D600 Dust/Oil/Lubricant Issue discussion/Discontinuation and price reductions

lubos

I bought my D600 in November 2012. I have about10000 clicks and never had dust issue. Cleaned three times with a blower and all dust have gone away...so I am uncomprehending that so many have problems.
Excuse my bed english, I am from Sweden

bbarb

@guys, i think our questions will be answered shortly.

If indeed nikon reveals the D610, its more than obvious that the oil dust issue of d600 was so major that it forced them to reveal a brand new model. If it was an easy task to deal with, they would have just brought a fix.
But my personal opinion is that the problem is at the design of the camera at specific parts which is not easy to fix at nikon services around the world.
So in the end i strongly believe that all of the D600s are affected,but due to tollerance of parts, and user requirements and usage, in some cases they havent reveal the problem yet or the problem was hidden behind other unknown and known to us factors.
I really hope that i am wrong, but this is my opinion and i strongly believe it and i think i have good reasons to believe it, since nikon denied me a new d600, with the excuse ''the way you work with the camera you will most likely have the same issue, so there is no point to give you a new d600'', which means they know the problem is there in every single d600.

The terms i used ''the problem is hidden behind known and unknown factors'', just to think out loud, is this:
I consider that the problem is hidden behind known factors when a user shoot wedding for instance, and never see the spots, this means that the spots are there but they are hidden due to user usage. An other example is the backup D600, if they shoot they will have spots, but as long as they dont shoot no spots issue.

The unknown factors i consider all the things we dont know, for instance, tolerance of parts or maybe the issue has to do with enviromental conditions. For example what if the oil that is used in camera and create the spots is affected by temperature. Our friend @lubos from sweden dont have oil spots (thats why using the blower he cleaned his sensor, because it was dust and not oil on his sensor, oil cant be removed with blower) because of the lower temperatures of his country that leads to a high viscosity of the oil used. Me on the other side shooting travel at very warm conditions 35-45 celsius with blue sky, the problem was upsolutely unacceptable.

Of course all these are my thoughts and are speculations but my point is that these known and unknown factors are those that hide the problem for the rest of the D600 users, and this is the reason that they sre forced to move into the D610. (if indeed there is a d610)

Again i really hope i am wrong, because this means that all d600 have the problem, but if this is not the case why nikon move into the d610?

lubos

@bbarb
You have rigt about oil on the sensor, I never had that problem...lucky me
and yes we have a colder climate here in Sweden

donaldejose

As soon as the D610 is out I hope someone takes one apart to identify any different internal parts. That might help provide some insight. I would also hope that Nikon would specify exactly what was changed and why it was changed.

I noticed this posted today from an EU Nikon Support rely to an e-mail inquiry about the D600 dust issue:

"Thank you for your email.

I would like to confirm that currently there are no recognised manufacturing problems with the D600 and D800 bodies. Please note however that all DSLRs are prone to spots appearing on the sensor, either as a result of external dust entering the camera body or (in rare cases) due to shutter lubricant contamination. Even weathersealed DSLRs may be affected by this issue, as zooming and focusing the lens forces air through into the camera body.

Unfortunately I cannot comment on 3rd party polls and reports, however I believe you should not expect this issue to appear with a new D600 or D800 camera in shorter time or with higher intensity than with other DSLR cameras.

Please do not hesitate to contact us again should you require any assistance.

Kind regards,

Nikon Europe Support"

Perhaps the key word is "RECOGNIZED"?

Ade

Or perhaps the key word is "currently". As in, they've just fixed their manufacturing problems yesterday.

Or maybe they've stopped making D600s altogether, so "currently", there is no problem.

Hopefully the new D610 parts were engineered to fit the D600 as well, so those having this oil issue can finally get their cameras permanently fixed.

bbarb

Or perhaps the keyword is "CC rules".
A written Email reply, will never violate the must said rules of a company.
In such occasions i trust more spoken words than written typical by the book emails.
@donaldejose: what were you waiting for?
"Dear customer, yes d600 has spot issues, but we work on it and in a few days, everything will be fine. Thanks for contacting nikon" ???? Lololo,
Dont go far, look what you have already done with their email, already its in front of the whole world threw this site.
Can you imagine what would have happened if they admitted threw an email such a major issue?
Next day all the d600s of the world, would be traveling to nikons HQ and a mass action would have become true and consumers would have start claiming money back, discount for upgraded model etc. etc.
Well, they know the future, of their emails, that is why the replies are and must be typical.
But spoken words, can sometimes deviate the company line.

PB_PM

As soon as the D610 is out I hope someone takes one apart to identify any different internal parts. That might help provide some insight. I would also hope that Nikon would specify exactly what was changed and why it was changed.

