Now lie back on the couch and tell us Pierre how you feel about your inner workings being exposed by your posts.
NR is censoring criticism
(55 posts) (25 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
TaoTeJared, so who are you?
A moron working for Nikon or just for NR?
I did not direct any jabs at an individual, but you have been doing just that everyday.
Obviously above my pay grade, paid to dissect criticism.Wait, how did you get to post pictures taken by the D4 on December 2, 2011, before the camera was officially announced?
Cartainly not the guy on the street covering the beat. Unless of course you are posting photos taken by others and breaking copyright. http://www.flickr.com/photos/taotejared/6665804855/in/photostream/My rants are statements of fact meant to inform others who may be under some false illusion that cameras can be recovered. Cars on the other hand have Vin #'s and registration requirements around the world. Does not mean they cannot be chopped up, but when they go in the shop the numbers are checked against documentation. A two year old d3x is worth more than many cars.
Nikon official service centers could do a better job of checking serial # and origin of equipment when it is accepted for service, just like a legal garage does.Posted 1 year ago # -
-
Maonua: You must have missed out on the D4 discussion back then. We were all looking for examples, especially at high ISO, taken with the yet unavailable D4 and posting them for others to examine. Those D4 flicker images were just hosting the photos so they could be posted on NR for us to discuss. Tao never represented them as photos he took. We all knew they were Nikon publicity shots. Flicker was just the host. We all have to have a host somewhere else if we are going to show a photo on NR to discuss one or more aspects of a new or old camera.
I have never looked at Tao's work until you identified his flicker stream which I then checked to see just what you were talking about. Tao does good work, thanks for directing me to it, I enjoyed browsing through it.
You do raise one real good point. Nikon official repair shops should check the serial numbers of cameras that come in against a stolen camera list Nikon could publish on its website. I like that idea but guess they just don't want to do the extra work.
Posted 1 year ago # -
OK, a question regarding NIKON registration. On the website is what is called My Nikon and once one registers, you can create "My Camera Bag" where all one's equipment is registered with serial number. I am wondering if this is useful for recovering stolen or lost cameras? Does anyone know the answer to this question?
Posted 1 year ago # -
I had a Nikon D300 stolen from me and the answer was pretty much, 'watch for it to come up in your local classifieds'. In my case insurance did pay replacement, though, less a $500 deductible, so I bought a D90 instead.
Have you tried this site, Maonua? It crawls the web looking for your serial number in image exif data. Most of the entries for mine are in the NR photo a day threads. http://www.stolencamerafinder.co.uk/
Oh, and Maonua, don't attack other forum members. From the rules:
Personal attacks on other members will NOT be tolerated and posts will be deleted.Posted 1 year ago # -
msmoto said:
OK, a question regarding NIKON registration. On the website is what is called My Nikon and once one registers, you can create "My Camera Bag" where all one's equipment is registered with serial number. I am wondering if this is useful for recovering stolen or lost cameras? Does anyone know the answer to this question?I had a D3100 w/kit lens and 55-300mm lens mysteriously disappear while in route to Kuwait via USPS. I did ship them insured so luckily I did get my money back. I also did register the camera and the lenses with Nikon. I'll let you know if I ever hear back from them.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Maonua said:
TaoTeJared, so who are you?
A moron working for Nikon or just for NR?
I did not direct any jabs at an individual, but you have been doing just that everyday.
Obviously above my pay grade, paid to dissect criticism.Wait, how did you get to post pictures taken by the D4 on December 2, 2011, before the camera was officially announced?
Cartainly not the guy on the street covering the beat. Unless of course you are posting photos taken by others and breaking copyright. http://www.flickr.com/photos/taotejared/6665804855/in/photostream/My rants are statements of fact meant to inform others who may be under some false illusion that cameras can be recovered. Cars on the other hand have Vin #'s and registration requirements around the world. Does not mean they cannot be chopped up, but when they go in the shop the numbers are checked against documentation. A two year old d3x is worth more than many cars.
Nikon official service centers could do a better job of checking serial # and origin of equipment when it is accepted for service, just like a legal garage does.The questions should be who are you? You have 5 posts and joined this month. Tao has been around for 2 years and has 1800 posts. He is very helpful in most cases. The site is called Nikon rumors...not make suggestions to Nikon how they should handle your camera being stolen. Sorry for your lost if you had gear stolen, but I think it is general knowledge to get it insured if you spend big bucks on the equipment. I don't think anyone is under the false impression that they will get their stuff back when it is stolen. Just like all other stolen goods only a small fraction are ever recovered.
Generally you get more pleasant responses around here by maintaining a cool demeanor and showing some respect to others. You started this thread by accusing people of things that aren't true. It is a public forum about Nikon equipment not a Nikon sponsored website and the whole website is based off of RUMORS.
rumor
noun
1.a story or statement in general circulation without confirmation or certainty as to fact
2.gossip; hearsayPosted 1 year ago # -
Yes Maonua, I am yet another bad guy in your "conspiracy theory - everyone is against you" riddled world. Utter nonsense.
