Sigma repair service UK - is this acceptable?

[shadowcatcher]

<p>I bought a Sigma 24mm f1.8 lens over a year ago and noticed it was usually never sharp and very hit and miss. My colleague borrowed it and said it was back focusing and this was the reason why. I sent the lens back to Sigma explaining the problem and unfortunately it was 1 day out of warranty. I explained the situation it had always been like that and they said tough, which is fair enough, not very spirited but fair enough. However, this was on the 28th April 2011 and cost for repairs and change of chip was £60. After 10 weeks and repeated calls I was finally told it wasn't the chip and it needed to go back to Japan for total recalibration i.e. I bought it like that so it must have been shipped like it. More fool me for not noticing and letting it go out of warranty, fair enough. However, I've received it back on the 18th August and noticed Sigma have clobbered me for a further £67 for recalibration?<br>

Basically is 111 days to fix a lens an acceptable time frame and is the extra £67 justified.<br>

As a caveat, the lens is sharp once more and I am happy with it, just not with the rather apathetic service section of Sigma Lenses UK. Moral of the story, buy a Canon.</p>

 

[HenryUK]

<p>I think you should remind them of you statutory rights. These apply regardless of any warranty.<br>

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Consumerrights/Yourconsumerrightswhenbuyinggoodsandservices/DG_182935<br>

Essentially you are entitled to expect an item to be fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. There isn't a 12 month time limit on these.<br>

Many businesses try to avoid responsibility by saying something is out of warranty.<br>

Don't accept this. Ask for your case to be escalated to a manager and firmly explain that the lens didn't perform consistently and must have had a defect from new. A lens should perform for many years, not just 12 months.<br>

I find that may organisations back down at this point.<br>

Good luck.<br>

Henry</p>

 

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>I can comment only with a Dutch/continental point of view but if you had sent it back during the warranty period the discussion would have been simpler. Now, after the warranty period, the onus of proof that the lens was malfunctioning from the beginning is on you. I'd show them some earlier pictures, including one or two madr by your colleague. BTW, there is EU legislation claiming a 2 year warranty period for tech idems. Unfortunately this is not implemented in the Netherlands yet, seemingly neither so in the UK. Problem is whether you want to go to court for GBP 67.</p>

[keith reeder]

<p>I'm with Henry here - I'd consider that a lens should be (and have been) of satisfactory quality (it wasn't); <em>and fit for purpose</em>, (which again it clearly wasn't), for more than a year.</p>

<p>I also don't think that Sigma can lawfully charge you that £67 for the "extra" work without clearing the additional expense with you first - although that'll depend on the specifics of your agreement with them.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Many years ago I bought a 14mm F3.5 and when Canon launched their DSLRs it would no longer AF. I was slightly later than some to add digital so I did not bother sending the lens off straight away for a replacement AF chip. When I contacted them to do this they told me thay had run out of chips and that the lens would not be compatible with any Digital EOS body. Since I assume that they are still selling AF lenses for Canon I assume they must have some AF chips but my lens (like many others) cannot be used on an EOS digital body (only EOS film). They claim it is not their problem as canon changed their mount. However, in the course of my discussions it transpired that they had never licensed the Canon EOS AF mount and had merely reverse engineed it - I guess they got it wrong. What disgusted me was that they never made it clear to users that they had not really done the job properly - they sold the lens as fully EOS compatible. Since then I have only bought one Sigma lens (the 8mm F3.5) and I only bought it as it is the only full frame circular AF lens for EOS - until the new Canon 8-15mm zoom.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>From 1995 to 1999 I bought 6 new Sigmas. In 1999 I bought an EOS 3 and, of course, none of the Sigmas would work properly. One worked okay if I only shot wide open and the reminder simply gave the blinking battery symbol. Sigma told me only the 50 2.8 EX had a chip update, the rest were recently discontinued and were no longer supported. So I had 5 paperweights. The next year I bought an Elan 7E and the damn 50 2.8 EX with new chip couldn't be stopped down. When I checked they didn't have a "reprogramed" chip yet, so I sold the 50 2.8. A shame Sigma CS is so terrible as it was otherwise an excellent lens. In contrast, I own several Canon EF lenses from the late 80s and early 90s and they work perfectly on my 7D/5D2.</p>

[pto189]

<p>Copy and paste your case with a warning: "Don't buy Sigma lenses!" on every photography forum until Sigma reimburses the cost to calibrate your lens.</p>

[colin carron]

<blockquote>

<p>Copy and paste your case with a warning: "Don't buy Sigma lenses!" on every photography forum until Sigma reimburses the cost to calibrate your lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>or until you are thrown off every photography forum. Personally I have always found Sigma lenses to perform well and offer good value.</p>

