Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
I hate to rain on your parade, and I honestly hope your scanner continues to give you great service, BUT, don't you think that it should not have been necessary to have your scanner sent back to you in basically a broken state? And do you not also think that it was during their first repair that they damaged something which caused the catastrophic failure of the unit, possibly requiring the full replacement of the innards (or at least they decided to go that course as it was cheaper than trying to figure out what was wrong with it)? Do you think Nikon would have been so helpful if this had occurred earlier in the warranty period while the LS-30 was still an "in catalog" item, rather than discontinued, where they have hundreds of used units available for spare parts? I'm happy that they serviced you well in the end, but I still see major room for improvement. I also think that Nikon might be responding to the dismal service record that has been well documented on the internet. Let's hope that's the case. Art Hersch Nitikman wrote: > > A couple of weeks ago or so, I posted a message about the warranty service > Nikon USA had given me on my LS-30, in glowing terms. They had repaired the > intermittent banding, etc., that had been plaguing me. They had replaced > the main circuit board, and on my first scan, those problems were gone. > Immediately after posting the message, I scanned another image, and found > the focus was way off, and I could not do anything to correct that! I got > on their 800 number immediately, and was told that it would have to be > shipped back. The lady promised to get a free UPS shipping coupon to me > overnight. Actually, it was the morning after the next day when FedEx > brought me the prepaid coupon. > I repacked the scanner, and took it to our local UPS, and was promised it > would go out by a UPS plane that night. Tracking confirmed that it had been > delivered on the Friday following, 4 days after I had first received it. > Two weeks later, I was informed it had been repaired, and shipped (by UPS > Ground this time). When it was delivered today, I unpacked it, and > connected it, and ran a test scan on Vuescan 7.1.6. The first preview came > out dark but the scan was perfect. > I checked the packing slip, and they recorded the work done the first time, > and added: Replaced Focusing Motor, Stage Motor, Photo-Interrupter > (whatever that is) General check and clean, and Lube Stage Motor. It seems > to me that I have a remanufactured scanner at this point! There is hardly > anything else I can think of other than the optics that they haven't > renewed, and there is clearly nothing wrong with them. The scans of some > ~20-year-old negatives are just gorgeous... > Other than their insisting on working on someone else's equipment while I > was suffering withdrawal pains, I can't thing of anything negative to say > about their service. I can only say that I am totally satisfied that they > have made good on their promises. All that it cost me was the ~$11 shipping > and insurance when I first sent it in. I also have a 90-day warranty > extension, in case something goes wrong with the repair. I think I'm home > free right now, and I now have over a dozen rolls to get developed, and > scanned. > Hersch
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
At 01:38 AM 7/17/01 -0700, Art Entlich wrote: >I also think that Nikon might be responding to the dismal service record >that has been well documented on the internet. Let's hope that's the >case. Art, can you document that Nikon's service record has been any worse than that of other companies offerering similar products? rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 01:38:51 -0700 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I hate to rain on your parade, and I honestly hope your scanner > continues to give you great service, BUT, don't you think that it should > not have been necessary to have your scanner sent back to you in > basically a broken state? Attaboy Art! Kick 'em where it hurts, even when they do finally do a repair that's OK :) I am glad Hersch is happy with the outcome, and I daresay Nikon are glad Hersch is not Art. :) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
Of course they should have fixed it right the first time. Their nominal procedure is to send it to QC after it is 'repaired', and before shipping. Obviously, the bad focus is something that was missed by two separate people. As for damaging something, I don't know. I would guess that when replacing the pc board, the focus would have to be adjusted. But, as others have said, it is easier these days to just change something out than to 'fix' it. Nevertheless, the customer service people were uniformly polite and constructive. And the end result is that I think I have a fully 'refurbed' unit, and it works at least as well as ever. That could change... Hersch At 01:38 AM 07/17/2001, you wrote: I hate to rain on your parade, and I honestly hope your scanner continues to give you great service, BUT, don't you think that it should not have been necessary to have your scanner sent back to you in basically a broken