Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-21-2010, 12:50 PM - 1 Like   #16
Unregistered
Guest




I think I'd like to exchange this thread for a new one.

07-21-2010, 01:53 PM   #17
Unregistered
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Sounds to me like it's nothing to do with shoddy workmanship, but rather the fact that you've not been hands-on with the camera first.

By your own admission, there was nothing wrong with the first camera. (Stuck pixels happen with every manufacturer, and none that I know of considers a single stuck pixel to be a defect.)
Shame on me for returning the first camera. Some display manufacturers (Dell's Ultra Sharp comes to mind) consider even one dead or stuck pixel to be defective. Having said that, per the Pentax manual, this is not the policy with their cameras. Again, shame on me.

QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
By your description, there was nothing wrong with the second camera, either. The AF points are not terribly brightly or evenly illuminated on any K-7 I've tested. You've confirmed that yourself because your last two cameras were identical -- and most likely you'd have seen the same thing with the first one were you not obsessing over a pixel. It's more likely that the difference you perceived at B&H was down to environmental conditions making the points easier to see.
There is no doubt that the sample at B&H had brighter and more evenly lit AF points. My wife noticed it as well. I suspect the LED was positioned imperfectly in at least two of the samples I received.

QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Your third camera again had no problem other than some dust that could've been easily cleaned off -- and there's every chance you received a unit somebody else like you had returned. (It's not supposed to happen, but it sometimes does.) Even if it came from the factory, it's in an easily cleaned location -- I've seen new cameras from other brands arriving with dust sealed into places that can't be cleaned by the end user.
Focus screens are not easily cleaned. Especially if the dust is between the pentaprism and screen.

QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Your expectations are way too high...
This may in fact be true. Lesson learned when buying Pentax gear.

QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
...and you've almost certainly just returned three cameras with nothing wrong with them, meaning they now have to be sold as refurbs with reduced prices. You're the reason the rest of us have to overpay for our new products. Well done!
Not my problem.
07-21-2010, 01:55 PM   #18
Unregistered
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
I'm sure he'd have found a mote of dust on a button, or a screen-printed logo that had a shockingly large fleck of paint missing, just as soon as it got home.

Some people simply have completely unrealistic expectations for a new product, and/or buyer's remorse. A camera is a tool. It shoots pictures. If it does so properly, all the rest of this is utter nonsense. I mean, really -- a button that can rotate ruins your photographic experience? If one looks hard enough at any product they'll find flaws like this, even products aimed at pros.

Even if the miracle happens, and a perfect camera is received, what happens if in six weeks a stuck pixel appears. Does it then ruin your photographic experience and cause you to sell the camera, or do you put it down to bad luck given the return period's over? Obviously, the latter. If it's not worth the money out of your own pocket to sell the camera and buy another, it shouldn't be worth the money out of everybody else's pockets to return it for a refund.

Were I the retailer in question, I'd likely have banned him after the second return of an identical high-ticket item, unless a real, significant fault could be demonstrated. There's realistically no way I'm going to be making any money out of him with a return rate like this.
Remind me to not shop at your store! Had I purchased this camera from a brick and mortar retailer, I would have inspected the subsequent cameras before leaving the store.
07-21-2010, 01:57 PM   #19
Unregistered
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
So you want perfection, but you're only prepared to pay bottom dollar for it? Where's the logic in that?
Where's the logic in questioning my logic???

07-21-2010, 02:02 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy97 Quote
Shame on me for returning the first camera. Some display manufacturers (Dell's Ultra Sharp comes to mind) consider even one dead or stuck pixel to be defective. Having said that, per the Pentax manual, this is not the policy with their cameras. Again, shame on me.
I was referring to camera manufacturers. Even for display manufacturers though, a single stuck pixel allowing a return is *not* the norm, nor anywhere close to it. That's a policy available only on products whose premium pricing reflects the policy (and you can be sure they're going out of their way to carefully test every LCD panel before installation to ensure there are no stuck pixels to cost them money on that policy, with the rejects going straight in their other products.)