<p>It sounds to me as though the fault with the lens was one that was there from the outset and slipped through Sigma's quailty control. As such I think you should at least try pursuing it.</p>

<p>I once was given an elderly original Olympus Trip 35 (remember them?) by someone who had never managed to get a decent shot out of it. It had never worked properly and always produced out of focus images. I took it back to an Olympus dealer who after a few weeks came back to me with a NEW Olympus Trip 35 as the original was clearly a manufacturing fault.</p>

<p>Given the theory that all things in the cosmos balance out in the end, maybe that was the positive moment which balances your Sigma lens problem. Or just maybe Sigma might be generous.</p>

[pjmeade]

<p>It's sad to know that the jobsworth is still alive and working for Sigma.<br>

There are a couple of things you can do. Firstly get an address or email address of their customer services and report your case to them ( <a href="http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/contact.htm">http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/contact.htm</a> ).<br>

Another, quicker approach is via twitter. Say what happened in a tweet including the name @SigmaImagingUK and the #photography hashtag. <br>

Companies monitor social media in order to pick up on this kind of thing and to keep their corporate fingers on the pulse.<br>

I've had replies within a couple of hours taking the twitter route.</p>

[dhbebb]

<p>By all means try any or all of the above in an attempt to win a goodwill gesture from Sigma. If these do not work, you may ultimately have to recognize that from Sigma's point of view a need for re-collimation COULD result from product abuse (being dropped) and that this is the reason for their apparent obstinacy.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I recall having two poor quality Sigma lenses in the 1990's and in my mind I see them as a company whose sole interest is to undercut on price and still make a healthy profit. May or may not be true, but it just goes to show how a couple of duff products produces antipathy. </p>

<p>I think there's a big difference between what Sigma have to do and what they have the opportunity to do. If you don't return the lens within a warranty period its becoming more difficult to credibly claim that it was always unsatisfactory. They give a period of time for the owner to notice and act upon any faults that occurred in manufacture and I'm pretty sure that even if he could demonstrate conclusively using photographs that the problem existed within warranty, that the OP's failure to <strong><em>complain or return </em></strong>the lens in that period means that the bet is off if Sigma want it to be. The OP has not been quick enough to report the matter to Sigma and product quality aside, he has to take ( and I think is taking ) a large amount of the resposibility for this situation. </p>

<p>One thing I'd be doing if I were the OP is to talk with Sigma to find out why I might have been charged twice to solve one problem, and whether they have physically charged the second amount to your card without prior approval. I think either of these opens up a whole different issue. OTOH it may be that their std charge for a recalibration and freight to/from Japan is £127 and the second amount is simply to cover the difference between that and the initial diagnosis . Whichever they must not unless you have agreed make actual charges to a card where you have not approved the fact and amount of the charge beforehand. They may well have the right to send a bill for repair work done - I have no idea what arrangements were made by the OP or indeed what t&c apply generally when sending items to Sigma for repair. However even my motor dealerships call , say what they've found and get my approval to a repair cost before carrying out work.</p>

<p>Now what <em><strong>should </strong></em>Sigma do, to demonstrate that they actually give a damn about customer satisfaction , repeat purchase and reputation? Well given the submission was only a day late, and notwithstanding this timing being the OP's entire fault, they could start by accepting that on overwhelming balance of probability that the problem was present during the warranty period, and that corporately they aren't in the business of seizing every opportunity to penalise their customers for acting slowly. It doesn't matter whether the problem was there from the beginning or not- if they accept that the problem was there on the last day of warranty the course of action is the same. In short they could, if they cared a bit, carry out his repair properly and free and also within an appropriate timeframe. The fact that they aren't doing any of that tells you all you need to know about them for the future. </p>

<p>My own inclination is to try and get an explanation for the dual charge and then write to the CEO by name with the issues that remain. In my experience, people at the top of organisations are much quicker to see the nuances and implications of situations than people near the bottom. </p>

 

[shadowcatcher]

<p>I take it all back, all is sorted by Sigma UK, one e-mail and they sorted it within 15 mins and now that is customer satisfaction. They rang me back and explained everything, really good guys. My faith in humanity has been restored and I will continue to advocate and buy Sigma lenses.<br>

Top company, super services and my 24mm f1.8 is sooooooooooo sharp wide open I could kiss it.</p>

[harry_ziman]

<p>My experience is the same as Philip Watson's - I will never ever touch Sigma again. They even tried to mislead me by saying that Canon also have compatibility problems with EOS mounts. I found them unhelpful and indifferent to this customer despite the shortcomings in their products.</p>