Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item The Online Resource for Sports Photography

 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Classified Ads
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions

Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.



|| Member Message Board

Nikon Canada Claiming Impact Damage
Minas Panagiotakis, Photographer
Montreal | QC | Canada | Posted: 7:04 PM on 03.11.13
->> Nikon Canada NPS claims that my 2 1/2 month old D4 camera has suffered impact damage, that is not the case!

The issue: it has trouble tracking players coming directly head on, AF-C mode.

The Montreal office saw no issues with the camera. In fact, the Montreal office had a D4 in the back which performed exactly as mine. According to them it was normal. They offered to ship it to Toronto's office and have them look at it. This afternoon I received a call from NPS in Toronto and they tell me the camera suffered impact damage and that it would cost over $700 to repair??? I argued my point many times. After being put on hold on multiple occasions, the rep came back saying since I'm an NPS member I get a 20% discount on repairs and they will throw in an additional 30% discount?? Why can't they admit there is a problem with the camera. It seems that Nikon's customer service is degrading. Is this a standard practice for Nikon to state "Impact Damage" on most repairs and have us pay for it?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Josh Merwin, Photographer
New York | NY | | Posted: 12:00 AM on 03.12.13
->> They probably assume that you got pissed off that it wasn't working correctly and threw it on the ground in frustration.
Seriously though, Is there anything cosmetically that makes them think it has been dropped? If not, I would suggest going throughout your dealer. If you do end up paying for the repair, make sure it is fixed as soon as you get it back.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Hinton, Photographer, Assistant
New Orleans | LA | USA | Posted: 2:34 AM on 03.12.13
->> Yes Nikon has made a habit of claiming impact damage to void warranties in the US. I'm not sure about Canada.

A costumer service site rates Nikon service between terrible and disappointing with 209 negative comments versus 17 positive comments. That's a ratio of about 12 negative comments to 1 positive comment. Many of these comments discuss the phrase "impact damage."

Nikon USA Repair Service is bad. As detailed by this report from Lens Rentals.

Here are the highlights
"Nikon, I love the cameras. I love the prices on the cameras. But Nikon USA’s repair and service sucks and is getting worse. And yes, Fanboy, I know they fixed your item for free in 5 days. We had one come back in 5 days, too (although not this year). I also know they have a great 5-year warranty. But how much does that help when you drop it?"

"Just for curiosity, I compared same-item repair costs for Nikon and Canon 24-70s. All Canon 24-70 repairs were either $268 or $370 (non-discounted price) during the entire 6-month period. All Nikon repairs were $539 or $602 from April 1 onwards; they were $310 before April (although there were only two during that period). I don’t have
room to list all the replaced items, but they were similar: barrels, collars, helicoid rings"

Nikon has had an 'F' or failing rating from the Better Business Bureau for several years.

Do a search with your favorite search engine for "Nikon impact damage" and you find numerous complaints about how Nikon uses microscope scratches and cracks, which are invisible to the naked eye, to say a warranty is voided due to "impact damage."

As stated previously in other threads. I am sure the "Fanboys" may be offended by this, may discount several sources, and want to rewrite history. The time, experience, and research you have invested in the brand does not make you a bad person because the brand fails. It's the fault of the brand not you, don't take it personally because the brand screws up. Before you respond please read this article
"[The study concludes] that those who have more knowledge of and experience with a brand are more personally impacted by incidents of brand "failure."
"Consumers are highly resistant to brand failure to the point that they’re willing to rewrite history," business administration professor and researcher Tiffany Barnett White said in a statement. "It not only explains why so many Toyota customers ignored the negative brand information in the aftermath of the highly publicized recalls, it also accounts for why they’re quick to defend the company and why they would want to re-write history in a more positive way."
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jim Karczewski, Photographer, Assistant
Hammond | IN | USA | Posted: 3:50 AM on 03.12.13
->> I had something similar with Canon, but in the end Canon decided it wasn't worth the $50 I'd have to pay to repair the issue than charge me.

I was sent a 1Dx as a loaner when my 1Dx was looking like it wasn't going to be back in time for a critical game. Called CPS, Rep told me they would overnight me a 1Dx. Mine came back (even though said still in QA) and theirs. I took both, hell, it was a semi-state game... Why would I not, at a dark field I needed ISO 10,000+ on to shoot football.

