D750 - What it doesn't come with that makes me...

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I just got off the phone with Nikon Customer Service after a rather unhelpful call with a very non-talkative counter person at B&H. It went something like this...

Me (from this point on in Italics): Hello, I just received my brand new D750, and I had to call because when I opened it I could not find the hot shoe protector. Now this may be a ridiculous question, but is it even possible that Nikon is no longer shipping cameras with that piece? I mean, I've purchased 5 new Nikon bodies in the last 5 years and every one has come with one.

CS Rep: I appreciate your wanting to know that... (verifies all sorts of personal information to make sure she can log the call) ... Do you mind if I place you on hold for a few minutes and research that question?

Not at all. Do what you have to do.

(annoying music plays for 2 minutes)

Sir?

Yes!!

OK, I was able to confirm that Nikon does not include the hot shoe protector with the D750. But if you'd like I can email you a link to our site where you can purchase one for two dollars.

(chuckling) Really?! No, don't bother sending me a link. I had a feeling you were going to tell me this. I just find it beyond absurd that Nikon has decided that a $2300 camera doesn't deserve to be shipped with a $2 piece of protective plastic. I've got to assume this is a recent development, because the D610 I received just last week has one. In fact, I'm staring at six of them now. But you're telling me that in order for me to put one on this 7th body I'm going to need to spend another two dollars?

Yes sir. I understand why you might think this is strange, but I've been told that this is how Nikon ships the D750. Is there anything else I can do for you?

Um, yes. In your logging of this incident can you please express my utter contempt for this decision, and please include within that response an address, email or snail, for someone specific at the highest humanly accessible level to whom I can express my utter disdain for this decision in written form?

Well, I can certainly include an address in my notes for you.

I would greatly appreciate that. Because after all the lunacy I went through with you all with the D600 fiasco, to omit a two dollar piece of protective gear that will inevitably cause someone hundreds of dollars in non-warranty repair work is nothing more than another way in which the people who run your company have decided that we the photographers no longer matter to them. I appreciate your information, and my apologies if any of my anger over this seems directed at you - it certainly isn't. As I wait for your response, please let those who may be monitoring our communication know that I'll be letting the lunatics of the internet who have been carrying torches and pitchforks since the D600 mess know that your company is at it again.

Thanks for your help and have a good rest of the day.

Honest to God, folks, I'm more than just a little pissed off about this. Yes, I know it's a simple little thing that 1/2 of you chuck in a drawer the minute you get it, but come on!! It's been included with every camera body I've ever purchased, and yes, I have an extra one lying around so I don't have to spend the $2, but... well... DAMN!!!

Makes me not even want to play with this thing today. How incredibly cheap can you possibly get?!?! That's 1/10 of one percent of the retail price that they refuse to throw in.

I have half a mind to call customer service every day and ask whether or not they've changed their mind on including one yet, knowing that it will cost them about $10 to field each incoming call. I suggest, perhaps, you all do the same.
 
Last edited:

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
By way of update, I received a note from the CS rep who stated that while the D750 does not include one, she has asked that Nikon ship one to me. Like I said in another post, the CS Reps can be extremely helpful over there if you keep your calm. :)
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
Hard to believe that they are so small minded - that is not to say i don't believe you.

Like you Jake this sort of thing really annoys me.

I remember when I was a youngster my dad only bought new cars and in those days they always came with a full tank of petrol. These days you probably need to bring a can of fuel just to get you to the nearest petrol station so you can fill up.

One way to get customers coming back is to take care of the "small things" while not taking care of them is a sure way to chase them away.
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I have 4 of these sitting in a drawer somewhere. It comes off immediately after the body arrives. I don't blame Nikon for trying to save a couple of pennies. When they fail to include a strap, which I don't use either, people can get pissed. But that's just me.
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
I think the point is more that they have been including these since Adam and Eve so why suddenly stop - particularly at the top end of the price range.

PS I've lost mine
 

Pretzel

Senior Member
I remember when I was a youngster my dad only bought new cars and in those days they always came with a full tank of petrol. These days you probably need to bring a can of fuel just to get you to the nearest petrol station so you can fill up.

I still get full tanks, even when buying used. I guess I'm just skilled in the art of negotiation. ;)

Funny how fast that tank fills when you tell 'em they're about to lose the sale over 12 gallons!

As far as the hot shoe protector, I'm in shock! It probably costs them a whole... 29 cents? If even that? We should start an email campaign, blow up their customer service inbox with the sheer lunacy of it all!

(for the record, I still have both hot shoe protectors, all my original lens/body caps, etc. and STILL use them! One cannot be too protected in normal day to day use of their expensive gear!)
 
Last edited:

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
They include the body cap, right? That's almost never on there!!

I don't feel "better" about it hearing about the D810, but at least I feel like I'm not the first to notice but maybe just the first to bitch. But again, it cost them pennies, but could conceivably cost a photographer big bucks when something snags or smashes the rail. So why the hell would you stop including it to save those pennies?!

I pinged the folks at Nikonrumors to see if they had anything to say about it. Maybe just a little ticked because I have one sitting somewhere in the St. Augustine grass of Deland, Florida from when I was in a tizzy trying to get my flashes to work two weeks ago.
 

J-see

Senior Member
There's some serious cutting going on at Nikon.

I wanted the PB-6 Bellows. Unavailable, I can't get it. Extension rings; one of the three I could order, the rest they can't even tell me if I could ever get them. I'm already waiting maybe 6 weeks on a stupid lens hood.
 

J-see

Senior Member
And they haven't been made by Nikon in years. Why does this surprise you?