state? And do you not also think that it was during their first repair that they damaged something which caused the catastrophic failure of the unit, possibly requiring the full replacement of the innards (or at least they decided to go that course as it was cheaper than trying to figure out what was wrong with it)? Do you think Nikon would have been so helpful if this had occurred earlier in the warranty period while the LS-30 was still an "in catalog" item, rather than discontinued, where they have hundreds of used units available for spare parts? I'm happy that they serviced you well in the end, but I still see major room for improvement. I also think that Nikon might be responding to the dismal service record that has been well documented on the internet. Let's hope that's the case. Art Hersch Nitikman wrote: > > A couple of weeks ago or so, I posted a message about the warranty service > Nikon USA had given me on my LS-30, in glowing terms. They had repaired the > intermittent banding, etc., that had been plaguing me. They had replaced > the main circuit board, and on my first scan, those problems were gone. > Immediately after posting the message, I scanned another image, and found > the focus was way off, and I could not do anything to correct that! I got > on their 800 number immediately, and was told that it would have to be > shipped back. The lady promised to get a free UPS shipping coupon to me > overnight. Actually, it was the morning after the next day when FedEx > brought me the prepaid coupon. > I repacked the scanner, and took it to our local UPS, and was promised it > would go out by a UPS plane that night. Tracking confirmed that it had been > delivered on the Friday following, 4 days after I had first received it. > Two weeks later, I was informed it had been repaired, and shipped (by UPS > Ground this time). When it was delivered today, I unpacked it, and > connected it, and ran a test scan on Vuescan 7.1.6. The first preview came > out dark but the scan was perfect. > I checked the packing slip, and they recorded the work done the first time, > and added: Replaced Focusing Motor, Stage Motor, Photo-Interrupter > (whatever that is) General check and clean, and Lube Stage Motor. It seems > to me that I have a remanufactured scanner at this point! There is hardly > anything else I can think of other than the optics that they haven't > renewed, and there is clearly nothing wrong with them. The scans of some > ~20-year-old negatives are just gorgeous... > Other than their insisting on working on someone else's equipment while I > was suffering withdrawal pains, I can't thing of anything negative to say > about their service. I can only say that I am totally satisfied that they > have made good on their promises. All that it cost me was the ~$11 shipping > and insurance when I first sent it in. I also have a 90-day warranty > extension, in case something goes wrong with the repair. I think I'm home > free right now, and I now have over a dozen rolls to get developed, and > scanned. > Hersch
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
Tony Sleep wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 01:38:51 -0700 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > > > I hate to rain on your parade, and I honestly hope your scanner > > continues to give you great service, BUT, don't you think that it should > > not have been necessary to have your scanner sent back to you in > > basically a broken state? > > Attaboy Art! Kick 'em where it hurts, even when they do finally do a repair > that's OK :) > I can only speak for myself (obviously), but I don't see either the need nor do I have the desire to promote an auto repair shop that I have to bring my car in twice or thrice to fix what should have been done on the first repair, even if they don't charge me anymore for doing it. I get no compensation for the time I'm without my vehicle, the expense of having to use the taxi, the gasoline (petrol) costs, etc. I understand that sometimes devices are complex and may take more than one "go" to get the fix to 'stick', but part of repair is to also at least test the product afterward for reliability of the repair. > I am glad Hersch is happy with the outcome, and I daresay Nikon are glad > Hersch is not Art. :) Nikon is having to deal with me. I own a lot of their "stuff", and it has and does continue to breakdown (after it was serviced by them, BTW). Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
>From my read on this, their service is at least equally as bad, while costing more, as do their scanners. Further, they tend to maintain an arrogant attitude about consumer complaints when the repairs are not up to standard. If you think my comment is inaccurate, feel free to spend your time proving otherwise, and report back to us. Art rafeb wrote: > > At 01:38 AM 7/17/01 -0700, Art Entlich wrote: > > >I also think that Nikon might be responding to the dismal service record > >that has been well documented on the internet. Let's hope that's the > >case. > > Art, can you document that Nikon's service record has > been any worse than that of other companies offerering > similar products? > > rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 21:40:02 -0700 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Nikon is having to deal with me. I own a lot of their "stuff", and it > has and does continue to breakdown (after it was serviced by them, BTW). Ah, now I understand : legitimate user feedback, therefore :) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