Well, send the camera back, get a call from CPS, the battery grip is cracked... Kicker, you can only see the crack from inside the battery compartment. Now I know, anytime I get a loan.. I'm checking everything, battery compartment included for damage. Thankfully as mentioned, CPS ate the cost.

I do not envy Nikon owners, seriously. It seems like you have to give your first born, a blood sample, and a full criminal background check to become a "member" and then they don't treat you like a real PROFESSIONAL which is the point of the service.

Maybe they've been told to tighten the belt straps due to their declining sales? Who knows. I wouldn't take that though, I'd fight them any way I could and get it fixed, UNDER WARRANTY.

Best of luck to you...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Eric Isaacs, Photographer, Assistant
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 1:58 PM on 03.12.13
->> Maybe it got dropped in Montreal? Ask for a specific description of the impact damage and photos if possible. Make sure it's in the same condition as when you sent it out.

Here's a rehash of the "impact damage" issue Tamron hit me with.

In the end, getting the word out may be the only recourse against corporations that shirk responsibility.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Tim Snow, Photographer
Montreal | Qc | Canada | Posted: 5:13 PM on 03.12.13
->> @Minas...speak with Pete McCabe...he has had almost the same thing happen to him. Contact me if you need his info.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Minas Panagiotakis, Photographer
Montreal | QC | Canada | Posted: 1:02 AM on 03.13.13
->> Hi guys, thanks for your help. I received a call from Nikon today claiming that they took apart my camera and found that the magnesium plate inside the camera that holds the components is no longer aligned. They also state that my lens mount or bayonet is also off. They sent pictures of my disassembled camera attached to a machine that measures alignment. According to them this is a frequent occurrence with users that shoot with long lenses such as 70-200 and 400mm. They have offered to reduce the cost of the repair $375 down from $750. They don't seem to understand that the camera works flawlessly except in AF-c mode.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Martin McNeil, Photographer
London | London | United Kingdom | Posted: 12:35 PM on 03.13.13
->> Does anyone else have a problem with the following excerpt from Minas' last update?

"According to them this is a frequent occurrence with users that shoot with long lenses such as 70-200 and 400mm."

I'll take Minas at his word that this is what the Nikon service center people said and, if true, it's beyond worrying; after all, one would expect that both the cameras and lenses are designed to *work* together and have materials tolerances that would permit mounting of a 70-200mm or heavier lens without it warping or mis-aligning the mount... especially that of a camera less than 90 days old.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Simon Wheeler, Photo Editor, Photographer
Ithaca | NY | USA | Posted: 4:15 PM on 03.13.13
->> I presume Minas knows to put the monopod under the 300 and not under the camera body. I bet they see plenty of cameras from people like the person I saw in the stands of a college football game this fall with the monopod under the camera body and a 300 2.8 mounted.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Hinton, Photographer, Assistant
New Orleans | LA | USA | Posted: 4:34 PM on 03.13.13
->> As I understand it, Nikon Montreal said it was working, and exactly like another camera, and then it's not working in Toronto with significant "impact damage." Then they should make a claim with the shipment company and not charge you.

According to Montreal it was working fine and did not need repair, right?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael Fischer, Photographer
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 9:30 PM on 03.13.13
->> I would calmly call them and ask to speak with the service manager. I would explain calmly that the camera was checked in Montreal and was found to be working exactly like the same model they possessed at that office.

I would then say the following:

Either the camera was damaged when:

1) it was produced and/or shipped by the factory;
2) when it was shipped to them after Montreal;
3) or you damaged it.

I would explain that in no uncertain terms the camera has been doing what it's been doing since you bought it - that would be #1 and would eliminate #2 and 3.

I would also explain that as a working professional, you not only treat your equipment with extreme care, long lenses are always supported with a monopod as a added precaution.

I would then tell them that the camera has a warranty, and all you're looking for is for them to honor the warranty. I would then ask " Is that reasonable?" Shut up and let the manager answer.

If he agrees, you're good. If he says no, ask for the contact information for his boss. Make it clear that it isn't personal, and if you had damaged the camera, you'd have no problem taking responsibity for it; but you draw the line at paying for a repair that you didn't cause.

The trick is to go up the line as far as you need to go. Be calm, be professional. At some point, you let them know you'll go to the President of Nikon Canada if that's what it takes. The camera doesn't work right, and it evidently hasn't since you received it.

Hope this helps...

 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title: Nikon Canada Claiming Impact Damage
Thread Started By: Minas Panagiotakis
Member Login:

Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
I also write a weekly column read it at ::..