shun's advice. There doesn't seem to be an expiration date on the service advisory - so you can always send it in if the problem resurfaces.</p>

<p>Shun.</p>

<p>That is a saying to live by.</p>

<p>-Cheers</p>

<p>Derek, when it comes time to sell your camera it will likely be worth more on the used market if you have Nikon give you this new and improved shutter.</p>

<p><em>Nikon could have saved themselves a lot of bad PR and loss of customer confidence had they taken this step much earlier.</em></p>

<p>Perhaps, but in the case of users like the OP who don't have a problem with their D600's, the service advisory may motivate many of them to send them in to repair even if there is no issue with the camera. If, say 50k D600 users do have this issue, does it warrant 1 million users to send their cameras in to costly shutter replacement when in fact there may not be any issue with their cameras? At which point is it no longer sufficient to evaluate each camera on a case by case basis as they are taken to service and repair them when necessary rather than ask ALL the cameras to be sent in for replacement of the shutter that in SOME cameras causes this issue? I don't think there is any clear-cut solution to such a problem. The internet amplification effect is really a two-sided sword. However, I do agree that some users who have had to send their cameras in 2-3 times before the problem is finally resolved (and in some cases it was not), there was a real issue with customer service and I can understand that this is not a good situation since there is no guarantee that the repair is effective. So it would have perhaps been better to test the cameras for a longer time before release, or cease production at the point where there were clear signs of an issue and in repairing defective units, do extensive testing of the effectiveness of the repair. On the other hand if Nikon service takes 3000 exposures with the camera after repair to ascertain that the repair is effective, the user might complain that the shutter has been used too much ...</p>

 

<p>Ever since the D600 dust/oil story broke just a month or two since its introduction: <a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00axxj">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00axxj</a>,<br>

we have had a lot of discussion about this issue. Clearly, a higher percentage of D600 have such issue than what we would consider "normal." It is unclear to me whether it is indeed a serious issue for most D600 owners or part of it is the result of more people checking their D600 due to all the internet negative publicity. We have heard stories that people have their D600 going back for multiple sensor cleaning or even more than one shutter replacements; we have also heard stories that some people have absolutely no abnormal problems with their D600 at all.</p>

<p>Remember that almost two years ago, there was also a lot of internet chatter about the D800's left AF issue, and some people even suggested that Nikon should recall the D800. I happen to have used a D800 loaner for 3 months and I have owned a D800E since June 2012. Both cameras have zero AF issue.</p>

<p>I am all for Nikon thorouhly fixing all cameras that are out of the norm, but why would I send a perfectly working D800E (or D600, D610, D800 ...) back to Nikon for "repair"? They can't possibly make it any more perfect. Even though that doesn't cost me anything for shipping and "repair":</p>

<ul>

<li>

I lose usage of that camera for some time, perhaps 2, 3 weeks while it is en route to/from Nikon.

</li>

<li>

The camera could get damaged or lost during shipping.

</li>

<li>

Nikon repair could poentially screw up a perfectly working camera so that it has new issues after this unnecessay "repair." Most likey Nikon will be reponsible for such problems, but I am merely generating headache for myself.

</li>

</ul>

<p>If it ain't broke, don't fix it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Derek, when it comes time to sell your camera it will likely be worth more on the used market if you have Nikon give you this new and improved shutter.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why?</p>

<p>First of all, Nikon never says that any replacement shutter is improved. That is why in some rare occasions, people have had their D600 gone in multiple times with more than one shutter replacement.</p>

<p>And Nikon does not post any time limit for this service advistory. Whoever buys Derek's used D600 could send it in themselve for another shutter replacement, if that is necessary under this service advisory.</p>

<p>However, I seriously doubt that Nikon is just going to blindly replace the shutter on every D600 that is sent to them. Clearly there are plenty of D600 that have no problem at all; e.g. our own Matt Laur has one of those. In that case Nikon would just send it right back to you, perhaps after some cleaning. In other words, you are merely wasting everybody time and effort, including your own.</p>

<p>

Of course, that is what Nikon repair service has been doing all along, anyway. The only difference is that the warranty period for this particular problem on the D600 is now extended to essentially forever.