At 09:37 PM 7/17/01 -0700, Art wrote: >>From my read on this, I don't give a rat's ass about your observations on this topic, Art. I can browse the internet as well as the next Tom, Dick or Harry, and don't need your help to form my opinions on such matters. Have you owned a Nikon scanner? Have you ever used one? Have you ever scanned one of your images in a Nikon scanner? Have you personally dealt with Nikon technical support in any manner, ever? >their service is at least equally as bad, while >costing more, as do their scanners. Further, they tend to maintain an >arrogant attitude about consumer complaints when the repairs are not up >to standard. Again: how does Nikon compare to other brands, offering similar products, on any of these matters? THAT is the question. Not Art Entlich's unfounded opinions, based on his tea-leaf interpretation of internet posts. >If you think my comment is inaccurate, feel free to spend your time >proving otherwise, and report back to us. Bullsh*t, Art. You made one of your many unfounded, accusatory, broad-brush statements about Brand X. It's clear that you haven't any facts to back up your accusations, vis-a-vis Nikon's record, as compared to any other brand. It's not my job to refute your unfounded statements. You made the statement; YOU provide the facts to back them up. Can't cite facts? The give it up. Find something else to talk about. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:18:17 -0400 rafeb ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > It's not my job to refute your unfounded > statements. You made the statement; YOU > provide the facts to back them up. Not wishing to pour petrol on troubled waters, but Nikon does have some 'previous' :- (i)the unfortunate history of malfunctioning hoppers, originally with the LS1000, then again with the LS2000 - the now-defunct Nikontech forum used to be filled with complaints, hints about bodges using plastic or card shim, and demands that Nikon do something (which they never did). It's only fair to say that many people had no problems though. (ii)broken colour management in Nikonscan (LS2000 generation) which they took, what? 2 years to fix? (iii)the jaggies issue in LS30's, which seemed to be met only with corporate denial and repairs which mostly failed to fix anything (implausible once Ed Hamrick had fixed it in software :) (iv)some historical calamity regarding franchised repairs of Nikon cameras, at least in some territories. UK owners will remember. Once Nikon took repairs back in house, things were much better. (v)various other design disasters like the MD11 motor drive (jammed often), questionable progress with the F3 and F4 which allowed Canon EOS to race ahead, and the diversification into 'low end' cameras and lenses which diluted the brand values Whether this concerns anyone is a matter for them, I think. I'm happy for factual information, positive or negative, to appear on this list. Obviously it will form part of peoples' buying decisions, and has to be weighed against Nikon's substantial reputation WRT photo kit, including scanners. I'm less happy about axe-grinding, though I do understand that when people spend substantial amounts of money they feel angry or pleased, depending on the outcome. Nevertheless, when it works out that one person is pleased by their choice, and another feels aggrieved by theirs, it shouldn't result in an argument, surely? Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Tony Sleep wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:18:17 -0400 rafeb ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > It's not my job to refute your unfounded > > statements. You made the statement; YOU > > provide the facts to back them up. > > Not wishing to pour petrol on troubled waters, but Nikon does have some > 'previous' :- Sorry, Tony, but I'm afraid you missed my point. The information is real, I'm sure, but not quite what I was asking for. I had a specific question directed at Art; which he did not answer. Anyone who's been reading this list knows that Nikon scanners have problems. As do scanners from any number of other vendors. The question was, how does Nikon rate against its competitors, in these matters (service, reliability, basic functionality, etc.) Art insinuates, repeatedly, that Nikon is unique in supplying faulty gear and rotten service. That is simply untrue. As I recall, Art himself recently took delivery of a new Minolta scanner that was unfit for service. Shall we recite the litany of scanner flaws, and scanner-service horror shows described on this list, over the years? Can you honestly say that any one brand is more or less prone to reliability or service headaches than "the others?" And if so, I'd sure like to see the basis for your judgement, whatever it may be. Quite frankly, a study of this sort would require resources (and objectivity) that probably can't be found on this list. FWIW, my purchase of a Nikon scanner this time around was a rather direct consequence of lousy service with some "other brand," and the experience of a close friend who also bought a scanner of that same "other brand." I have no issues with Lawrence Smith reporting problems with banding on his (Nikon) scanner. That's real information, quite unlike what we get from Art on this topic. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:26:51 -0400 (EDT) Raphael Bustin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Can you honestly say that any one brand is more > or less prone to reliability or service headaches > than "the others?" Nope. There's anecdotal reports aplenty, but no way of weighting the pissed-off-and-grumbling users of any marque as a percentage of the whole. There are a lot of complaints about Nikons, but then there are presumably a lot of Nikons. What is more interesting is the patterns that form in the nature of failures. This strikes me as very useful ammunition for consumers confronted by unresponsive service depts. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Tony Sleep wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:26:51 -0400 (EDT) Raphael Bustin > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > Can you honestly say that any one brand is more > > or less prone to reliability or service headaches > > than "the others?" > > Nope. There's anecdotal reports aplenty, but no way of weighting the > pissed-off-and-grumbling users of any marque as a percentage of the whole. Bingo. That was my point. > There are a lot of complaints about Nikons, but then there are presumably a > lot of Nikons. What is more interesting is the patterns that form in the > nature of failures. This strikes me as very useful ammunition for consumers > confronted by unresponsive service depts. I don't know if any of these companies give much of a hoot about their film-scanner customers. Cheap flatbeds, FAX machines, and 3-in-1s (printer/scanner/copiers) present a much larger market, with much less demanding users. I'd be curious to know, among veteran film- scanner users, whether there's any brand loyalty at all. Anybody out there buy the same brand twice? rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
rafeb wrote: > I don't give a rat's ass about your observations > on this topic, I stand behind my statements. Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with years of experience with their equipment as to what has happened to the quality of the stuff and their repair service. In terms of their scanners, I maintain that relative to their costs, they have, if not the highest, one of the highest levels of internet posted complaints regarding defects in hardware and or software, and service related issues of the major scanner companies. Now, I'll accept that might be due in part to more discerning purchasers making higher demands, or even their market position, perhaps selling more scanners. But they also cost a lot more to purchase, and that should also account for something more than being further out of pocket. You know, I find it interesting that just a few months back when the new Nikon scanners were just being released, I indicted that depth of field issues were beginning to be reported through my sources. I got sh*t on both this and the scanner@leben list for taking a strong stand on this matter, stating this was a problem which had become a greater one with the higher res Nikon scanners. Many people demanded "where is your proof" "you don't own one", "you are just anti-Nikon", etc. Well, as more of these units became disseminated to users, guess what happened... more and more reports about the DOF limitations began to spring up, and now its an accepted "feature' of those scanners. Only one detractor had the decency to write me privately to (sort of) apologize for being so abusive to me. That says a lot more about them than me. I've grown relatively thick skinned over the years I've been contributing to lists and groups. I give advice here based upon a mixture of my experience, research, other published and personal sources, and other elements. I neither have the time nor inclination to gather "proof" for statements I make. I could be vindictive about this and demand you (and others) "cite facts" every time I don't like what someone says, but I see little to be gained. You know as well as I, how difficult it would be to document in an irrefutable manner most of these types of things. Heck, the Austin and Todd show was proof enough of that. Since you are unwilling to disprove my statements, (I don't know how they could be either proven or disproven, quite honestly, other than hiring on a research team) I guess, I can only assume your viewpoint is based upon your perceptions, as mine are upon mine. As I said before, I don't need to be involved in a rear-end accident with a Pinto to know they have a dangerously placed gas tank. So, in this kind of circumstance, I suggest letting the chips fall where they may. If my credibility is as lacking as you suggest, no one is believing a word I write here anyway. Right? Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
