Where to get parts for a Nikon D5000 SLR, with DX VR: AF-S Nikkor

In article , tony cooper
wrote:

There are three basic causes for lens damage:

1. Dropping the lens or the whole. A protective filter offers
absolutely no protection from drops unless the contact point is
directly to the lens.

which it can easily be.

2. Bumping the camera with lens attached. When you have the camera
strap around your neck, and the camera swings around, it can bump into
things. Again, unless the contact point is directly to lens, a filter
does no good at all.

and if it is the front element, then it does.

3. Sand, and other debris, getting on the lens and causing scratches
if the lens is cleaned improperly. A filter stops this, but the
filter is damaged if cleaned improperly. Filters aren't free.

neither are lenses. it's a whole lot better to replace a $10 filter
than a $100 lens (in this case).

4. the lens cap comes off inside the camera bag and scratches nearby
glass. this happened to me. fortunately, i had a filter and only had to
replace the filter.

The better solutions are the use of your lens cap when you aren't
actually shooting and the use of a lens hood at all times.

true, but that has nothing to do with using a filter. both a lens cap
and a hood can be used with filters.

The lens hood acts as a bumper, so incidents in #1 and #2 are far less
likely to result in lens damage when the contact point is the directly
towards the lens. It doesn't guarantee the lens won't be damaged, but
it significantly reduces the chances. Significantly.

I prefer the rubber lens hoods instead of the rigid plastic or metal
hoods. The rubber lens hoods can be rolled back instead of removed to
fit the camera in your bag or when the hood creates a shadow when the
built-in flash is used.

the rigid hoods flip around so there's no issue in fitting in a camera
bag. they are also more effective since they're built for a specific
lens and the aspect ratio of the sensor. rubber hoods are generic.

as for shadows, learn how to properly use flash and you won't get a
shadow.

There's an argument that cheaper filters degrade the image, but I'm
not going to get into that. It's not a proven thing either way.

it is definitely proven, but if you can't see the difference then you
don't need to buy expensive filters.

Make your own decision, though.

that's the only good advice you've given.

In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote:

In fact though, the higher priced filters *are* better!

usually they are, and priced accordingly. not always though.

In article , Bruce
wrote:

don't get cheap filters. get a multi-coated one, at a minimum.

Where would you get a multi-coated filter and ... what would it do for me
when all I want to do is protect the lens?

You need a Nikon NC filter. It is colourless, multi-coated and will
provide the protection you need.

no he doesn't. there are better and less expensive options.

"Arklin K." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 16:29:26 -0700, nospam wrote:

don't get cheap filters. get a multi-coated one, at a minimum.

Where would you get a multi-coated filter and ... what would it do for me
when all I want to do is protect the lens?

The "where" answer is any reputable camera store, either local or online.
The why is a bit trickier: When you look through your living room window at
the street outside, you may see reflections or glare, depending on lighting,
angle of view, etc. The coating reduces or eliminates this.
Many people use a UV or Skylight filter on their lens all the time. These
filters are fairly inexpensive.

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 06:56:38 +0000, Arklin K. wrote:

I'll call Nikon tomorrow first and report back what they say.

It was a looooooong wait! I've been on for almost an hour!
And I'm still waiting!

My battery is running low on my laptop - so - I'm going to post where I
left off while on (seemingly permanent) hold with Nikon ...

Nikon Support/Service/Repair: www.nikonusa.com (click on 'service')
5AM-9PM Mon-Sun Pacific, 800-Nikon-US, 800-645-6687

Amazingly, this is the "correct" sequence at the 800 number:
a) x1 = US
b) x5 = Repairs (or press x3 for lenses)
c) x5 = Parts (or press x0 for a representative)
d) x2 = Representative
e) x1 = Parts (FAX = 310-322-6979)

Nikon Parts direct number:
7AM-3PM Mon-Fri Pacific, 310-414-8107

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 09:59:43 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

Something's wrong with that statement. If you are buying new products,
the store is not the cause of damage within a few months. You are.