</P>

<p>Ilkka, not to get into a lengthy debate over this - enough has been written already about this anyway - but the advisory still does not even mention the oil spots which IMO where the real issue and much harder to clean than some dust (even if the "debris" the shutter threw on the sensor was excessive in some cases). To add, there are many nuances between "denying there is a problem" and a "full-out recall of all cameras". I believe we can agree that early on announcing a free shutter replacement for anyone experiencing the "oil spots" would have smoothed over the internet amplification effect in a jiffy and gone a long way in increasing customer satisfaction and confidence. The fact that this advisory still doesn't mention the full issue, comes more than a year after the issue was revealed, and appears forced by the filing of a class action law suit gives this the feel being told to close the stable door after the horse has already bolted </p>

<p>Does this, or rather do they, reset the shutter-count?</p>

<p>If you've got a high milage D600, maybe 130000 frames and after shutter replacement and some use, it reads 4000 and you sell it, is that 'fair' to the new purchaser?</p>

<p>Not quite the same as a car with a new engine after 150000 miles, but not a new gearbox....but similar!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Why?<br>

First of all, Nikon never says that any replacement shutter is improved.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Some things can just be assumed. Given that this is Nikon's second shot at this shutter, I don't think this is a total stretch.</p>

<p>I was just making the point that if your classified ad stated that your D600 included the new, and presumably improved, shutter your ad may be more attractive than others. At any rate you would at least be satisfying those who suspect that you may just be trying to off-load your problem D600 onto them. I am not trying to be controversial, I am just raising the point.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I believe we can agree that early on announcing a free shutter replacement for anyone experiencing the "oil spots" would have smoothed over the internet amplification effect in a jiffy and gone a long way in increasing customer satisfaction and confidence.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dieter, I, for one, don't think so.</p>

<p>On the web, there are plenty of people who would complain about Nikon regardless of what they do. Thom Hogan is a very good example in the last 2, 3 years, and there are many who have followed suit. Those people complain about everything and every time.</p>

<p>The problem is that a shutter replacement is not a guaranteed fix for the problem. Not that I completely believe in them, but there are reports that people have had more than one shutter replacements. And there is a lot of gray areas between "normal" dust collection on a sensor and having a dust "problem."</p>

<P>

I have also read that it could even be Nikon's competition that is fanning the flames on this D600 dust/oil issue. Since there is no way we can verify every claim about D600 oil/dust, repair, failed repair ..., including those who accuse Nikon's competition, I can only comment generally that I take everything I read on the web with a little grain of salt, unless it is a very trust-worthy source.

</P>

<p>This new service advisory is likely the reaction to a couple of class-action law suits on the D600 dust/oil issue. I am no lawyer (thankfully), but since this D600 isn't exactly causing death and injury, I wonder what D600 owners can gain from such law suit. Typically it is no more than literally a few dollars. It is usually the lawyers who collect a lot of fees. And in the long run, if you send them a D600 5 years from now, Nikon can always tell you that your problem is not covered by this service advisory. It'll be up to you to argue with them.</p>

<p>As I said earlier, first of all Nikon is not mentioning "oil" at all, and they have been cleaning D600 sensors and in some cases replacing shutters or even replace D600 with new D610 bodies. Other than extending the warranty to forever for this particular problem, there isn't a whole lot of changes.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>First of all, Nikon never says that any replacement shutter is improved.<br>

Some things can just be assumed. Given that this is Nikon's second shot at this shutter, I don't think this is a total stretch.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not inconceivable that early replacements were using the same shutter and that later (or now) an "improved" version (D610 shutter?) was installed. Nikon knows and it is very likely that they won't be talking about it. Assumptions can easily be made - it's the verification part that might prove a lot more difficult. Maybe someone will take a few cameras apart and have a closer look?</p>

