another Z8 problem

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Status
Not open for further replies.
Member's gallery
flashpixx said:
I was in my local Authorised Nikon Repair dealer dropping off my Z8 for the service advisory.
They mentioned the strap lugs coming off and suggested there may be another service advisory.
Have been waiting for somethng to be reported (yes social media does work) before I mentioned it.
Click to expand...
I wonder whether it is due to a missing part or wrong design?
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
@Lance B yah, i noticed that hole which i as well suspect is the housing for some sort of anchoring detent. i too suspect it was yanked, i am guessing the key is the owner didn’t feel like it should have failed given the force. hard to say. it would be helpful if they cut that mount assembly in half for us to get a better view 😂
Click to expand...
To me it looks like something is missing. I can't imagine that pin being secure [enough] with what we see and it does look like it was "pulled out" in some fashion.
Ugh, another recall is going to raise some concerns about whether or not this camera was rushed to market.
 
Member's gallery
Lance B said:
From my engineering background, and looking at the photos provided, the actual eyelet anchor assembly that goes into the camera seems to have a hole in it, where it seems there could or should also be an anchoring pin, or other method, assisting with the security of that eyelet assembly to the camera body. A possible pin appears to be missing, or other method of security of that eyelet assembly, and thus possibly why it came adrift from the camera more easily in this particular case. Just a thought. To pull the eyelet out of the camera with an anchoring pin would take a very considerable force and destroy the area around the eyelet anchor point of the camera body and I doubt very much that it was just merely had a lens attached and that combined weight pulling the eyelet anchor from the camera whilst carrying it around. It looks to be more to this than what there appears, IMO. It looks like there was possibly some yanking force going on or the strap became caught on something and the owner pulled at it not realising it had possibly become snagged, not just the weight of a lens and carrying it around. However, if there is a pin that goes though the eyelet and that pin was missed during the construction of a particular camera (or dare I say batch of cameras) then it would be much easier to remove the eyelet assembly as the eyelet assembly is relying on the plastic "adhering or gluing itself" to the eyelet assembly shaft which is smooth due to the chrome plating and would thus have little adherence and thus come out quite easily. I would dare say with the way it is shown that there will be many more failures if it is indeed engineered this way, which I do not believe it would be. The point I am making is that the way the eyelet assembly is being shown in the photos really looks way under-engineered for such a duty and I can't believe that Nikon, or any decent engineer, would design it in such a way. If the anchor point assembly of the eyelet and camera is supposed to be able to take the weight of a lens and camera body, say the Z8 + 800 f.56 lens, the heaviest Nikon lens I know of, then it would be designed to take at least the combined weight plus 2.5 times that. It seems as though there is something missing from manufacture of that particular camera, like the aforementioned pin or other anchoring method to keep the eyelet assembly in place, or that there is something missing from the owners photos - did a part get lost like a pin through the eyelet assembly as I have postulated?
Click to expand...
Thanks Lance, this is the most reasonable analysis, thank you for the insight.

Oliver
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
i don’t think that it’s telling. if it was yanked out, it wouldn’t be surprising if the pin popped out and was lost
Click to expand...
Or, maybe the pin/whatever was never installed?
That would also explain why it pulled out...
I guess my point was there has to be more than what we see or this like putting up a bath towel rack directly into drywall with just drywall screws. It looks purty but it isn't going to hold squat. And if that's the case Nikon has a really dumb design problem.
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
it’s possible, but we have no proof that it wasn’t just pulled past it’s tolerance
Click to expand...
Yeah, we just don't know.
If there is a recall I think that would indicate an inadequate design or something was missed during assembly (like the mount). I hope it is not an inadequate design.
If there is no recall then this is just a "one of"...which doesn't concern me.
I guess we'll find out in due time....
 
Geoff_G said:
To me it looks like something is missing. I can't imagine that pin being secure [enough] with what we see and it does look like it was "pulled out" in some fashion.
Ugh, another recall is going to raise some concerns about whether or not this camera was rushed to market.
Click to expand...
In the age of Internet fora, everything is rushed to market. Just read the comments here and elsewhere on the 200-600, the z9 etc. The obsessive demand for instantaneous consumer gratification has become unbearable and inevitably companies will begin to respond to those demands by rushing products out the door. And then the same fans of an instantaneous society will complain about quality control issues and demand that the repaired cameras are returned to them within 3 seconds. Read the posts on the Nikon z8 service advisory thread and you will see what I mean - people counting the number of minutes their camera is away from them, or the posts on the z9 preorder threads where people are comparing delivery times with each other if they ordered 3 seconds after midnight on the day of announcement. Is it really any wonder that problems arise with this level of artificial urgency everywhere in evidence? Time for people to recognise they are partly responsible for such problems arising. In any case, this thread has already overblown what appears to be a very very isolated event into a potential second recall. Nothing like talking heads to stimulate panic over nothing. And this is why I struggle with Internet fora.
 
