Should Nikon repair my damaged Z9 at their cost and supply a loaner?

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
Stephen Berger said:
OP also says “My point is that I did tighten this knob more than once, but how many times are you supposed to tighten it? Every time you use it, no.”

My response is absolutely 1000% yes, if there’s a known potential issue then you tighten it every time, without fail.
Click to expand...
Even if there is no known potential issue tbh, I certainly check all connectors continuously while out. 70-200 VR I removed that point of failure by fastening the strap to the collar screw, not because it looked like failing but just because it didnt need to be there in my use case.
 
Member's gallery
SCoombs said:
If we take the OP at his word, the knob was apparently tightened (as the manual would tell us to do) but the foot detached anyways. I don't think this is all that outlandish a claim since I have seen a fair number of reports that the 500pf foot can detach even when the knob appears to be tightened.

In fact, in his review of the 500pf Steve actually says that he had his knob tightened and the lens foot detached anyways. See here (at the 5:50 mark if the link doesn't get you to the right timestamp for whatever reason):

Also noteworthy in that segment, for all those in this thread saying the OP or others are wrong for carrying the lens by the foot, is that Steve says that the foot is how you're "supposed to carry any lens that has a foot."
Click to expand...
Steve recommended the Hejnar replacement fooot after this experience and that is how I found Hejnar and Chris makes fantastic products and have been installed on all of my Nikon lenses with lens feet since then.
 
Member's gallery
jimfromno said:
I was carrying my relatively new, five months, Nikon Z9 with a Nikor 100-400/4.5-5.6 S lens attached into the Cleveland Zoo for a days shooting using a shoulder strap. The camera/lens is connected via a QD socket on the tripod lens plate attached to the lens foot. The lens plate was purchased from Kirk Enterprises. As I was walking in, the lens foot slipped off the lens mount and the Z9 dropped to the concrete damaging the frame at the view finder. As the Z9 is a heavy camera it hit the concrete hard, and I’m worried that there might be internal damage.

My initial email to Nikon requested a new camera to replace the damaged one due to their neglect. Their neglect being their inability to design a lens foot. I also own a Nikon 500mm PF and that lens foot has the same issue. Companies like Kirk are in business designing replacement Nikon lens feet. Nikon response was that impact damage is not covered under warranty. They want me to mail them the camera and that I could expect to pay approximately $500.00 for inspection and repairs. I refused.

During subsequent conversations I’ve told them that this is not a warranty issue that it’s a neglect issue and they need to repair the camera at their cost. They still want me to mail in the camera which means I won’t have a camera for however long this takes and it’s not clear how much they would charge. They tell me they can’t give me a loaner. But of course they can they’re Nikon they can do what they want.

What do you say?
Click to expand...
Seems like a simple enough issue. Did Nikon sell you the camera with an aftermarket product attached to it improperly? If the answer is yes it sounds like a Nikon problem to fix the damage. If you attached the foot it's absolutely your burden to pay for it. In fact, based upon my insurance claim experiences, it's very, very possible that an insurance company might deny a claim based upon the story you told of how it happened. Lesson learned should be don't lug around $8000 worth of gear by the strap as is states claerly on every strap package warning I have ever read. Sorry for your misfortune. Better get a lawyer that cost less than $500 buck even if you win. Good luck.
 
Member's gallery
jimfromno said:
I was carrying my relatively new, five months, Nikon Z9 with a Nikor 100-400/4.5-5.6 S lens attached into the Cleveland Zoo for a days shooting using a shoulder strap. The camera/lens is connected via a QD socket on the tripod lens plate attached to the lens foot. The lens plate was purchased from Kirk Enterprises. As I was walking in, the lens foot slipped off the lens mount and the Z9 dropped to the concrete damaging the frame at the view finder. As the Z9 is a heavy camera it hit the concrete hard, and I’m worried that there might be internal damage.

My initial email to Nikon requested a new camera to replace the damaged one due to their neglect. Their neglect being their inability to design a lens foot. I also own a Nikon 500mm PF and that lens foot has the same issue. Companies like Kirk are in business designing replacement Nikon lens feet. Nikon response was that impact damage is not covered under warranty. They want me to mail them the camera and that I could expect to pay approximately $500.00 for inspection and repairs. I refused.

During subsequent conversations I’ve told them that this is not a warranty issue that it’s a neglect issue and they need to repair the camera at their cost. They still want me to mail in the camera which means I won’t have a camera for however long this takes and it’s not clear how much they would charge. They tell me they can’t give me a loaner. But of course they can they’re Nikon they can do what they want.

What do you say?
Click to expand...
Mid last year I had a similar problem.
Z9 on the 70-200 Z lens on a tripod.
The lens collar came undone and the camera fell on my Camera bag.
The Z9 lens mount broke and so did the laptop that it fell on.
It took more than 6 months and AU$1100 to fix just because of a poorly designed lens foot ... 🦘
 
Member's gallery
Personally, I would never carry the 70-200 f2.8S nor the 100-400 f4.5-5.6S via the lens foot using a strap and never have done so, even in the F mount versions. The Z mount of the Z cameras is well strong enough to take the weight of either of these two lenses whilst using the neck strap lug points of the camera - 1.5kg is not that heavy - Z8 neck strap lug point issues at the moment aside! The fact that these two lens do not have neck strap anchor points should be a clue to the fact that Nikon doesn't think they need them and that the cameras strap points will be strong enough as well as the Z mount. Heck, I even carry the 500 PF much of the time using the neck strap on the camera mounts - it also does not have neck strap mount points either. However, I also do at times use the lens foot anchor point of the 500 PF to carry the lens as I have replaced the Nikon foot with the Hejnar foot that is now not the removable type and thus will not dislodge like the 70-200 and/or 100-400 may do.
 
