To Import or Not?

[Chris Nuzzaco]

Ok, I'm trying to upgrade to a D700 pronto for my commercial photography work, but its just a wee bit too much to swallow for the next few months. The problem is, I really need an upgrade now, as the images I'm producing have a shelf life of several years, and I squirm at the idea of producing yet another 800 images that are essentially "handicapped" because of the camera they originated on. So, with that said, here's the question...

Would you buy an Import camera to save as much as $600? Personally, I've always stayed away from them because of the whole warranty issue. Just curious to hear what others think. I'll most likely just grip and grin, or *gasp* shoot a wedding to make the extra dough, till I get a non-import cam... even if it kills me :(

[jimhare]

Hey Chris,

I used to do this a lot, but got burnt by the warranty thing. Ended up paying the difference in repair bills... In a sense it was okay as I was even, or maybe still a bit ahead, but it was a bad experience and I didn't enjoy it.

In Australia, there are quite a few grey importers who offer their own warranty. Some of these are actually reputable companies that have been around for a long time. Maybe try to find one of these in the U.S.?

I now tend to only import lenses, which often have international warranties, but just try to find the best local deal on a body.

So on one had it's worth the risk as if you do have to pay for a repair, it might only cost as much as a local one, and chances are you won't have to repair it.

In the end, up to your comfort level.

Hope this helps.

Jim

[Stephen Williams]

I always thought the Nikon warranty was worldwide.

[jimhare]

Lenses only I think, same as Canon.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

Thanks for detailing your experience! Now that I think about it, the warranty might actually NOT matter that much. Here's why:

User negligence.

I'll have to search deeper, but from what I recall, almost any warranty for a camera has a clause stipulating that if you do something stupid to harm it, the warranty doesn't cover it. For example, a dropped camera is typically not covered (they call it "impact damage"). So unless you can fool them, they'll still make you pay. It only seems to cover factory defects, or internal wear and tear you can't really control.

Makes me think....... humm.

[J. Bernard Vallon]

Thanks for detailing your experience! Now that I think about it, the warranty might actually NOT matter that much. Here's why:

User negligence.



I disagree. I've seen some users do some pretty stupid things to there cameras and have the warranty still replace the damaged gear. I knew a photographer who destroyed his shutter cleaning the sensor because he didnt use the 'cleaning mode'. Warranty replaced it. Keep a good relationship with a local pro-retailer, like service photo in Baltimore or Calumet in phili and they'll help you out when you need it.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

I disagree. I've seen some users do some pretty stupid things to there cameras and have the warranty still replace the damaged gear. I knew a photographer who destroyed his shutter cleaning the sensor because he didnt use the 'cleaning mode'. Warranty replaced it. Keep a good relationship with a local pro-retailer, like service photo in Baltimore or Calumet in phili and they'll help you out when you need it.

Yep, I'm aware of that. My Nikon 85mm prime lens fell out of a fellow redusers car one day :pinch: (long story) and that totally doesn't qualify for warranty, BUT, my dealer got it threw still. Probably didn't hurt that my lens had zero scuffs on it. My big question though is this, will I always get lucky with things being covered like that? I dunno. The guy who sent it in wasn't sure that it would actually get accepted, so I gambled $25 to find out. I won that time, at least.

[J. Bernard Vallon]

For a situation like that, I'd probably rely on my operator's insurance. I have very good insurance from CBIZ in cumberland. they cover all my gear anywhere in the world except for being afloat, and acts of war. The 85mm might be under the deductible, but its still good for my piece of mind.

Eva over there is awesome.

[Rob Castiglione]

I have been in this situation and I kind of use a "financial pain threshold test".

It is based on the following logic. The very reason that you are considering going grey market is financial (totally legitimate). However, that is also your essential vulnerability in buying grey market - you could suffer a big financial hit if things go wrong (a very real possibility with electronic gear).

I am prepared to go grey market on items say upto say $1,000 but not over - that is my threshold. I am prepared to accept the worst case scenario - total loss of the $1,000.

Of course, your threshold might be different from mine.

Cheers