Response from Nikon on their ****-take upgrade to D3.

Dave wrote:

Thank you for contacting Nikon Support. The upgrade has not been
implemented in D3 cameras before because mainboards with extended buffer
was not yet available. However it will not be installed in new cameras
by default either - it will be an optional upgrade only.

The upgrade does not consist on just RAM unit replacement - actually the
buffer unit cannot be unsoldered and soldered back in the service centre
and therefore the whole mainboard has to be replaced. This also adds a
significant cost of labour to the cost of part alone.

Perfectly legitimate explanation for the upgrade cost but not for why
they don't just include it in the new models and charge $50 more.
Perhaps they've already got a bunch built and when those are used up
they'll start with a D3x.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:03:27 -0700, Paul Furman wrote:

Perfectly legitimate explanation for the upgrade cost but not for why
they don't just include it in the new models and charge $50 more.
Perhaps they've already got a bunch built and when those are used up
they'll start with a D3x.

Possibly, but the new, higher density chips may be much more
expensive per GB. The high price may also be to discourage D3
owners from upgrading unless they really could use the extra buffer
memory. If all D3 owners want to upgrade, Nikon might have to hire
many extra technicians in order to be able to return the upgraded
cameras in a timely manner.

I agree fully with Waddling Eagle.

Having worked in the high tech sector for 30 years, Nikon's response was a
reasoned and professional reply to a whiny, immature, profane and spelling
error-ridden childish tantrum by "Dave".

Get over it, Dave, and go buy Canon if you're so darned upset.

Besides, who really "needs" this memory upgrade? For heaven's sake, I can
already shoot 52 or so Large/Fine JPG's in a single burst. Who NEEDS more
than that? Only a very inexperienced shooter just blasting away and
"hoping" to get a good shot. I call it the "machine gun approach" to
photography. Certainly noting Atget, Adams, Steiglitz or Weston would have
ever done. Or needed to. Then again, "Dave" probably has never even heard
of these photographers... s





"C J Campbell" wrote in message
news:2008081307243175249-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...
On 2008-08-13 00:16:47 -0700, Dave said:

I sent the following to Nikon about the D3 Buffer Memory Expansion
option. Their response is below. I know there were a few spelling errors
in my original post, but I've copied exactly what I sent them, and their
response.

************** SENT TO NIKON *****************

Subject: Why are Nkin taking the **** over the D3 upgrade?

I'd just like to make that point that I feel Nikon are being very unfair
in charging for "D3 buffer memory expansion".

After paying this much for a camera, I think Nilon should have put the
extra RAM in before shipping it. Memory is not that expensive these days.

I gather in the US this is $499/ I've not seen a UK price from Nkon, but
I've seen in Amateur Photographer this is £352 pounds, which is about 45%
more. This is really is taking the pee.

IMHO Nikon should offer this free. Doing it in order of serial number, so
those that bought the D3's first get upgraded first. I only bought my D3
last week, so I would be almost last on the list, but I think Nilon
should do this free. Not take the mic out of people who have paid good
money for a camera.

So I have three questions.

1) Is there any good reason the D3 was not shipped with this.

2) Is there any good reason Nikon and charging so much for a couple of GB
of RAM in the USA?

3) Is there any good reason Nikon charge so much more in the UK than in
the US?

I can see how you will irritate a lot of processional photographers with
this.

Dave


****** Response from Nikon Europe Support. ******

Subject: Why are Nkin taking the **** over the D3 upgrade?

Dear David,

Thank you for contacting Nikon Support. The upgrade has not been
implemented in D3 cameras before because mainboards with extended buffer
was not yet available. However it will not be installed in new cameras by
default either - it will be an optional upgrade only.

The upgrade does not consist on just RAM unit replacement - actually the
buffer unit cannot be unsoldered and soldered back in the service centre
and therefore the whole mainboard has to be replaced. This also adds a
significant cost of labour to the cost of part alone.

You can find more details on D3 buffer expansion in the link below:

Title: D3 Buffer Memory Expansion Service
URL:
https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/...ted=1216726798

In

regards to your third question, unfortunately I am not qualified to
comment on Nikon's financial strategy and economic environment.

If you require any further assistance, please update your incident and I
will be happy to help you.


Kind Regards,

Aleksander Nowak
Nikon UK Professional Support
www.europe-nikon.com/support





Gee. You wrote an incredibly rude and profane letter full of spelling and
grammatical errors and got a polite and reasonable response. Good for
Nikon.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Chris H wrote:
In message , Dave writes
I sent the following to Nikon about the D3 Buffer Memory Expansion
option. Their response is below. I know there were a few spelling
errors in my original post, but I've copied exactly what I sent them,
and their response.


Part of the problem may be the availability of memory chips. When the
camera was initially designed (2 years ago?) they fitted the largest
ones that were practical. 18 months on the capacity of parts that
physical size and power consumption may have doubled.

