Law firm already filed a class action lawsuit for the Nikon D600 dust/oil spot issue

Nikon D600 dust time lapse video

A quick update before we continue with the D4s coverage: I was told that the law firm Zimmerman & Reed PLLP has already filed a class action lawsuit in California federal court for the Nikon D600 dust/oil spot issue on February 19th, 2014.

Update: here is another Nikon D600 lawsuit.

This entry was posted in Nikon D600 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Geomet

    Perfect this is what nikon needs to wake up…

  • Aldo

    even if nikon wins (which is yet to be seen)… this is setback to their reputation. A formal action against their handling of the issue… Reminds me of hurricane katrina.

    • Harry

      LOL, looks like you changed your stance from 5 months back. Good to know.

  • Rhonbo

    This might contribute to better QA in the future.

  • BluePlanet

    Thought I sold mine, but I do support this! Nikon should be responsible!

  • Anyone know how to search the California federal court database?

    • Aldo

      not federally… city wise you can go online and pay a fee… if you go to the court house is free.

      • Thanks, I am sure there will be some updates online in the future.

  • Scott M.

    Class action, whooo-whooo! The lawyers get 99% and the clients get .50 cents each. A fair settlement would be replacing the part that creates the dust on some models or swap for D610, IMO.

    • Scott


    • AM

      Nikon gets spanked anyway.

    • Mansgame

      As long as Nikon gets punished, that’s all that matters.

    • Bphoto

      Not exactly 99%. Typically the attorneys get one-third plus expenses. The balance does into a fund to pay the members of the class. Those class members will get a small amount or a coupon. The judge usually gets to determine what happens to the balance. This can be donated to a local charity to benefit the community whereby assuring his re-election. American jurisprudence at its finest. See Cy-pres doctrine.

  • Lol lawyers

    Let’s hope that they take Nikon to cleaners! I’m pretty sure that the victims won’t get squat, while the fat cats will get fatter, but at least this will teach Nikon Corp an expensive lesson.

    Get your lube out Nikon and welcome to the club!

  • DuncanM

    Why would anyone sign up for that? If your D600 is that badly borked just take Nikon to small claims court and get back all of your $2100 + reasonable fees.

    • Dave Ingram

      Actually – might be cheaper to just contact customer service at Nikon and ask for a refund, they seem to be pretty amenable to going that route lately as long as you have a legitimate issue and have jumped through the hoops, at least in Canada. Worked for me.

      Another fellow in our local camera club had difficulties with his D600 as well – he had a shutter replacement and then the entire camera replaced with a new D600, trips to Nikon service, wet cleaning, etc. He had contacted customer service several times over the last year in writing and they kept putting him off … until last week. He was still having difficulties with spotting and oil so emailed one last time – Nikon responded with a refund and within a week he had used it to purchase a new D610.

      • Al

        Probably being more accomodating due to impending class action law suit.

  • Bill Lise

    Just downloaded the complaint, which can be seen at

  • Parampreet Dhatt

    Whether Nikon wins or loses, customers rarely get any benefit from cases like these, its only the lawyers on either side who have a field day.
    But I do hope this gives Nikon a much needed kick on the behind to drastically improve their quality control, which has been shoddy (to say the least) in the past few years.

    • ronin

      Consumers benefit not directly but indirectly in that companies will be inclined in the future to be more responsive and less dismissive to product issues simply because of the possibility of punishing litigation.

  • Bill Lise

    Just downloaded the complaint. It is available at

    • Aldo

      Wow after scanning through the list of alleged violations… the only way I see nikon winning is if the judge is a photographer also.

      • torwag

        There is a certain chance the judge is a Canon fanboy too 😉

        • Mansgame

          Judge Joe Brown seemed to be a Canon guy.

    • Thanks, I will update my post.

    • Mansgame

      This lawyer knows his D600. He pretty much covered everything from the D600 supposedly being a pro camera, to Nikon’s nopology, to their denials of a problem existing. After Nikon spends millions of dollars on this whether it’s paying claims or losing the suit, in addition to paying for all the refunds and cleanings they’ve done, I wonder if they’ll look back and think “gee, maybe we shouldn’t have been jerks. Maybe we should have done things the right way the first time”

  • Bill Lise

    You can use Pacer to get federal court documents, but you need to create an account and pay by credit card.

  • Al

    I’d like to see Nikon build their case around “within specification” argument. Lol.

  • Mansgame

    I’ve already moved past this so my name won’t be anywhere in this but old school Japanese companies like Nikon need to wake up. This isn’t 1960.

  • guest

    Am I the only one who thinks a lawsuit is stupid? You buy a car, you use it, it gets dirty, you clean it. It’s not rocket science. For the record, yes I have a D600.

    • Truth

      Apparently this car has a mechanism that splatters mud on your car after every 100 miles.

    • Bruce

      That’s like saying you engine was manufactured with a fault that covers your windscreen in oil every few hundred miles. Yet the answer is to constantly clean the windscreen. Tosh.