The image from the D4 was released by Nikon Australia, open licence to share. If you were more interested in finding out about it rather than fueling your own gibberish fantastical plots of the world being against you, a google search would have pulled it up for you.
You have a skewed idea of reality if you think garages ever check vin numbers against stolen cars or if companies should keep track of hundreds of thousands of lost or stolen goods every year. Here is something you seem not to understand - when police recover stolen goods, they are sold at auction when the trial is over or if no one claims them. If items are left in a foreclosed/ back rent home or storage locker, they are sold at auction to pay for past rent/ monies due. People buy them, and many send them in for service. Your cameras could have been recovered in a raid on a meth lab and have been sold at auction, then sold on ebay, left in a foreclosed home, sold again and already been serviced.
How is Nikon suppose to keep track of all of that? Are they suppose to ask everyone to give them a "current status" update every few months? You can't sue the police for selling confiscated goods and everyone down the line had/has legal ownership. What you think should be done is unreasonable due to the complexities of updating information. You may not like it, but that is how the world works. Be glad you had insurance, that is what it is for.
Posted 1 year ago # -
msmoto said:
OK, a question regarding NIKON registration. On the website is what is called My Nikon and once one registers, you can create "My Camera Bag" where all one's equipment is registered with serial number. I am wondering if this is useful for recovering stolen or lost cameras? Does anyone know the answer to this question?@msmoto, I don't know the answer to your question but I do know the registration process provides an easy way for one to access and report the stolen article serial numbers to the police and also to post them with the local pawn shops, craigs list, etc. The best bet is to always have everything insured but it never hurts to file a report and the information necessary to recover one's property. Police departments regularly attempt to find the rightful owners of stolen goods.
As others have commented, it is generally not the responsibility of any manufacturer to track someone's personal property. While we have a society that loves to avoid acceptance of personal responsibility, maintaining the security of one's own personal property is exactly that.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I had some items stolen once. The police found the criminal, he told them he sold my items to a store, the police recovered them and returned them to me. I assume the store was just out the money they had paid. So sometimes recovery is possible. But I don't know what would have happened if I just had the serial number and no criminal linkage to the item in the store.
Posted 1 year ago # -
proof of purchase and a case number from the police would prolly have got the store to release them. Unless they were fencing it in the first place, then your attempt to get them back may have got you a stay in hospital...
Posted 1 year ago # -
TaoTeJared said:
...when police recover stolen goods, they are sold at auction when the trial is over or if no one claims them...Here in Canada, I saw articles in the newspaper where a previous owner identifies his car or truck a few weeks after being stolen a couple of blocks away, call the police who come take the vehicle away and sell it. The owner never got it back.
The idea is that your insurance already or will paid you back, if the vehicle was returned, would you need to pay back the insurance? Keep both? What if you already purchased another one? Often the car is sold in pieces; would they return the parts to you?
The trouble is that not all have insurance and after losing your car twice or 3 times, no insurance will want to cover you.
Posted 1 year ago # -
"The idea is that your insurance already or will paid you back, if the vehicle was returned, would you need to pay back the insurance? Keep both?"
Oh yeah you have to pay them back unless the car or even any item was damaged, they let you keep the repair estimate. That is a huge scam in the US with people doing that. They say something was stolen, file a police report, and then get the money. Meanwhile a buddy has the stuff at his place. One of my friends did a 4 year stent working for an insurance company when he was laid off from police cut-backs. Insurance companies investigate like mad. They had him go after people for as little as $250. Once they file a police report, it becomes a crime.
"What if you already purchased another one? Often the car is sold in pieces; would they return the parts to you?"
When you accept payment, the insurance company then "owns" the stolen item. If your stolen car/item is found, they sell it at auction or scrap it. You can get personal items from it though - if there are any.The trouble is that not all have insurance and after losing your car twice or 3 times, no insurance will want to cover you.
I like Beso's ending words for that one.
Beso said:
While we have a society that loves to avoid acceptance of personal responsibility, maintaining the security of one's own personal property is exactly that.Posted 1 year ago # -
This has evolved in to an interesting discussion I'd say that falls under the heading of what really is a companies responcibility after they have sold you a product. I'd say very little, most products a warranted again manufacturing defects that's all. BTW in 30 years of owning Nikon equipment I've had only one failure, a rivet holding the shutter blades together in a FM2 after maybe a few 100,000 actuations. Not to bad and well after the warranty was up.
Nikon makes a good, no excellent product! Would it be nice if their marketing was more focused on us little guys? Sure I'd like that but it's not their responcibility.
As far as stolen equipment, no doubt in my mind the manufacture has no responcibility what so ever. I've spent way to may years in the military and at least in the US Army if your stuff is stolen and it wasn't locked up that's your problem you won't even get to file a report. If the Army's stuff is stolen and you didn't lock it up it your responcibility and you're paying. I've found following a few simple precautions can prevent most thefts.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hi,
I've had Nikon equipment fail under some extreme conditions, and break under horrible conditions. It wasn't insured, because that's not what the Army does during War time or anytime.