Member's gallery
I wonder if this is a wide spread problem or design issue. If you have any sort of lens that weighs more than 1Kg, you should mount any strap you have to the lens not the body. I have NEVER put the supplied Nikon strap on the Z9. I use long lenses a lot. Short lenses don’t need a strap. As far as I am concerned the lugs are redundant. They look solid enough but WHY would you use a neck strap anyway? I strongly recommend the use of the Black Rapid shoulder strap anyway. I find having a strap is a nuisance when placing the camera on a tripod or monopod or gimbal.
 
Griffym said:
I wonder if this is a wide spread problem or design issue.
Click to expand...
Based on what I have read above, there have been a couple of cases. How many z8s have been sold - 10,000? 2 cases is a statistical anomaly. Nothing is known about user behaviour before the damage occurred. I would think it is best to simply treat the matter as being well within quality control tolerances and move on until or if it ever becomes a wider phenomenon reported by Nikon itself.
 
Member's gallery
ChrisM said:
The Z9 mount point looks very similar to the A1 mount point.
Before I get associated with trolling again, I am interested because I may want to add a Z8 + 500PF to my Sony A1+600GM set-up, as a light weight, super portable kit. I used the 500PF on the D500 for a few years, and that was a very good experience.

The Sony set-up is carried at the lens, but a Z8+500PF combo does not have ankers at the lens itself, so has to be carried via the camera strap lugs.
I know that Nikon intended to save weight by replacing some magnesium parts with a new composite. It may well be that this is a fisrt for this type of strap lug.
Click to expand...
I carry my Z8 and 500 PF via the lens threaded screw in the foot. And I've added a little loop so if one is detached the other will take the weight as a backup.
 
Member's gallery
ChrisM said:
The Z9 mount point looks very similar to the A1 mount point.
Before I get associated with trolling again, I am interested because I may want to add a Z8 + 500PF to my Sony A1+600GM set-up, as a light weight, super portable kit. I used the 500PF on the D500 for a few years, and that was a very good experience.

The Sony set-up is carried at the lens, but a Z8+500PF combo does not have ankers at the lens itself, so has to be carried via the camera strap lugs.
I know that Nikon intended to save weight by replacing some magnesium parts with a new composite. It may well be that this is a fisrt for this type of strap lug.
Click to expand...
I attach my Peak Design strap to one mounting point on the Z8 and one on the tripod foot on the 500PF. No problems...
 
Member's gallery
I have never hung a camera round my neck since an occasion when I tripped on a tree root and fell full length with a D610 under me. The camera was unharmed with not a mark but my bruise was pretty bad and very painful for several days, especially when a doc' prodded and poked me and reassured me that I had not broken a rib.
I had no strap on the D850 I have just part-exed for a Z8 and never dropped it, in fact I removed those small triangular strap thingies and have done the same with the Z8. If I have to carry the camera any distance I put it in a hip bag or attach it to my belt with a PD belt clip. Excellent device! In any case there is no way I want the weight of a Z8 (or the preceding D850) hanging around my neck. One last point - one of my subjects is insects and then (in macro mode) a strap is a damned nuisance.

I note that Steve doesn't have straps on his cameras, so I could claim to be in good company.

Chaz
 
Member's gallery
ChrisM said:
The Z9 mount point looks very similar to the A1 mount point.
Before I get associated with trolling again, I am interested because I may want to add a Z8 + 500PF to my Sony A1+600GM set-up, as a light weight, super portable kit. I used the 500PF on the D500 for a few years, and that was a very good experience.

The Sony set-up is carried at the lens, but a Z8+500PF combo does not have ankers at the lens itself, so has to be carried via the camera strap lugs.
I know that Nikon intended to save weight by replacing some magnesium parts with a new composite. It may well be that this is a fisrt for this type of strap lug.
Click to expand...
I attach my blackrapid strap to 500PF foot.
 