I noticed this posted today from an EU Nikon Support rely to an e-mail inquiry about the D600 dust issue:

"Thank you for your email.

I would like to confirm that currently there are no recognised manufacturing problems with the D600 and D800 bodies. Please note however that all DSLRs are prone to spots appearing on the sensor, either as a result of external dust entering the camera body or (in rare cases) due to shutter lubricant contamination. Even weathersealed DSLRs may be affected by this issue, as zooming and focusing the lens forces air through into the camera body.

Unfortunately I cannot comment on 3rd party polls and reports, however I believe you should not expect this issue to appear with a new D600 or D800 camera in shorter time or with higher intensity than with other DSLR cameras.

Please do not hesitate to contact us again should you require any assistance.

Kind regards,

Nikon Europe Support"

Perhaps the key word is "RECOGNIZED"?

Do you work for Nikon or a retailer? Do you get kickbacks (commission on D600s sold)? Why are you trying so hard to cover up this obvious issue that has been widely reported by users, and reviewers?

MikeGunter

Hi all,

In medieval times, scholars discussed how many angels could sit on the head of pin.

My best,

Mike

donaldejose

I do not work for Nikon or any retailer or have any financial interest and am not trying to cover-up anything. I have a D600 and I have written many times about the "dust issue" I discovered and how I dealt with it. I just think the D600 has obtained a bad reputation of having a generic issue when in reality I think it is an minor issue for a small number of D600 bodies and a major issue with a few D600 bodies. I am not alone in holding this opinion as I see other D600 owners say the same thing on other websites. Perhaps when, and if, the D610 arrives we will be able to see what parts are different which could have accounted for the issue.

As far as a lifelong generic dust problem with the camera being so widely assumed to be true I would note that Lens Rentals has 60 D600s. Early on they pulled 20 off the shelf, checked them and concluded 100% of 20 bodies needed cleaning. They did the same thing a few months later and concluded about half needed cleaning after 4 to 5 rentals and the expectation is that at around 10,000 exposures the D600 dust spots will be the same as all their other DSLRs. http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/11/not-surprisingly-d600-dust-issue-gets-better-over-time To my knowledge this is the best data base we have and it mirrors my own experience. Their conclusion "So it looks like the problem is going to be something you see early in ownership that clears up over time." also mirrors my opinion.

As of today lensrentals website still carries this warning about the D600.
"Please Note We are seeing a lot of dust issues with D600 sensors We will clean the sensor right before the camera leaves, but since the cause appears to be shutter movement, dust may reoccur during the first shot. If you shoot stopped down (f/8 or smaller aperture) this may not be the best camera choice." They posted this warning early on and have not yet removed it.

I did e-mail Roger to see if he had done any follow up on that article and he reported: "I asked the outgoing techs who do the cleaning and they said now the D600s 'are a bit more dusty, but not awful' compared to other cameras. That may just be that they expect to see more dust in them so they do.
All I can really say is the dust problem seems to be minimal after 5k shots or so. It's very possible that the newer bodies have lest dust from the start, but we haven't had much D600 demand this year so we haven't bought very many new ones."

To the best of my knowledge what I say is an objective statement of the issue.

tc88

We see less than 1,000 people complaining which suggests more like a 1% failure rate.

To the best of my knowledge what I say is an objective statement of the issue.

I'm going to beat this dead horse issue one final time.

You kept on repeating that 1% rate several times, even after being pointed out that your logic is purely spin logic and totally flawed.

I would say most objective people reading that 1% you provided and the other data points such as from the LensRentals will agree that they paint two totally different pictures.

donaldejose

You are correct. They do paint two entirely different pictures. The lens rental data is which I would call real hard data and it the best I know of. But it does not prove a generic issue which will not resolve itself with repeat cleanings and It mirrors my personal experience. The other numbers (how many units sold compared to how many people complain of a serious issue) is not data. It is just estimate and speculation. Why the difference? Because lens rentals actually looked closely at 20 early D600 production sensors and once again later at 20 sensors which have seen 4 or 5 rentals while in normal use people don't look that closely. A lot of people may have spots on their D600 (as we all have some spots on all our sensors) without realizing it because they shoot at f5.6 and simply have not looked closely. But then, if the spots were so terribly huge and so terribly many, you would think even normal people shooting at f5.6 would notice them and post more complaints. So the really serious issue may be much smaller than the mere presence of more spots than normal. In a sense I suggest there are three issues: 1. a terrible issue of lots of big spots every 100 or so shots after repeated cleanings. This may be a very small number of D600s. 2. a more moderate issue of excess spots which do clear up after a few cleanings and 10,000 exposures. This may be a large number of D600s but it also is quite manageable. 3 and then those D600 bodies which may have some spots but they are too few or too small for users to notice in normal use. This may be true for the tens of thousands of D600s in use for which no complaints are made.