<p>Dieter, it is not entirely clear to me that you can simply put the D610's shutter onto a D600, and of course there are even claims that the D610 also has dust/oil issue, although few seem to believe in that. Again, I wouldn't necessarily believe in everything I read on the web.</p>

<p>But if Nikon indeed didn't have an improved shutter for replacement until later on, and you think they should have announced this service advisory a years ago, what exactly do you think they should have done back then when they didn't have sufficient replacement parts (perhaps no trouble-free parts at all) to deal with a massive service advisory?</p>

<p>It is very easy for us to sit in front of a computer (or iPad, etc.) and type what Nikon should have done, blah, blah, blah. It is always easy to be a Monday-morning, armed chair quarterback.</p>

<p>I do assume that every d600 send to nikon following this notice will receive new, improved shutter unit. If (like some responders suggest) nikon will inspect the cameras and decide which need replacement which don't and for replacement use the same shutter - then nikon needs new management.</p>

<p>@Shun<br>

I bought a refurbished D600 about two months ago, and I absolutely love it. The strange thing is that the camera had zero shutter activations when I got it (and the price was fantastically low). I haven't seen any problems. It is a backup for my D800E that I need for two weddings in March, so no way am I sending it back now. Maybe later if I see a problem. But what do you think the chances are that Nikon began replacing the shutters in all refurbs, or at least some, as mine was new? This camera is so good I don't know that I would complain too much about a little extra cleaning.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Dieter, it is not entirely clear to me that you can simply put the D610's shutter onto a D600</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I did not make the claim that this can be done at all. I stated that no one except Nikon knows what that replacement shutter actually is - and they very likely won't tell. Since the D610 and D600 share the same body, gutting and replacing whatever necessary should be possible - it may be more than just the shutter assembly though.</p>

<p>What should they have done in December of 2012? Stop production (at that point likely not more than 150,000 units), fix the problem, come out with the improved product. Deal with those already sold by cleaning them for free as often as it takes - and deal with repairing those units (an estimated 20% though that is by no means a solid number) once the solution was found. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Again, I wouldn't necessarily believe in everything I read on the web.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Good advice - that I am following already before it was given.<br>

Re: class action lawsuit - I agree that the lawyers take the lion's share; D600 owners won't get the desired refund or small additional fee to trade up their D600 to a D610 - that's wishful thinking. In this case, filing the lawsuit seems to have prompted Nikon to act though - and over what essentially amounts to an extended/indefinite limited warranty and apparently a shipping fee refund to all those who had send in D600 previously. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>As I said earlier, first of all Nikon is not mentioning "oil" at all</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You edited Derek's original post at around the same time I posted my initial response - so you may or may not have seen my post which was posted when Derek's OP was unedited. I edited my post when I saw your edit to eliminate the link to the service advisory that you had by then included in the original post.<br>

In essence, Nikon still doesn't address the issue fully - but the result is what should count for D600 owners.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I do assume that every d600 send to nikon following this notice will receive new, improved shutter unit. If (like some responders suggest) nikon will inspect the cameras and decide which need replacement which don't and for replacement use the same shutter - then nikon needs new management.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am the one who thinks Nikon should inspect every D600 sent their way and only replace the shutter if necessary. I understand that in some cases, they would even replace a D600 with a new D6100.</p>

<p>If Nikon sets it up so that they automatically replace the shutter or even send someone a brand new D610, they would merely be opening themselves up to abuses. In that case, why wouldn't someone just buy a totally beaten up D600 with huge shutter actuation counts, send it in and expect a new D610 (or at least a new shutter) in return? Or I could just use my D600 like crazy for 2 years, send it in for a new shutter, use it for another 2 years, send it in again ....</p>

<p>Concerning refurbs, I have had very bad personal experience with Nikon USA refurb lenses: 3 out of 3 were still defective. I have never bought any refurb bodies.</p>