    • Bruce

      And the answer is to take the car to the dealers and get it fixed, not sue the manufacturer. Unless, you crashed as a result of the leak! 🙂 Has anyone lost valuable shots as a result of the oil leak. Then someone may have a case.

    • Mansgame

      A car’s purpose is to get you from point A to point B outside. Getting dirty does not affect that purpose and in fact is designed to be dirty and cleaned.

      A camera’s purpose is to take clear pictures. Being dirty directly affects the camera’s primary purpose.

      See how that works? So you see, it’s your post rather than the lawsuit that’s stupid.

    • Mike


      You assume that all D600s off the assembly line are equal – that is that the first and the last were made the same.

      Is that true? There might have been some changes after the $hitstorm that caused a stir making some of the D600s different.

      Many early adopters never got a clean sensor.

      Lawsuits have a tendency to find true of such matters, or failing that, to compensate for making $hitty people covering it up.

      My best,


  • Am I the only one who has a D600 that Nikon service managed to fix? (on the second try, but they still fixed it.)
    40,000 shots in, 15,000 since the second servicing, no oil.

    • No, you are not – this is why I think this lawsuit will be dismissed.

    • Mansgame

      Seems like it.

    • Michael

      I am hopeful, I have sent mine in twice and I am waiting for the worst (hoping for the best) but ready to join the lawsuit if it doesn’t get fixed.

  • sd

    The Lawyers will give up after they see how many actual cameras were sold in the US. Before the closeout firesale.

    Maybe they’ll pull out a million dollars out of it by settlement. But the End Nikon user won’t see a dime because Lawyer fees will eat all of that up.

  • GN

    Why hire the law firm to file a class action while you can do it your own? It’s cheaper and for sure you will get what you wanted… Just file it in the small claim court and Nikon can’t send out attorney to every single court.

    • Michael

      That’s a good idea.

  • Michael

    I Sent My D600 in for repair. They replaced the shutter and aperture lever, within three months the camera had oil spots in the same places. They said it was “not oil but dust” , yeah right. In an email reply they wrote “I do not know who informed you that it was oil but it was not. The spots that you were seeing on your images were dust. Many rumors and a lot of incorrect information is posted on the internet. The technician that repaired your camera has assured me that it was dust. ” I think it is time to call American express and get my money back for this defectively designed camera and buy something else.

    • Harry

      I sent it in a second time and insisted they replace it with a 610. They said I would get a response within 24-48 business hours. This on Friday afternoon around 1PM. Technically, they have 30 minutes left to respond but I doubt they will 🙂

      • Michael

        Hi Harry, I hope they do the right thing by you, at the moment they have not by me. Keep me in the loupe.

        • Harry

          After my second “repair” and 4000 shots purely under test conditions (one lens, no change). I see the spots in all the same places. Sucks that I have to deal with Nikon again. It is hilarious that the support guy challenged me to “reproduce it again and we will talk of replacement”

  • BobTB

    Only in America , here is how it works for most sane people in the rest of the world.Buy product , product not satisfactory return product for refund or replacement.Not happy with replacement , return it and take refund don’t buy anymore .

    In America skip above steps and go to court with some ludicrous claim { no doubt hoping for cash } about the product “harming” the buyer.Jesus the ambulance chasing legal system in America is an absolute disgrace.

    • Harry

      Sorry if the statement is rude but your point makes no sense. Even now, I am working with Nikon to get a replacement or refund. Problem is, they will not do either.

  • Ed

    I just got this email from one of the law firms collecting info for the lawsuit. If what they say is accurate, it confirms my suspicions. Basically Nikon is NOT really doing anything. I am now on my 4th shutter in my D600 with no final fix. My camera is with Nikon again (5th shutter). After receiving the following email, I am no longer expecting anything to change with respect to the solution offered by their Service Advisory. If they continue to install the same shutter assembly as the original D600 shutter, the problem continues. Either the D610 shutter or a revised D600 shutter is the only way to finally resolve this issue. Below is the text of the email.

    “On February 25, 2014, Nikon released a Technical Service Advisory announcing that Nikon is offering “service” for D600 owners.
    Although Nikon’s
    service includes “inspection, cleaning, and replacement of the shutter
    assembly and related parts of [the] D600 camera,” this is no different
    from the service numerous D600 purchasers have already
    received from Nikon, and unfortunately our investigation concluded that
    such service has failed in most instances to remedy the oil and dust
    spotting problems.
    We applaud Nikon for
    its increased attention to this issue in response to our lawsuit, but
    their offer appears fundamentally insufficient, and the lawsuit will
    continue to move forward on behalf of all D600 purchasers.

    We will keep you updated as the case continues to develop.

    1100 IDS Center, 80 South 8th Street
    Minneapolis, MN 55402 T 612.341.0400”

    • Harry

      yeap, me too.we’ll see how this goes.

  • Osmany Torres

    At the first claim Nikon sent me a ticket for cleaning service, but the camera come back to me with the same problem, they even did a good service…

    I asked for a refund and they told me this is not an option, and offered me just another ticket for service…

    Something has to happen, Nikon should not continue scamming people like that!

  • Back to top