A few D600 bodies clearly fall into category 1 as has been reported by some owners. LensRentals 20 bodies and my body clearly fall into category 2. Perhaps more than 90+% of D600s now sold may fall into category 3; we just don't know. That 90+ percentage number is not spin or flawed, it is just speculation since we don't have good data. My point as always been that it is a logical error to simply assume all D600 bodies fall into category 1 because a few of them do since so many clearly do not.

tc88

donaldjose, here is what I already pointed out to you before. If your logic holds water, then you should also argue the good rate is only 1% and fail rate is 99% since there are probably less than 500 reports that the camera doesn't have the issue.

bbarb

@donaldjose, you want so much to see an almost empty glass of water as full, that in the end you indeed see it as full. But i think you forget something, you paid this camera with your hard earned money, why compromise? Indians say where is smoke, fire is around, and they are 99% of the times correct.
Please be so kind and reply to this question.
If nikon says we have a fix for the d600, those of you that have an issue visit a local store and free of charge you will get the fix, are you going to send your camera, or not? My point is do you consider that you have an issue in your d600 or not? I bet that from all those stating that they don't have dust issue, 100% of them will go for the fix. What do you think?
@tc88, although your point is very clear to me and i completely agree with you , we must also keep in mind that a product that meets the requirements don't get so many positive reports, as much as when a product gets negative reports when it doesn't meet the requirements. People are good on accusing a product while the are not good at compliment. Which is normal because when you pay something you also demand from it to do what its supposed to do.

donaldejose

tc88: One can think anyway one wants but not all ways of thinking are equally valid. There is logic and illogic. People without problems are not going to take the initiative to post that they don't have problems. We don't have a thread with many postings that the D4 doesn't have a dust problem, do we? Or a thread that the D3 doesn't have a dust problem. Does the lack of such threads and postings "prove" that the D4 and the D3 all have dust problems? No, that is illogical thinking. People without a specific problem are not going to be posting in huge numbers that they do not have a problem which they do not have. People with a specific problem which upsets them are far more likely to post complaining about it. The absence of a public statement that a certain negative situation does not exist is not proof that the negative situation does exist. It is more logical to assume people who don't post don't have a problem. If a married person does not take the initiative to publicly proclaim that they do not cheat on their spouse we cannot logically conclude they must be a cheater simply because they did not publish a statement that they are not. It may simply not be an issue for them and they may feel no need to claim they have not done something they did not do. A post complaining about a problem is some evidence of a problem. The lack of a posting disavowing any problem is not evidence that a problem must exist. It is far more likely that those who don't post have nothing to complain about.

bbarb: I am very sorry for and sympathetic to your situation. If Nikon says they have a "fix" and will do it free on my camera whether or not I would send it in depends upon the "fix." If the fix is to clean the sensor I would not send it in because I have done that myself and it seems to have solved the problem. I see no reason to send my camera in for a cleaning or a deep cleaning or something like that. And as you know, that is what I think the problem is: some dirt or grindings on an inadequately cleaned part in some of the D600s along with some excess lube spraying off the mirror mechanism in some D600s. Perhaps I am wrong. If Nikon stated that a part was defective, would be spraying dust and lube over the life of the camera and can be replaced of course I would send mine in for that replacement. So far I have seen lots of what looks like cleanings and no real proof of any defective part needing replacement. Perhaps the D610 will show us which part, if any, Nikon replaced.

tc88

donaldejose, the reason your 1% fail rate argument is called spin is because you conveniently classified anyone who's not publically disagreeing with you to be agreeing with you which is totally false logic.

While there may be some truth that people are less likely to give compliment than complain, a lot of times people don't bother complaining either. I have returned a few defective items to Amazon, some were dead within a few minutes of usage. I haven't wrote any reviews since there are already same reports there and I'm not emotionally involved to bother with.

If your logic really holds water, you should suggest to retailers that all buyers who haven't complained should be counted as a 5 in the product review, and I bet many products will get much higher ratings. Unfortunately, I don't think even the most unscrupulous retailers dare to take such an approach.

heartyfisher

LOL ! quote from one of my fav shows, any guesses which? ( be specific !) "My logic was not in error but I was."