Rafe wrote: >I'd be curious to know, among veteran film- >scanner users, whether there's any brand >loyalty at all. Anybody out there buy the >same brand twice? I'm every bit as "brand loyal" as the brands (and suppliers) are loyal to me and my goals. If it works like it's supposed to work, I'll stick with it. When they stick it *to me*, it's "Adios." :-) Best regards--LRA _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
At 07:19 19-07-01 -0400, Raphael Bustin wrote: >I'd be curious to know, among veteran film- >scanner users, whether there's any brand >loyalty at all. Anybody out there buy the >same brand twice? I'd have stepped up from my Polaroid SS35+ to their 4000 model without question if it had ICE^3. The Nikon 4000 was a reluctant choice based on a specific feature set that I needed. It's my fervent prayer that I'll never have to deal with Nikon service. Been there, done that years ago with an LS1000. Very unpleasant. Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.com/ -- "Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object." ~Joseph Campbell
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Arthur Entlich wrote: > > > rafeb wrote: > > > I don't give a rat's ass about your observations > > > on this topic, > > I stand behind my statements. Apparently not, Art. You have yet to answer my simple question. > Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more > Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with > years of experience with their equipment as to what has happened to the > quality of the stuff and their repair service. Pissing contest, based on conjecture, and utterly irrelevant. > In terms of their scanners, I maintain that relative to their costs, > they have, if not the highest, one of the highest levels of internet > posted complaints regarding defects in hardware and or software, and > service related issues of the major scanner companies. Now, I'll accept > that might be due in part to more discerning purchasers making higher > demands, or even their market position, perhaps selling more scanners. > But they also cost a lot more to purchase, and that should also account > for something more than being further out of pocket. The 8000 ED and the LS-120 have nearly identical retail price at the moment. Historically, the Nikon and Polaroid scanners have tracked each other quite closely in terms of retail cost for similarly-featured models. This is public information, Art. I read Shutterbug, peruse the BH Photo catalog, and pay attention to these details. Your assertion about comparative pricing is just plain wrong. Recall that when the 8000 ED was first announced, Nikon undercut Polaroid's estimated retail price for the LS-120. > You know, I find it interesting that just a few months back when the new > Nikon scanners were just being released, I indicted that depth of field > issues were beginning to be reported through my sources. I got sh*t on > both this and the scanner@leben list for taking a strong stand on this > matter, stating this was a problem which had become a greater one with > the higher res Nikon scanners. Many people demanded "where is your > proof" "you don't own one", "you are just anti-Nikon", etc. Well, as > more of these units became disseminated to users, guess what happened... > more and more reports about the DOF limitations began to spring up, and > now its an accepted "feature' of those scanners. It is an issue, but hardly insurmountable. The actual images that have been posted show that the Nikon is no slouch in terms of sharpness, and holds its own against the competition. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: > Rafe wrote: > > >I'd be curious to know, among veteran film- > >scanner users, whether there's any brand > >loyalty at all. Anybody out there buy the > >same brand twice? > > I'm every bit as "brand loyal" as the brands (and suppliers) are loyal to me > and my goals. If it works like it's supposed to work, I'll stick with it. > When they stick it *to me*, it's "Adios." :-) Aw, c'mon Lynn, just answer the question. It's really simple. Ever bought the same brand of film scanner twice? I sure haven't. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service
> Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more > Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with > years of experience with their equipment as to what has happened to the > quality of the stuff and their repair service. What Nikon equipment do you own, Art? Why I ask, is just because it's Nikon, doesn't mean it's the same division. Typically, in a company as large as Nikon, the divisions are very distinct, and one division's "performance" isn't necessarily going to be the same a others. Interestingly enough, there was no link for "support" on their web site, so I couldn't find out if the same repair depots are used for the camera gear and for scanners. Does Nikon have any web based support for the scanners? If so, what's the URL? I did find "NikonNet" (real obvious that this is a link to support ;-/ ) and then "NikonTech" (very buried, and surrounded by a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with technical support...)