A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 12th 13, 08:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:04:08 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

What else could it be?


Anynumber of 1,000 things inside a very complex device. To assume it's
the frame material is ridiculous.

Still paranoid, eh?
  #2  
Old March 13th 13, 09:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 22,082
Default Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!

In article
,
RichA wrote:

What else could it be?


Anynumber of 1,000 things inside a very complex device. To assume it's
the frame material is ridiculous.

Still paranoid, eh?


We don't really know, do we?


you certainly don't.

If it's residual debris from unclean
assembly, then Nikon looks bad. If it's an ongoing shedding of dust
and pieces due to wear of ill-fitting mechanism parts, Nikon looks
bad. If it's some kind of lubricant that being flung around because
of over-lubricating or poor design, Nikon looks bad.
So tell us what you think it is?


it's not because they chose plastic.
  #3  
Old March 14th 13, 03:00 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:11:06 -0700 (PDT), RichA wrote:
: On Mar 12, 2:28*pm, Bowser wrote:
: On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:04:08 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: wrote:
:
: What else could it be?
:
: Anynumber of 1,000 things inside a very complex device. To assume it's
: the frame material is ridiculous.
:
: Still paranoid, eh?
:
: We don't really know, do we? If it's residual debris from unclean
: assembly, then Nikon looks bad. If it's an ongoing shedding of dust
: and pieces due to wear of ill-fitting mechanism parts, Nikon looks
: bad. If it's some kind of lubricant that being flung around because
: of over-lubricating or poor design, Nikon looks bad.
: So tell us what you think it is?

I think it's Canon looking less bad.

Bob
  #4  
Old March 15th 13, 12:05 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:11:06 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On Mar 12, 2:28*pm, Bowser wrote:
On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:04:08 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

What else could it be?


Anynumber of 1,000 things inside a very complex device. To assume it's
the frame material is ridiculous.

Still paranoid, eh?


We don't really know, do we? If it's residual debris from unclean
assembly, then Nikon looks bad. If it's an ongoing shedding of dust
and pieces due to wear of ill-fitting mechanism parts, Nikon looks
bad. If it's some kind of lubricant that being flung around because
of over-lubricating or poor design, Nikon looks bad.
So tell us what you think it is?


I have no idea, but I won't assume that it's due to any specific
material. Why jump to conclusions?

Nikon already looks bad, regardless of the cause. Both of their new FF
bodies have issues, and they can't seem to solve them. I'll stick with
my GH3.
  #5  
Old March 15th 13, 12:06 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 22:00:46 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:11:06 -0700 (PDT), RichA wrote:
: On Mar 12, 2:28*pm, Bowser wrote:
: On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:04:08 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: wrote:
:
: What else could it be?
:
: Anynumber of 1,000 things inside a very complex device. To assume it's
: the frame material is ridiculous.
:
: Still paranoid, eh?
:
: We don't really know, do we? If it's residual debris from unclean
: assembly, then Nikon looks bad. If it's an ongoing shedding of dust
: and pieces due to wear of ill-fitting mechanism parts, Nikon looks
: bad. If it's some kind of lubricant that being flung around because
: of over-lubricating or poor design, Nikon looks bad.
: So tell us what you think it is?

I think it's Canon looking less bad.


Well, we all know Canons are better, don't we?

;-)
  #6  
Old March 15th 13, 12:33 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Wolfgang Weisselberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,285
Default Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside!

Bowser wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 22:00:46 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:


I think it's Canon looking less bad.


Well, we all know Canons are better, don't we?


Better for whom, better according to which standard and and
better by what margin?

;-)


:-

-Wolfgang
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cheap PLASTIC used in D600 is "shedding" all over the inside! nospam Digital SLR Cameras 1 March 12th 13 06:07 PM
Nikon offers "service" for its dirty D600 Me Digital SLR Cameras 0 February 22nd 13 09:25 PM
Now that "hybrid aspheres" are avail, where's the cheap "NoctNikkors?" Alan Browne Digital SLR Cameras 6 June 5th 08 12:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.