Member's gallery
My D3X fell of the back of a 4 wd ute tray because the bag wasn't zipped properly, it bounced on the gravel road side snapped of the actual pin eye that holds the strap as in question, the D3X rolled in to the grass and ended up in a mud soaked grass bed, it took about 20 minutes to find it, the 50mm 1.4 D had the lens face smashed so it was scrap, the body had a couple of bad marks especially the top plate corner of impact.

Nikon needed to remove the top of the camera body to release internally the locking pin holding the strap eye piece in place.
For cosmetic reason they replaced the top 1/3rd plate complete with new eye pieces that come with it, the D3x worked perfectly and needed no other repairs, the camera didn't get damaged as far as function goes, we put on another lens before sending it to Nikon and it worked perfectly.

Looking at the Z8 it appears to be a different design, I am guessing because its mirrorless and the pin goes in 90 degrees.

I can't tell if they have a locking pin in the Z cameras or the Z8 Z9 like in the D3X D4s D5 D6.
Really sorry to hear about your experience.
 
Member's gallery
i'm guessing the previous single digit bodies are more likely to have the mount points directly into a metal frame. i'm guessing the z8 is built more like other prosumer cameras, so it would be interesting to know how other prosumer bodies are built
 
Member's gallery
Its sad that in the world of new technology and new products that as customers consumers we seem to always have to wear any issues, the days of things being problematic to some degree are becommingthe norm.
 
O said:
Its sad that in the world of new technology and new products that as customers consumers we seem to always have to wear any issues, the days of things being problematic to some degree are becommingthe norm.
Click to expand...
Please refer to my post above about consumer impatience. It is not so long ago that people here and elsewhere were complaining that it took nikon 16 months to bring the z8 to market. How could it take so long, was the cry. Perhaps it does take so long to ensure proper testing and quality control. Perhaps if we behaved as we did in the 80s and 90s, complaints about how long it takes to fully develop and test a new camera would be the privilege of a few journalists writing for photography magazines. But now every Joe Soap has their opinion on how a highly sophisticated piece of technology should be developed, how much it should cost, what features it must have, and how long it should take. Maybe people should simply keep quiet and let the experts do their jobs in peace, as they did before Internet fora put companies under ridiculous pressure. That is, after all, why we pay them big bucks for their products.
 
Member's gallery
philippe said:
Please refer to my post above about consumer impatience. It is not so long ago that people here and elsewhere were complaining that it took nikon 16 months to bring the z8 to market. How could it take so long, was the cry. Perhaps it does take so long to ensure proper testing and quality control. Perhaps if we behaved as we did in the 80s and 90s, complaints about how long it takes to fully develop and test a new camera would be the privilege of a few journalists writing for photography magazines. But now every Joe Soap has their opinion on how a highly sophisticated piece of technology should be developed, how much it should cost, what features it must have, and how long it should take. Maybe people should simply keep quiet and let the experts do their jobs in peace, as they did before Internet fora put companies under ridiculous pressure. That is, after all, why we pay them big bucks for their products.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Too true the internet is the problem, leveraging grips and gossip from the village street to cloak the planet, and utubers fan the flames. The maturation in sophistication, abilities and quality of modern photographic products is astounding, compared to the 1980s. The Z System launched barely 5 years ago, and Nikon's new strategy of firmware updates speeds up the tempo in delivering new features even more.

But don't worry, soon they will be the clamouring for the Z9 update. After all it will soon turn 2 years old in October!
 
Member's gallery
philippe said:
Please refer to my post above about consumer impatience. It is not so long ago that people here and elsewhere were complaining that it took nikon 16 months to bring the z8 to market. How could it take so long, was the cry. Perhaps it does take so long to ensure proper testing and quality control. Perhaps if we behaved as we did in the 80s and 90s, complaints about how long it takes to fully develop and test a new camera would be the privilege of a few journalists writing for photography magazines. But now every Joe Soap has their opinion on how a highly sophisticated piece of technology should be developed, how much it should cost, what features it must have, and how long it should take. Maybe people should simply keep quiet and let the experts do their jobs in peace, as they did before Internet fora put companies under ridiculous pressure. That is, after all, why we pay them big bucks for their products.
Click to expand...
I blame this on social media. It rules the planet from what I've seen but is an unreliable source of 'information'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top