Just look at the size and cost of PC memory? 1GB strips now cost less
than 256Mb strips did. My first 50 Mb hard drive cost twice the 500
Gbyte Serial ATA I bought last month.

The problem is the new memory devices may not fit the old main board.
There will almost certainly be a new pin out. Try fitting a serial ATA
drive to an IDE connector.



When I bought my current camera, I bought two 128 meg SD cards for $45
each. This morning I saw 4GB SD cards for $19.99! Now if gasoline
would just do that!

Ron Hunter wrote:
Now if gasoline would just do that!

You can halve it instantly. Get a car with 2x gas mileage.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
news


When I bought my current camera, I bought two 128 meg SD cards for $45
each. This morning I saw 4GB SD cards for $19.99! Now if gasoline would
just do that!

Gas regular gas here in Houston is running $3.60 on average.

ASAAR wrote:
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:03:27 -0700, Paul Furman wrote:

Perfectly legitimate explanation for the upgrade cost but not for why
they don't just include it in the new models and charge $50 more.
Perhaps they've already got a bunch built and when those are used up
they'll start with a D3x.

Possibly, but the new, higher density chips may be much more
expensive per GB. The high price may also be to discourage D3
owners from upgrading unless they really could use the extra buffer
memory. If all D3 owners want to upgrade, Nikon might have to hire
many extra technicians in order to be able to return the upgraded
cameras in a timely manner.

I don't believe the higher density chips are an issue. See below.



I read somewhere on rec.photo.digital there is extra 2 GB of memory, but
I suspect it is less than that.

Looking at

http://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/c...ted=1216726798

one sees the memory upgrade increases the number of images before the
buffer fills from 16 to 36 if you save images in the NEF 14-bit
uncompressed format. That is an extra 20 images. According to the D3
manual, the size of such images is 24.7 MB. So to hold an extra 20
images of 24.7 MB one would need an extra

20 * 24.7 = 494 MB.

I chose the uncompressed RAW file, since one knows the size will not
change, unlike a JPEG, or RAW lossless compressed file, where the size
would depend on the image content.

Picking the smaller 12-bit uncompressed, which has an image size of 18.8
MB, the upgrade will increase the number in the buffer from 17 to 38,
which is an extra 21 shots


21 * 18.8 = 394.8 MB.


Taking a 3rd example, of medium sized TIFF files, the upgrade increases
the buffer from 19 to 42 shots, which is an increase of 23. The sizes of
these are 20.7 MB.

23 * 20.7 = 476.1 MB.

I'm not sure why these figures differ quite as much, but I very much
doubt the extra memory needed is as much as 2 GB, as someone said here.
More like 512 MB.

There is no doubt some overhead in memory moving data around, but that
overhead would be included in the basic camera. I don't actually believe
any more overhead would be incurred.


The next thing I thought of is how fast does the memory need to be? The
largest amount of data one can save is the large TIFF file at 35.9 MB.
(You can save RAW and JPEG at the same time, but that is still smaller
than the single TIFF file). At a maximum frame rate of 9 frames per
second, that is

9 * 35.9 = 323.1 MB/s

Looking at

http://www.crucial.com/support/memory_speeds.aspx

one finds the *maximum* transfer rates of say PC-1600 ram is 1600 MB/s,
and for the DDR400 (PC-3200) it is 3200 MB/s. So whilst I accept those
are maximum figures, it suggests to me the memory is nothing too special
- just cheap PC memory would do.

So IF my calculations are correct (and of course I have no inside
knowledge), Nikon decided to not put 512 MB of cheap PC memory in the
camera, but rather make that an optional extra for which the camera
would need to be returned.

These sizes and speeds of memory have been available a long time, so I
don't think availability of chips would have been an issue myself.

As I say, I'm only making educated guesses here, but without detailed
technical information, that is the best one can do.

Alan Browne wrote:

Ron Hunter wrote:

[snipped data restored:]

When I bought my current camera, I bought two 128 meg SD cards for $45
each. This morning I saw 4GB SD cards for $19.99! Now if gasoline
would just do that!

[end restore]

Now if gasoline would just do that!

You can halve it instantly. Get a car with 2x gas mileage.

128MB for $45 is more than 32x the cost per unit of capacity as is
4,000MB for $20.

32x is a long way from 2x


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

On 8/13/08 5:48 PM, in article ,
"mj" wrote:


"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
news


When I bought my current camera, I bought two 128 meg SD cards for $45
each. This morning I saw 4GB SD cards for $19.99! Now if gasoline would
just do that!

Gas regular gas here in Houston is running $3.60 on average.


Except for the Gas War on Eldridge @ FM 525 where it got down to ~ $2.20
yesterday!

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:30:21 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-08-13 00:16:47 -0700, Dave said:

in the US?

I can see how you will irritate a lot of processional photographers
with this.

The assistants who have to snap walking backwards as the B+G leave the
building.

Wouldn't that be "recessional"?
--
John