As for thief, I've personally, been robbed twice. Nothing was ever ever recovered. Insurance paid.
I've commented negatively on Nikon more than once and haven't been called out by the mods. A few NR users haven't be so polite, but I've stood my ground.
Nikon made a mediocre if not crappy video camera with the D90. It was the first DSLR that made video, but it just wasn't very good. It's usable under a very specific set of circumstances. It's very inflexible. The D7000 is much better, but still has faults that, if were more full-featured, could have toe-to-toed with Canon or Panasonic and wiped the market, but didn't.
Personally I don't see the OP's points, but then everyone sees things differently through their own eyes.
My best,
Mike
Posted 1 year ago # -
Maonua, obviously you have not read the rules of this forum - http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1107 especially #2. Calling another member a "moron" will not fly here. Consider this a warning and don't wonder why your posts are being deleted.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Here's an idea - let me file a class action lawsuit against Nikon (I'm a lawyer) alledging that they are liable to all Nikon owners who have had their equipment stolen and not recovered because it would have been easy for Nikon to place a wifi activated kill switch or a lojack-type device in every product they made, and they failed to so do. We can offer to settle the class action if Nikon, while not admitting liability, pays to every ripped off owner a $100 nuisance award, and pays attorney fees and costs of $15,000,000. Hey, I gotta make a living !! (And isn't this how most class actions suits seem to be resolved?) LMAO.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Mike Gunter said:
Hi,I've had Nikon equipment fail under some extreme conditions, and break under horrible conditions. It wasn't insured, because that's not what the Army does during War time or anytime.
As for thief, I've personally, been robbed twice. Nothing was ever ever recovered. Insurance paid.
I've commented negatively on Nikon more than once and haven't been called out by the mods. A few NR users haven't be so polite, but I've stood my ground.
Nikon made a mediocre if not crappy video camera with the D90. It was the first DSLR that made video, but it just wasn't very good. It's usable under a very specific set of circumstances. It's very inflexible. The D7000 is much better, but still has faults that, if were more full-featured, could have toe-to-toed with Canon or Panasonic and wiped the market, but didn't.
Personally I don't see the OP's points, but then everyone sees things differently through their own eyes.
My best,
Mike
If you want to takes video, buy a real camcorder. They only put video on dslrs as a convenience, not to take good video.
Posted 1 year ago # -
-
warprints said:
I agree - but you've opened a can of worms .... just wait for it ....I agree too. Shooting video on a consumer-level DSLR, at present, is like cooking a turkey in a microwave. You can do it, but you'd use different equipment if you had your choice. This is 2012. In a few years I'm sure consumer-grade DSLRs will be better at video. Maybe microwaves will be better at cooking turkeys, who knows.
Posted 1 year ago # -
msmoto said:
OK, a question regarding NIKON registration. On the website is what is called My Nikon and once one registers, you can create "My Camera Bag" where all one's equipment is registered with serial number. I am wondering if this is useful for recovering stolen or lost cameras? Does anyone know the answer to this question?Anything the police can get to help identify stolen property is useful. I do get a chuckle thinking a privately held company would be liable to have people on staff, pay those folks and such to help someone recover stolen property. Seems that it would be a good individual practice to keep such information for ones self in the event of a need to claim a loss on ones insurance or even their tax return :)
Posted 1 year ago # -
DaveO said:
If you want to takes video, buy a real camcorder. They only put video on dslrs as a convenience, not to take good video.I used to think the same, but as a journalist I don't have time to use a camcorder. Dslr's just have a much quicker startup and it saves me energy not carrying a 4th body on the field...
Posted 1 year ago # -
DaveO said:
If you want to takes video, buy a real camcorder. They only put video on dslrs as a convenience, not to take good video.Hi,
Gosh, I didn't get Nikon's memo on that. :-)
But then, I doubt you did, too. A terrific amount of work is being done with these "consumer" cameras by professional photographers and film makers. As an examplen, we shot footage with the D7000 for PBS, CNN, the Outdoor Channel, as well as nationally viewed commercials, even thought it is a consumer camera. I don't think I would 'dis' it too much.
Furthermore, I do recall "Video" being stamped on the boxes and a long announcement made at the time from Nikon about the 'landmark' achievement.
Of course, I'm old enough to remember when we were shooting newspaper assignments with 35mm cameras and the Rollie guys were telling us that our toy cameras wouldn't make the grade, either. I suppose you could look at it that way, too.
@Warprints, it is a can of worms, but it shouldn't be, nor do, for the life of me, I understand why it is. The technology is clearly good enough and available enough and widespread enough to be seamless for both still and motion shooters. Why there is the slightest controversy between the two is beyond me.
My best,
Mike
Posted 1 year ago # -
Reply »
You must log in to post.