Nikon UK - Accessories - DSLR - Close-up - Bellows focusing attachment PB-6 - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses

That doesn't look like "out of order" does it? Same with the extension rings.

It looks like they're cutting rarities which are their least profitable branch. 3 days if I want a new D810, weeks and weeks and still no hood. You think I had to wait that long if it was a popular lens?

When a company like that can't deliver you the specials, one could wonder.
 

PapaST

Senior Member
Perhaps Nikon is following Canon on this. I don't think Canon has included them on most of their newer cameras. I've read where some disgruntled Canon folks use Nikon as a "well Nikon gives them, why can't we get them?"
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I think the point is more that they have been including these since Adam and Eve so why suddenly stop - particularly at the top end of the price range.

PS I've lost mine
Are you saying they should gradually stop?
Isn't the D4S the top of the price range?
Would you like me to mail you one?

I've been using (D)SLRs for almost 40 years and never have had an issue with the hotshoe being "naked". Maybe in retrospect it was silly to include the goofy thing to begin with.
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
Are you saying they should gradually stop?
Isn't the D4S the top of the price range?
Would you like me to mail you one?

I've been using (D)SLRs for almost 40 years and never have had an issue with the hotshoe being "naked". Maybe in retrospect it was silly to include the goofy thing to begin with.

You are quite right Brian they should stop across the board. No sense in gradually doing things. But what I was saying is why did they do include them in the first place, and for so long and then suddenly stop. However you have covered all these points very well.
And you are right the D750 is NOT the top of the Price range.
Thanks for the offer but I can manage without one and it would cost more to mail me one than to buy one. Very kind of you though.

And again you are right. If you have been using (D)SLR cameras for 40 years you would be. They should never have included the goofy things in the first place.

My apologies for expressing my thoughts ...
 

Woodyg3

Senior Member
Contributor
Wow. 5 cents worth of plastic is really worth people getting all snarky with each other? :)

My take? It's dumb that it's not included. But it's hardly essential. That is all ;)
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I wasn't getting snarky (if that was directed at me). I was only trying to say that in the overall scheme of things, not getting a piece of plastic that nobody uses is not something to get upset over. Anyone on this forum is free to express their thoughts. No apologies needed. You express yours, I'll express mine. OK? Btw, my name is Jim (not Brian). :peaceful:
 

SteveH

Senior Member
I use my cover all the time - Or at least all the times when the speedlight isn't mounted. How many times on these forums do we get people with lens / focus issues and one of the first bits of advice is... "Have you checked that the contacts are clean?"

So surely the contacts on top of the camera need to be clean too? If only there was some cover you could put on it to offer at least a little protection...
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
When you're trying to sell a product, any product, details matter. Presentation matters. Cost to the consumer in these matters is irrelevant because it's not an entirely rational thing we're talking about here; it's part of the overall image you're projecting as a company. The decision NOT to include a two-cent hot-shoe cover seems almost insulting (at least to me). My personal feeling's aside, people in general DO notice such things and, consciously or unconsciously, make buying decisions based on them. These are factors not in dispute to anyone who knows anything about marketing and luxury brands, like Nikon, that ignore these facts do so at dire risk to the luxurious image they wish to project... Which has a funny way of being reflected, ultimately, in their bottom line.

I sure as heck notice when I drop big bucks on a Nikon lens and get a cheap, flimsy, drawstring bag I immediately toss in the trash. By way of contrast I was pretty impressed when my Sigma lenses all arrived in high quality, semi-rigid cases with sturdy zippers and lots of thick foam padding, Each lens case was customized to the specific lens it contained and the whole presentation just oozed quality. It inspires confidence and makes you feel *good* about your purchase.

Details. Matter.

....
 
Last edited:

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I wasn't getting snarky (if that was directed at me). I was only trying to say that in the overall scheme of things, not getting a piece of plastic that nobody uses is not something to get upset over. Anyone on this forum is free to express their thoughts. No apologies needed. You express yours, I'll express mine. OK? Btw, my name is Jim (not Brian). :peaceful:

My emphasis added, because I am somebody who does use it - whenever a flash or trigger unit isn't on the camera. I'm also someone who has seen a hot shoe rail damaged in the past when something dropped in a camera bag and landed on the corner, bending it down to the point where a flash could not be mounted.

You can say it's whining over something insignificant all you want, but to me it's like making someone pay for floor mats in a $100K car - sure, most folks don't care, but it's the mere idea that you're laying out that kind of money and now you're charging someone extra for protection that used to be included (and still is on cheaper models). They still ship that ridiculous DK-5 long exposure eye piece cover that nobody uses because it's so much more a pain in the ass than just putting a cloth or your hands over the opening - and that's almost twice the price at $3.50. I've got one in my camera bag and the rest never get out of the original packing box. Why not ditch that?! You never need more than one at a time. I'd never have missed it, and I suspect most folks here wouldn't have either.

Look, I'm not losing sleep over it, but it just smacks of stupidity on Nikon's part, something they seem to be getting more and more comfortable with.

The thing I didn't complain about, and probably should, is that there is no protection at all for the LCD screen on the back. I have a D800/D600 protector here and it's almost the same size, but the black ring around the edge actually obscures the edge of the D750 screen, but not the D610 whose display window is the same size, but it does not fill it to the edges. With just minor use yesterday the plastic adhesive sheet over top of it is already peeling off and I need to decide whether or not I want to make one out of a spare iPhone 5 sheet I have lying around or just take my chances until one is manufactured.
 
Top