Hi Tony,

I was remiss in not mentioning that this store only sells used equipment.
And, that I didn't drop the equipment. They sold me a 400mm lens which
started making noises as I focused just about a month after I bought it.
I should have brought it back then, but I wasn't sure what the problem
was. Then, it broke altogether. Similar thing happened with a used flash
unit. I concluded that buying from that store was a waste, especially
since they offer no return - just credit, and even then, only within 30
days.

But, they are in no way responsible for a
product breaking in use.

I agree. It's my fault for buying from them. That's why I don't go there
anymore. You'd do the same.

It wouldn't make any difference where you
bought the product.

That's true. If it's going to break because it was badly repaired (e.g.,
if it was glued together), then it's gonna break no matter whom we bought
it from.

That's why I prefer to do my own repairs!
WHich is why I'm asking you for advice!

I think you mentioned that this is your third damaged lens. You can't
blame that on the store. Especially not the current damage. You
dropped the camera. You.

Of course. My fault, actually, is in buying a "plastic" Nikon D5000.

I've had the D3000 and the D5000, and I take pictures every single day. I
take pictures of people. And, people 'do stuff'. I take it hiking, I take
it biking, I take it to school. I take it to work.

It gets dropped. It's just what happens. This time, I was working on my
car, fixing a part, and the camera bumped against something and fell
about a foot onto hard garage concrete.

I do agree ... it's my fault (I don't think I ever said it wasn't).

But that doesn't negate the desire to 'fix' the camera.

All I'm asking for is help in finding the exploded diagram.
Note: I would think you guys do this all the time.

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 09:04:56 -0700, nospam wrote:

all that says is that independent stores can no longer buy parts
directly from nikon. that doesn't mean they can't get parts in other
ways.

I called Nikon. They 'do' sell parts to individuals. I'm still on the
line with them (it has been about an hour or so ... as I wasn't
counting) ... but they 'do' sell parts!

Yippee! They are transferring me now ... I'll write back with details!

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 09:12:26 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

These kit lenses have a plastic part that joins the lens and the body.
Nikon's more expensive lenses have metal part there.

I'm with you on that! It's my fault for buying a camera that has a
plastic part. I'm still on the phone with Nikon right now, and they
haven't yet found an 'exploded diagram' so they're still identifying the
part number from my description alone.

Sheesh. You'd think they could just refer me to a parts diagram online so
I could point to the part just like every other company in the world does!

I'm amazed. How are you supposed to order parts (which they do sell to
individuals) without having a parts diagram???

try
to remove that part from your present lens. You'll see the problem. The
screws come out, but there are two other places where the part is
attached,

The support person I first got told me that the three screws do come out
and that the part is a "bayonet mount" and it's the most common part they
sell. They said there are three different ones for that lens, and that
the "VR" is critical to tell them to get the right part.

He said there is a ribbon that is attached to the "bayonet mount" which
you have to be delicate with. He too said he had an exploded parts
diagram but that Nikon wants to only sell new equipment and thereofre
doesn't offer the exploded diagram to anyone, not even the dealers (he
said).

I can't believe a reputable company on this planet doesn't provide parts
diagrams ... so I asked for a supervisor. I'm on hold ... as we type.

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 09:04:54 -0700, nospam wrote:

it's a cheap lens. sell it on ebay

You can sell a broken lens on ebay?

I never would have thought of that.

On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 21:56:41 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote:

The filter comes in packaging. Even if _no_ filter is included in the
packaging it still costs $XXX to get the _packaging_ to the point of
sale. Adding the filter doesn't add that much to the total cost.

It's a Costco camera set. It was probably around $1,000 when I bought the
package. It came with the camera, two lenses, and a case.

No filter.

I just can't comprehend spending $150 for a lens (which is technically a
complicated thing) and then spending 20% for a piece of glass to screw on
the front.

Anyway, that's 'my problem' ...

One question: How did you guys know it was a 52mm filter size?
(I don't see that in the specifications for the lens.)