...but the link to www.nikontechusa.com gave me a DNS error.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service I spent A LOT of time on the phone with Nikon tech support when I had my first LS-8000. As a software engineer/dba with a lot of hardware experience, I've had a lot of experience with tech support in other areas. Finally, I've done my part to help Nikon meet their photographic equipment sales goals. While I've had my issues with Nikon's service for their photographic equipment, tech support for the LS-8000 was some of the best I've experienced. Paul Wilson > -Original Message- > From: Raphael Bustin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 9:38 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service > > > > > On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Arthur Entlich wrote: > > > > > > > rafeb wrote: > > > > > I don't give a rat's ass about your observations > > > > > on this topic, > > > > I stand behind my statements. > > Apparently not, Art. You have yet to answer > my simple question. > > > > Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more > > Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with > > years of experience with their equipment as to what has > happened to the > > quality of the stuff and their repair service. > > Pissing contest, based on conjecture, > and utterly irrelevant. > > > > In terms of their scanners, I maintain that relative to their costs, > > they have, if not the highest, one of the highest levels of internet > > posted complaints regarding defects in hardware and or software, and > > service related issues of the major scanner companies. > Now, I'll accept > > that might be due in part to more discerning purchasers > making higher > > demands, or even their market position, perhaps selling > more scanners. > > But they also cost a lot more to purchase, and that should > also account > > for something more than being further out of pocket. > > > The 8000 ED and the LS-120 have nearly identical > retail price at the moment. Historically, the > Nikon and Polaroid scanners have tracked each > other quite closely in terms of retail cost for > similarly-featured models. This is public > information, Art. I read Shutterbug, peruse > the BH Photo catalog, and pay attention to > these details. Your assertion about comparative > pricing is just plain wrong. > > Recall that when the 8000 ED was first announced, > Nikon undercut Polaroid's estimated retail price > for the LS-120. > > > > You know, I find it interesting that just a few months back > when the new > > Nikon scanners were just being released, I indicted that > depth of field > > issues were beginning to be reported through my sources. I > got sh*t on > > both this and the scanner@leben list for taking a strong > stand on this > > matter, stating this was a problem which had become a > greater one with > > the higher res Nikon scanners. Many people demanded "where is your > > proof" "you don't own one", "you are just anti-Nikon", etc. > Well, as > > more of these units became disseminated to users, guess > what happened... > > more and more reports about the DOF limitations began to > spring up, and > > now its an accepted "feature' of those scanners. > > It is an issue, but hardly insurmountable. > The actual images that have been posted > show that the Nikon is no slouch in terms > of sharpness, and holds its own against the > competition. > > > rafe b. > >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
I'm on my third film scanner, and have never bought the same brand twice, but this was certainly not due to dissatisfaction with the product's reliability. It is more due to the product selection/price at each purchase. I started out with an original HP Photosmart scanner and moved up to a Canon 2710. HP certainly didn't offer a product with better scanning ability than the orignal (I consider the USB an equal item, and though HP included drivers for USB with NT 4, I didn't want to try my luck ). The Canon served my needs quite well and produced scans of noticeably higher quality than the HP. Eventually I sold it in order to get a Minolta Scan Elite because I wanted Digital ICE and single pass multi scanning. The new Canon that is just now coming on the market has the operational equivalent of ICE, but I don't think it supports single pass multi scanning. Also, the Minolta only cost $699 from B&H. I'm just a hobbyist, so ultimate scan quality isn't a business and survival necessity. The new 4000 dpi looked interesting but were too expensive for me. The SS4000 is the right price now, but I don't wan to upgrade now. So in short, none of my experiences would prevent me from considering the manufacturers I have experience with, but I won't forgo functionality I want in order to stay in their camp. Pat --- Raphael Bustin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: > > > Rafe wrote: > > > > >I'd be curious to know, among veteran film- > > >scanner users, whether there's any brand > > >loyalty at all. Anybody out there buy the > > >same brand twice? > > > > I'm every bit as "brand loyal" as the brands (and > suppliers) are loyal to me > > and my goals. If it works like it's supposed to > work, I'll stick with it. > > When they stick it *to me*, it's "Adios." :-) > > > Aw, c'mon Lynn, just answer the question. It's > really simple. > Ever bought the same brand of film scanner twice? > I sure haven't. > > rafe b. > __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service