QuoteQuote:
There is no doubt that the sample at B&H had brighter and more evenly lit AF points. My wife noticed it as well. I suspect the LED was positioned imperfectly in at least two of the samples I received.
Could be, could not be. Either way, does it affect the shooting experience? Almost certainly not, as somebody who's noticed the same thing with their own camera, and who pays attention to which AF points are active when shooting.

QuoteQuote:
Not my problem.
Actually, it is your problem. You too are paying higher prices than you need to for your products, because you (and others like you) insist on buying products they don't actually know if they want or can afford, and then returning them for extremely dubious reasons.
07-21-2010, 02:06 PM   #21
Unregistered
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
And there it is. The dictionary (well, Wikipedia) definition of buyer's remorse. You've spent more than you can afford, you feel guilty, therefore you obsess over every detail in a search for something you can possibly consider to be wrong, and return the product. Then when it's gone, you want it back because you actually really liked it.
I feel the need to clarify what I said. What I meant to say is that I'm a relative newbie to photography and the K-7 represents a significant investment. However, I value the additional features it has over the K-x. That doesn't mean I cannot afford it. I don't buy things I cannot afford in the first place.

I want another K-7...as long as it matches the quality of my K10D. Remember, I have a reference here. If I didn't have a K10D we wouldn't be having this conversation.
07-21-2010, 02:08 PM   #22
Unregistered
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by SpecialK Quote
We (sellers) can refuse service to anyone, especially repeat returners. And, not all returns from consumers get a warranty from the manufacturer because... it's not a defect - such as a round button not being perfectly aligned.
For the record I did not return any of the cameras due to the crooked button. It's just indicative of sloppy quality control.
07-21-2010, 02:24 PM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 479
For what it's worth I think your situation might be an exception to the rule. But next time, buy from a reputable dealer like B&H, even if it's a few bucks more.

Also, being a relative newbie: focus on taking pictures, not your gear.

07-21-2010, 02:26 PM   #24
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Actually, it is your problem. You too are paying higher prices than you need to for your products, because you (and others like you) insist on buying products they don't actually know if they want or can afford, and then returning them for extremely dubious reasons.
You are accusing the OP based purely on your vivid imagination. Just ridiculous.
07-21-2010, 03:38 PM   #25
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16
QuoteOriginally posted by noahpurdy Quote
For what it's worth I think your situation might be an exception to the rule. But next time, buy from a reputable dealer like B&H, even if it's a few bucks more.

Also, being a relative newbie: focus on taking pictures, not your gear.
Oh, and nevertheless eventually end up with a decentered and used(!) "premium" lens called DAstar 16-50 after exchanging 2 even worse copies at the Pentax service in CO. - my bad for sending the lens to them but not the B&H itself..you live and learn..

Oh, and a K20 which as I found out just recently cannot even properly do manual, or auto - focusing to infinity (see my recent post here)..

A reputable camera from a reputable dealer..sorry for the rant, its just all the extra expenses with recent Pentax gear were (and some soon to be) not because of me using or abusing the camera/lenses, but because of some manufacturing defects of the equipment..hmm.. and I really (still..) like you Pentax ..

Tom
07-21-2010, 03:51 PM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 7,411
Pretty hilarious thread.
07-21-2010, 04:04 PM   #27
Veteran Member
kalison's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
Pretty hilarious thread.
Yes, yes it is.
07-21-2010, 04:04 PM   #28
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Depends on the definition of dim, and whether every camera is basically identical. (We have a sample size of three here, of which two are identical, and one is claimed to be different, but was examined in a store at a totally different locale, not a real-world shooting location).

Dim AF points are not a significant defect if they're present on every camera (or even if they're present on most cameras). They don't prevent you using the product, and don't prevent you knowing which AF points were illuminated. They're just slightly less pretty. (I know, my own are somewhat dim and uneven, and I've not hit a single situation where I had difficulty seeing them.)



