Got a Nikon? Share your thoughts and photos here or ask a question!

nicksan wrote in post #10440399
You mean you can't spend $7k for the 200-400VRII?

hahahaha of course I can:p


If I sell my soul to the devil....

monk3y wrote in post #10440417
hahahaha of course I can:p

If I sell my soul to the devil....

Ive got the devils cell # if you need it

peterbj7 wrote in post #10438231
Without doubt the D700 is a superb camera, and I may yet get one - several friends have done so. But this statement amazes me. My personal experiences with Canon Service (four times) have been unreservedly excellent and two of my friends who shoot Nikon have had dreadful and very expensive experiences with Nikon Service. In all cases these contacts were with the manufacturers themselves, not independent "agents" or "repair facilities", and were in two different countries. Please be fair in your comments or they will cease having any value.

For me, the customer service was the biggest reason I was done with canon. After sending my Mk 3 in 3x (the third time being the first recall) they sent back a note saying (in effect) that they'd done the repair and hoped I was happy because they were done working on the camera. I realize the M3 was a huge debacle. And since I literally one of the first owners in the U.S., my problems were always "new" to them...but they did NOT respond well to actual issues. I moved to nikon right after that. And there have been two more "send in your camera for this fix" re-calls with the M3 since then. So, perhaps different countries treat their customers differently, but I was completely unhappy with how canon treated me.

Permagrin wrote in post #10440556
For me, the customer service was the biggest reason I was done with canon. After sending my Mk 3 in 3x (the third time being the first recall) they sent back a note saying (in effect) that they'd done the repair and hoped I was happy because they were done working on the camera. I realize the M3 was a huge debacle. And since I literally one of the first owners in the U.S., my problems were always "new" to them...but they did NOT respond well to actual issues. I moved to nikon right after that. And there have been two more "send in your camera for this fix" re-calls with the M3 since then. So, perhaps different countries treat their customers differently, but I was completely unhappy with how canon treated me.

Yeah, that was a pretty big mess. Luckily for me, I never had a problem with my MKIII despite the fact that I had a very early copy myself. But the problems were very real for a LOT of people. They completely dropped the ball on that one. I think they've finally resolved the issue, but perhaps it was too late.

Ironically, for me, it was the MKIV that did me in. Strange, I know.

peterbj7 wrote in post #10438231
Without doubt the D700 is a superb camera, and I may yet get one - several friends have done so. But this statement amazes me. My personal experiences with Canon Service (four times) have been unreservedly excellent and two of my friends who shoot Nikon have had dreadful and very expensive experiences with Nikon Service. In all cases these contacts were with the manufacturers themselves, not independent "agents" or "repair facilities", and were in two different countries. Please be fair in your comments or they will cease having any value.

I am glad that you have had good experiences with Canon repair. However that does not mean that everyone else has to as well. I had many dealings with Canon and my comment is not a loose lipped statement that was made with the intent of knocking a company. It was based on my experience with Canon. Hence the Nikon

I have yet to post my horrible experiences with Canon repair and ALL of the reasons that I went over to Nikon. I know that Nikon is not free of flaws in the service department. I have no delusions of grandeur for Nikon, Do you for Canon? Are you implying that Merely posting a negative statement of a company should be grounds for being discredited?

I think not

nicksan wrote in post #10440602
Yeah, that was a pretty big mess. Luckily for me, I never had a problem with my MKIII despite the fact that I had a very early copy myself. But the problems were very real for a LOT of people. They completely dropped the ball on that one. I think they've finally resolved the issue, but perhaps it was too late.

Ironically, for me, it was the MKIV that did me in. Strange, I know.

I heard they had. It was just the treatment. Everyone at canon acted like it was all in our heads. We couldn't get the shots that we knew we were capable of, that we had with previous cameras etc...it was so frustrating to come back from 6hrs working a wedding and find that the bride walking down the aisle was NEVER in focus until she was close up. For most brides, a full length with their father (at least around here) is one of those "key" shots. I have dozens of photos of whatever was behind (or in front or in the crowd) of them.

The crazy thing was, when the M3 was on, it gave me some of the best shots I've ever had. I just couldn't count on it.

You guys were talking about the cost of switching. I lost the cost of a 300 2.8IS to switch. My M3 didn't sell for hardly anything (the cost of a D700). I wish I hadn't had to. I had a great lens lineup. One I was totally happy with.

I would go out on a birding expedition and get shots like this:

nicksan wrote in post #10440097
I find the 24-70 fine for me. Don't think we have a 24-105L equivalent. I find the Nikon 24-70 to be better than the 24-70L.

agreed. If you can't afford the 24-70G or even if you just want smaller and lighter, the tamron 28-75 has been amazing for me.

peterbj7 wrote in post #10440174
What would you use as the next-longest lens? With my 24-105 I move on to the 100-400, but I don't want to leave a gap in that range. Decent quality zooms only - I'm not in a position to start buying primes.

Nikon's 70-300 is a wonderful lens. Better than canons. But once you get over that to something bigger/better, canon's lineup wins. You have to switch to primes, the 200-400 or sigma zooms after the 70-300 basically (the 80-400 AFs super slow).

Nick VanGorder wrote in post #10440516
Ive got the devils cell # if you need it

uhhhmmm not ready.. I am totally fine with my 70-300mm for now

btw, regarding Warranty service, I switched to nikon knowing that I don't have warranty services from an authorized Nikon service center here in our country...

The Nikon distributor here is only a sub agent, and a lot are complaining about their service...

When I think of it, my 500D has a 3 year Canon Philippines warranty, while my D700 has none. Can't even shoot under the rain (coupled with a weathersealed glass) and risk it getting wet and not be able to claim warranty for it.

all my Nikkor lenses are gray market units... but I am very happy with the performance, I just hope I don't need servicing very much with my unit as I don't have any warranties to rely on

New Zealand is meant to be only slightly better for Nikon service. I figure i'll have to send it to Australia or the US for service when it needs it, which hopefully isn't too often.

tim wrote in post #10442907
New Zealand is meant to be only slightly better for Nikon service. I figure i'll have to send it to Australia or the US for service when it needs it, which hopefully isn't too often.

you should buy from the US also to be able your units to be serviced in the US right?

monk3y wrote in post #10443322
you should buy from the US also to be able your units to be serviced in the US right?

I'll buy from the US since the price is half what they cost here. I expect they'd service them, but i'd have to pay for shipping, so it might be better to have them serviced in Australia and pay their standard rates.

tim wrote in post #10443376
I'll buy from the US since the price is half what they cost here. I expect they'd service them, but i'd have to pay for shipping, so it might be better to have them serviced in Australia and pay their standard rates.

ahh wow!! half? prices here are about the same or just a little bit expensive than in the US...

A D700 + 27-70 costs US$4000 from B&H, as a kit. From photo.co.nz it costs US$8100.

tim wrote in post #10443583
A D700 + 27-70 costs US$4000 from B&H, as a kit. From photo.co.nz it costs US$8100.

hmmm expensive indeed... here

if I get it throught the authorized Distributor it would roughly be $2,700+$1,900= $4,600.

but if I get it gray market = $3,750.00 with 1 year service warranty coverage.. the good thing is Nikon Philippines will repair gray units, the bad news is at double the cost.

tim wrote in post #10443583
A D700 + 27-70 costs US$4000 from B&H, as a kit. From photo.co.nz it costs US$8100.

WOW....buy 2 and sell one in NZ