Yes, very obscure, that Nikon web support. www.nikontechusa.com was working yesterday when I accessed it for digicam related support (which wasn't there for the new 995). The site is downed hopefully temporarily, and hopefully down for improvements to the awful interface. You had to read every line on the page until you found your area of interest. Poor design. I did download NikonScan 3.1 from that very page. Darrell -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 9:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service > Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more > Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with > years of experience with their equipment as to what has happened to the > quality of the stuff and their repair service. What Nikon equipment do you own, Art? Why I ask, is just because it's Nikon, doesn't mean it's the same division. Typically, in a company as large as Nikon, the divisions are very distinct, and one division's "performance" isn't necessarily going to be the same a others. Interestingly enough, there was no link for "support" on their web site, so I couldn't find out if the same repair depots are used for the camera gear and for scanners. Does Nikon have any web based support for the scanners? If so, what's the URL? I did find "NikonNet" (real obvious that this is a link to support ;-/ ) and then "NikonTech" (very buried, and surrounded by a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with technical support...)...but the link to www.nikontechusa.com gave me a DNS error.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Austin Franklin wrote: > Does Nikon have any web based support for the scanners? If so, what's the > URL? I did find "NikonNet" (real obvious that this is a link to support > ;-/ ) and then "NikonTech" (very buried, and surrounded by a lot of stuff > that has nothing to do with technical support...)...but the link to > www.nikontechusa.com gave me a DNS error. nikontechusa.com should have worked; it's alive as I type this. There's also www.nikon-euro.com All else fails, there's 800-NIKON-UX, which is available 24/7 for 1st-level tech support. Calling at 7 AM I've never waited more than a few moments. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
To the best of my knowledge, at least here in Canada, the same division that handles the camera repairs also handles the digital scanner repairs. These days, most cameras (including Nikon's) use more electronic circuitry than mechanical parts, so it wouldn't be a stretch that both camera and scanner repairs would be handled in the same place. My experience has been that a "corporate culture" is defined from the top down, and that you will usually see more similarities than differences between divisions within a company, even if they are located in different countries. My personal experience has been that companies headquartered in Japan are less attuned to their clients from around the world. I suspect this might also be culturally related. The Japanese culture promotes calm and stoicism, and respect for older corporate institutions and I'd suspect they find the North American consumer awareness movement, for example, rather of an affront. In spite of the companies having North American divisions dealing with their N.A. clients, I suspect that there is a top down approach to management coming from the head offices in Japan. Lastly, N.A. and Europe are pretty far away physically from Japan, and its hard to know how much gets back to head office. I have written a few Japanese company head offices but never received a reply. I suspect there are still many linguistic barriers as well. I would love to see a more hybrid kind of management approach, where a mix of N.A. or European customer service and consumer awareness was mixed with the usually superior manufacturing and quality control of goods produced in places like Japan. Art Austin Franklin wrote: > > > Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more > > Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with > > years of experience with their equipment as to what has happened to the > > quality of the stuff and their repair service. > > What Nikon equipment do you own, Art? Why I ask, is just because it's > Nikon, doesn't mean it's the same division. Typically, in a company as > large as Nikon, the divisions are very distinct, and one division's > "performance" isn't necessarily going to be the same a others. >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