I wouldn't be surprised -- there are plenty of pointless laws on the books -- but I've not heard of this myself. Why would that be the case, and do you have a citation? If you've refunded the consumer fully, what possible reason is there for legally requiring you to continue to do business with a consumer who repeatedly returns products that aren't defective? I can see it maybe vaguely making sense if you're the sole distributor for a product (or type of product), but not when there are dozens or hundreds of retailers to choose from for the very same product, and tens or hundreds of thousands carrying near-identical competing products.



I didn't say it was the retailer who suffered. It's not. It is the end user who suffers. Where do you think Pentax's money comes from? Us, buying their products and services. If people return products that aren't defective (and yes, this is a pet peeve of mine -- obsessive returns, or even people ordering products just to try them out and then send them back), that makes the products more expensive for the rest of us. Pentax still isn't allowed to sell those perfect cameras as new again, they have to be sold as refurbs, meaning not only the loss of money in sending the product to the retailer, then the consumer, then back all the way again and refunding them, but also means the product itself can no longer be sold at full price. A significant chunk of its cost (and probably most if not all of the profit from it) has been flushed down the toilet.
There is a sample size of 4. 3 K-7's he purchased, a K10 for previous model comparison, and the one at B&H. He's shopping the brand. That's just being a good consumer on a big ticket item.

Dim AF points are a significant defect if the models he received are less functional than ones sitting at B&H. They prevent full use of the product as intended and as others use the same product of the same assembly line. Would you like it if your headlamps were 50% less dim on your new car compared to the one sitting in the showroom?

The laws are not pointless. He had 2 accepted returns and a policy from Amazon to allow them. Those are contracts. The prior returns are an indication of reseller liability. They accepted defect and fault.

It sounds like he's seen assembly issues and difference between models issued through the supply chain. This is a prime indicator of poor quality control. That and falconeye's rather damning technical analysis of the SR problem indicate Pentax is not on their engineering and manufacturing game.

If Pentax has to eat the loss then so be it. That's a market functioning. They will learn.
07-21-2010, 04:33 PM   #29
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,191
FWIW...According to Consumer Reports, fully 5% of Canon and Nikon dSLRs purchased by their members require warranty replacement or repair. Yes, one in twenty boxes on the shelf are defective. They do not have adequate data for Pentax product, but state that they believe that Pentax quality is equivalent to that of the market in general.

5% is a sad statistic, but is the standard for consumer electronics and increasingly, for business devices as well. That 5% represents the target for acceptable warranty service expense. In other words, they intentionally don't make them as well as they could be made because there is no money in it.

On a related note, I was at a barbecue on July 4th at a friends and was talking to a recent college graduate about cameras. He was looking at my K10D and telling me how he was wishing that he had not bought his Canon Rebel (I can't remember which model) which he characterized as a cheap piece of plastic junk. A few days later, another friend was complaining that her 50D, though less than a year since purchase, had required a warranty replacement and that the replacement had recently come back from the shop to replace a defective shutter. Frustration with poor quality is not just the burden of Pentax owners. (Sorry, I haven't talked to any Nikon owners recently.)


Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 07-21-2010 at 04:46 PM.
07-21-2010, 06:09 PM   #30
pdo
Senior Member
pdo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Westminster CA
Posts: 264
this thread is too funny..
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
button, camera, cameras, dslr, focus, issue, k-7, k10d, pentax, photography, picture, quality
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Camera and Lens Quality Control? benjikan General Talk 33 03-26-2010 06:39 PM
16-50mm DA* Quality Control in August 2009? xuagirt Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 08-17-2009 10:49 PM
How's Sigma's quality control lately? kristoffon Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 02-05-2009 10:00 AM
af360-FGZ Quality control mambosabi Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 5 04-14-2008 04:10 PM
K10 quality control issues? slip Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 02-08-2007 03:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:45 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top