I think @donaldjose is just pointing out that the data available to us does not point to the D600 being a totally flawed camera that should be wiped off the face of the planet! which seemed to be the sentiment and direction this thread was going. I belief he has leaned way more the other way, than he himself believes truly is the case, to provide some "balance" in this thread. For me, I prefer to round up the posse and lynch the D600. Much more fun don't you think? ( PS I am getting my funds ready to get a Firesale D600 ! :-) Yay ! )

tc88

I think most people are perfectly happy to hear donaldejose's case. It's only when he tries to generalize that to 99% situation, people want to get it "rebalanced".

donaldejose

heartyfisher: Yes, you understand. I do tend to want to stand up to the "lynch mob" mentality. Surely some D600s have been terrible, but just as surely not all have been terrible and some seem to have had no problem at all. Someone should be saying those positive things and not just getting all caught up in "lynch mob" emotion. By the way, I don't think I said 99% success definitely was the case. I think I phrased it one could argue that less than 1% of the buyers have posted about having serious problems so the camera could be considered 99% successful in the buyer's eyes. Just an argument one could make that the number of serious complaints are really very few compared to the number of bodies sold.

I see the D600 is now down to around $1,900. I do remember the original rumor was $1,500 which was claimed by many to be impossible for an FX sensor. Maybe we will get close to $1,500 for factory reconditioned D600s. Wouldn't it be ironic if history counted the D600 as a great camera that too many people didn't buy because they were mislead by an overblown internet rumor mill?

bbarb

I think @donaldjose is just pointing out that the data available to us does not point to the D600 being a totally flawed camera that should be wiped off the face of the planet!

@heartyfisher, well it depends on what you consider as data. If you consider as available data to us the rumor of the d610, then nikon is the one who wants to wipe the d600 off the planet. Lololol
So again, if nikon indeed reveals the d610 thats a final proof of the actual situation of the d600.
Nice quote, lololololo whats the show, i don know it.

@donaldejose, yes it would be ironic, but again were there is smoke there is always a fire around. By the way in the history of the industrial era we leave in, how many times have you seen an overblown rumor destroying an excellent product. I am sure there are cases in the history, but not so many to start believing that this is our case.

spraynpray

I can't believe I only just saw this on the Nikon UK support site:

To users of the Nikon D600 digital SLR camera

Thank you for choosing Nikon for your photographic needs.

Some users have indicated the appearance of multiple granular dust spots in images captured with the Nikon D600 digital-SLR camera. These granular dust spots are reflections of internal dust generated with camera operation, or external dust particles that have found their way into the camera, either, or both of which, have adhered to the camera's low-pass filter.

While the structure and concept of digital-SLR cameras makes the complete elimination of these dust spots very difficult, it has come to our attention that, in some rare cases, they may be reflected noticeably in images. Therefore, Nikon is informing users of a service to reduce this issue.

Resolution
As a first step, please follow the guidance from the User’s Manual (pages 301-305) related to the “Clean Image Sensor” function and manual cleaning using a blower. If these measures do not remove all dust particles and you are still experiencing problems, then please consult your nearest Nikon service center. They will keep your camera, examine it thoroughly, and service it as needed.

Requesting service
Please direct inquiries regarding this matter to your nearest Image Nikon service center.

We hope that you will continue to choose Nikon for your photographic needs.
Article No : 55647 Date published 22/02/2013
Date last updated 09/09/2013

-------------------------------------

Now that doesn't read like an article denying there is a problem, and certainly something I haven't seen for any model before the D600.....

bbarb

@spraynpray, am i missing something or what???

dont you know that nikon has already accepted that there is an issue with D600??
Its posted a long time already.

Dont you remember my story, even before i buy my D600 (about 3-4 months ago) this statement was live, and i contacted local nikon to reassure me that they have a fix, remember???

but what is the update ot 9/9/13 about??
anyone can help on that???

spraynpray

Yes @bbarb - the update was my point. They updated it with the information specific to the D600's real world problem. Before that it was just the non-committal 'you always get dust, set it to clean itself or return it for cleaning' type of approach.

[Deleted User]

@spraynpray You read this only now, we had a discussion on this forum about this statement month ago. I was very happy to read this in februari , because my D600 problem should be solved. Therefore I brought my D600 direct to the service center at that time, the rest is history, you can read everything in my earlier posts.

I wrote that I was an idiot to buy the D600, not anymore now because it is an incredible camera, with a dynamic range beyond imagination. I don't sell my camera's, due to the second hand price I can get. For example my D300 was 1150.- euro 5 years ago and now I can sell it for 250.-, so I keep it as spare. Further I don't live far from a Nikon service center, where I was two times with my D600, the first time they repaired it and the second time they checked and cleaned it for me, zero cost. OK the shrink, that was the expensive part

If you are in the same circumstances like me and you can stand the pressure........

Oh @Sato Bring your D600 to the service center, they fix it for you.

spraynpray

Good to hear from you Ton, and good to hear your D600 is still clean and you are loving it. Can't wait for the fire-sale....

bbarb

maybe i am wrong, but i think, that from the begining it was for the D600 body.
I think the update has to do with the reflections staff, but i am not sure.