I think Art may be pretty much right, here, particularly about the "top down" management. Recent history (and personal experience) shows that this type of hierarchy tends to frown on any criticism from below, hence constructive comments dry up, and the Top becomes not only insulated but *isolated* form any hints of disent. The ultimate result is like a fire--where a single bucket of water (or good corrective measures, early on) would have extinguished it in the beginning, it can destroy most or all of the building once it's out of control. The Japanese, of all people, should realize this. But they sometimes misplace their egos, just as others of us do. A word to the wise. Does the name "Bridgestone" mean anything? Best regards--LRA >From: Arthur Entlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service >Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 01:57:39 -0700 > >To the best of my knowledge, at least here in Canada, the same division >that handles the camera repairs also handles the digital scanner >repairs. These days, most cameras (including Nikon's) use more >electronic circuitry than mechanical parts, so it wouldn't be a stretch >that both camera and scanner repairs would be handled in the same place. > >My experience has been that a "corporate culture" is defined from the >top down, and that you will usually see more similarities than >differences between divisions within a company, even if they are located >in different countries. > >My personal experience has been that companies headquartered in Japan >are less attuned to their clients from around the world. I suspect this >might also be culturally related. The Japanese culture promotes calm >and stoicism, and respect for older corporate institutions and I'd >suspect they find the North American consumer awareness movement, for >example, rather of an affront. > >In spite of the companies having North American divisions dealing with >their N.A. clients, I suspect that there is a top down approach to >management coming from the head offices in Japan. > >Lastly, N.A. and Europe are pretty far away physically from Japan, and >its hard to know how much gets back to head office. I have written a >few Japanese company head offices but never received a reply. I suspect >there are still many linguistic barriers as well. > >I would love to see a more hybrid kind of management approach, where a >mix of N.A. or European customer service and consumer awareness was >mixed with the usually superior manufacturing and quality control of >goods produced in places like Japan. > >Art > >Austin Franklin wrote: > > > > > Even with your nice expensive Nikon scanner, I STILL own a lot more > > > Nikon equipment dollar per dollar than you do, and I can speak with > > > years of experience with their equipment as to what has happened to >the > > > quality of the stuff and their repair service. > > > > What Nikon equipment do you own, Art? Why I ask, is just because it's > > Nikon, doesn't mean it's the same division. Typically, in a company as > > large as Nikon, the divisions are very distinct, and one division's > > "performance" isn't necessarily going to be the same a others. > > > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service
> >I would love to see a more hybrid kind of management approach, where a > >mix of N.A. or European customer service and consumer awareness was > >mixed with the usually superior manufacturing and quality control of > >goods produced in places like Japan. > > > >Art > > I just realized, to a great extent, what I just described above is what Polaroid became in recent years... Hopefully, their recent hardships aren't indicative of this type of structure. Art
filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service
Glad to hear it all worked out well! >extension, in case something goes wrong with the repair. I think I'm home >free right now, and I now have over a dozen rolls to get developed, and >scanned. That will keep you busy - considering it's taken me two weeks to scan two rolls of film in my spare time since going scuba diving... :) Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service - in Australia
Julian wrote: >He actually said "if you send it back, we'll just send it back to you the same". He also said "I don't know the details of how it was checked, and you can't talk to the service people directly, you have to talk to me and I am only a support person" as well as "It is within manufacturer's specifications" - at least 10 times. This is somewhat akin to the vaudeville saying, "My plumber doesn't make house calls!" A little like driving 55 miles to take your machine to a "sevice depot," paying for the service in advance, and driving 55 miles home, then 3 weeks later driving the exact same 110 miles to retrieve it, and (when it doesn't work) opening it up to find the original dust still in the machine! Make your blood boil? Well I guess so! "It's a Jungle out there!"---LRA _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Service - in Australia
"Julian Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I rang them and complained bitterly, but the level of their insight and > dedication of the "first line" help desk is not sufficient to match the > nature of the problem. (IN Australia Nikon is sold and serviced by Maxwell > Photo Optics who don't really have anything beyond first-line > support. This guy was not up to dealing with this kind of problem). Bummer. I hope they make good with the fix, Julian. Meanwhle I'll pray that my LS30 continues to work really well... Rob