<p>the good news is that new D600s are down to around $1500, and this should give prospective buyers confidence that nikon will fix it if the problem develops. price could drop even lower; there's probably a big back-stock.</p>

<p>I had dust spots show up at around 500 actuations on my D600 that I was able to clean with a blower. I haven't checked it recently and I rarely shoot under conditions that would reveal dust spots. I'll be checking it tonight. <br /><br />The camera has not been heavily used, but I'm inclined to send it in to get the shutter upgrade since my initial problem happened very early.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What should they have done in December of 2012? Stop production (at that point likely not more than 150,000 units), fix the problem, come out with the improved product. Deal with those already sold by cleaning them for free as often as it takes - and deal with repairing those units (an estimated 20% though that is by no means a solid number) once the solution was found.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dieter, for the sake of argument and the lack of concrete data, let's assume all of your above information is correct, which obviously is a major assumption.</p>

<p>So Nikon should have stopped production of the D600 (and obviously stop selling them) in December, 2012. Since Nikon finally introduced the D610 in October, 2013: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00c3Jd, I would argue that it took Nikon 10 months after December, 2012 to have a full solution, ready for the market.</p>

<p>For the sake of argument, just say it took Nikon 6 months to come up with a solution so that based on Dieter's scenario, Nikon had to stop production of the D600 for 6 months, the Canon 6D would have been totally unopposed on the market. In the mean time, there would have been a lot of negative publicity on the D600 and lots of rumors (of course, that is true anyway). I don't think the D600 could have made a comeback 6 (or 10) months later, and Nikon could have lost a lot of market share in the low-end FX market, which both Canon and Nikon are betting on to replace the high-end DX market.</p>

<p>Clearly there is no easy answer to this situation; there are only a few bad choices. If indeed 4 out of 5 D600 owners have no serious dust/oil problem, IMO Nikon's chosen path is not necessarily a bad one. As long as Nikon finally fixes those D600 that indeed have issues, most people should be ok with it. As I said, for those who build their career on complaining about Nikon (and just about everybody else), they will always find things to complain about.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>The solution:</strong> Nikon is making available to all owners of D600 cameras (even if Nikon’s product warranty has expired) this customer-service measure, which includes the inspection, cleaning and replacement of the shutter assembly and related parts of your camera, FREE OF CHARGE as well as the cost of shipping D600 cameras to Nikon and their return to customers. Once again, please understand that regardless of this service, your D600 camera as is the case with all D-SLR cameras, will continue to require normal periodic sensor cleanings.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Service-And-Support/Service-Advisories/hs309y82/Technical-Service-Advisory-for-Users-of-the-Nikon-D600-Digital-SLR-Camera.html<br>

That is a quote from Nikon USA's service advisory. I have an e-mail to Nikon USA for clarification on whether a shutter assembly replacement is automatic or not for each D600 sent to them under this service advisory.</p>

<p>I sent my camera in for cleaning and an alignment adjustment two weeks ago and it scheduled to be delivered back to me this Thursday according to the tracking number. I just got off the phone with Nikon who informed me that my camera had been cleaned, <strong>SHUTTER REPLACED</strong>, mirror adjusted, and additional minor adjustments at <strong>NO COST TO ME</strong>. It was out of warranty. I am grateful that Nikon has stepped up to the plate and fixed my camera. What is important to me is that they fixed the camera not whether they admit denial of the problem. As for as any time limit on the advisory, hell send the camera in, its free shipping both ways. Do it now, not tomorrow, or next week, or even next month. I sent mine in thinks to alerts from this sight. People you have nothing to lose by sending them the camera. </p>

<blockquote>

 

 

<p>Derek, when it comes time to sell your camera it will likely be worth more on the used market if you have Nikon give you this new and improved shutter.</p>

 

 

</blockquote>

Are we spending our time taking photos or doing business by selling secondhand cameras? We should make sure we are true first before we expect Nikon to do so.

 

<blockquote>

There is an old saying: if it ain't broke, ....

</blockquote>