Member's gallery
simonsi said:
Even if there is no known potential issue tbh, I certainly check all connectors continuously while out. 70-200 VR I removed that point of failure by fastening the strap to the collar screw, not because it looked like failing but just because it didnt need to be there in my use case.
Click to expand...
So we can conclude of what you say this foot is really a problem.
Nikon designed it, put it on a lens supposed to be fixed to the most expensive cameras and the owner should be responsible ?
I don't follow you there.
 
Member's gallery
Stephen Berger said:
OP also says “My point is that I did tighten this knob more than once, but how many times are you supposed to tighten it? Every time you use it, no.”

My response is absolutely 1000% yes, if there’s a known potential issue then you tighten it every time, without fail.
Click to expand...
I don't think the knob becomes loose or untightens itself. I think the knob just doesn't function as intended whatever that is. It might as well not be there for all the good it does. Clealy from my experience shooting at Yellowstone and Grand Teton several times with experience guides and being among hundreds of other seasoned wildlife photographers, from what Steve has said his 500mm PF drooping like mine did and who has been quoted on video above, from the photo someone found from the Nikon gallery showing someone carry the camera/lens by the lens foot all go to show how wrong all the self righteous know it alls who insist I"m some kind of idiot for not tightening a knob and that after purchasing a pro camera and long lens then good luck finding a way to use it because you can't carry it to a location.
 
Member's gallery
Forum Rules - abbreviated.
"Our goal here is to create a community where people can talk photography and share photos without harassment, fanboism, or nasty arguments. ...
You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, ... .
You agree to keep conversations civilized and friendly. Name calling, personal attacks, ... will not be tolerated and your account may be banned or suspended at the sole discretion of the forum moderators and site administrators. This forum is meant as a positive learning and photo sharing resource and actions at run counter to this purpose will not be tolerated.
...
Finally, as a general rule, please be polite in your posts and responses. ...

@Admin @Mods @Steve Seems time to close this one to future posts.
 
Member's gallery
Roy said:
Mid last year I had a similar problem.
Z9 on the 70-200 Z lens on a tripod.
The lens collar came undone and the camera fell on my Camera bag.
The Z9 lens mount broke and so did the laptop that it fell on.
It took more than 6 months and AU$1100 to fix just because of a poorly designed lens foot ... 🦘
Click to expand...
The z70-200 hasn’t got a removable lens collar. The collar, is a solid ring that can rotate, and the lens foot attaches to it. Do you mean that the foot detached?
 
Member's gallery
Lance B said:
Personally, I would never carry the 70-200 f2.8S nor the 100-400 f4.5-5.6S via the lens foot using a strap and never have done so, even in the F mount versions. The Z mount of the Z cameras is well strong enough to take the weight of either of these two lenses whilst using the neck strap lug points of the camera - 1.5kg is not that heavy - Z8 neck strap lug point issues at the moment aside! The fact that these two lens do not have neck strap anchor points should be a clue to the fact that Nikon doesn't think they need them and that the cameras strap points will be strong enough as well as the Z mount. Heck, I even carry the 500 PF much of the time using the neck strap on the camera mounts - it also does not have neck strap mount points either. However, I also do at times use the lens foot anchor point of the 500 PF to carry the lens as I have replaced the Nikon foot with the Hejnar foot that is now not the removable type and thus will not dislodge like the 70-200 and/or 100-400 may do.
Click to expand...
According to Nikon the mount should not bear more than 1.3kg.
 
Member's gallery
JoPoV said:
So we can conclude of what you say this foot is really a problem.
Nikon designed it, put it on a lens supposed to be fixed to the most expensive cameras and the owner should be responsible ?
I don't follow you there.
Click to expand...
Not at all, I am saying you should check any and all connections that you rely on to keep your gear suspended. That foot is a quick release design so is not well suited to have hands and fingers near the quick release button and knob. Its designed use case is a quick release tripod foot, not a carrying handle, despite what lots of people do.
 
Member's gallery
Bob Hullinger said:
Seems like a simple enough issue. Did Nikon sell you the camera with an aftermarket product attached to it improperly? If the answer is yes it sounds like a Nikon problem to fix the damage. If you attached the foot it's absolutely your burden to pay for it. In fact, based upon my insurance claim experiences, it's very, very possible that an insurance company might deny a claim based upon the story you told of how it happened. Lesson learned should be don't lug around $8000 worth of gear by the strap as is states claerly on every strap package warning I have ever read. Sorry for your misfortune. Better get a lawyer that cost less than $500 buck even if you win. Good luck.
Click to expand...
In your rush to misjudgement you don't bother reading what I wrote, or understanding what I wrote which is likelly the case. I never touched the lens foot, except to add a tripod plate. The lens foot out of the box is not compatible with most tripod mounts and it's common to add a plate to make this adjustment. Adding a plate would in no way affect the performance of the foot or the knob. I have a question for you, do you know the first thng about cameras and camera lenses? Because you sound like some lawyer sittting in a office somewhere with no idea what you're talking about.
 
Member's gallery
simonsi said:
Not at all, I am saying you should check any and all connections that you rely on to keep your gear suspended. That foot is a quick release design so is not well suited to have hands and fingers near the quick release button and knob. Its designed use case is a quick release tripod foot, not a carrying handle, despite what lots of people do.
Click to expand...
You sound like your one of those people that obsesely washes their hands. And how often exactly are we supposed to check and re-check this equipment? Every 5 minutes? Or is that too long a time? As we don't know the reason this knob appears to come loose we can never predict when it may come loose again and when it will need adjusting. To be safe it would require continuous adjuctment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top