I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch molded as
a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

Jeanette Guire wrote:


Is it that the reviewers a

- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?

Good heavens! how could you even think such a thing!



Ron(UK)

I'm curious what this has to do with home repair?

"Jeanette Guire" wrote in message et...
I'm curious why...

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:09:24 -0400, "Eric"
wrote:

I'm curious what this has to do with home repair?

"Jeanette Guire" wrote in message et...
I'm curious why...



You have to repair the camera when you get it home.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch molded as
a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

They probably aren't allowed to test the cameras to destruction! With the
light use the reviewers put on a test camera, something like a flimsy
latch isn't going to break. Even if it did they aren't going to write it
in their article - camera manufacturers aren't going to be too trusting
of a reviewer who breaks cameras!

- --
Brendan Gillatt
brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk
http://www.brendangillatt.co.uk
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?...rch=0xBACD7433
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFHE5hzkA9dCbrNdDMRAraqAKC4lQL5yyYJBQDC4+Hxcl HCN8edMACfVpVE
bhccDitlOkzfFJ6XAluHiRo=
=4M9N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.

"HeyBub" wrote in
:

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.







Absolutely listen to this recommendation. This guy knows his **** big
time.

You must have heard the famous saying, "When someone says Duct Tape,
people listen."

Al Bundy wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in
:

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.
You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.


Absolutely listen to this recommendation. This guy knows his **** big
time.

You must have heard the famous saying, "When someone says Duct Tape,
people listen."

Darn tootin'! Nothing says "I love you" more than a
fresh-off-the-production-line full roll of silver duct tape. But most
people ask for "Duck Tape". Quack, quack!

--
fu set.

John McWilliams

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:27:56 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

Al Bundy wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in
:

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.
You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.


Absolutely listen to this recommendation. This guy knows his **** big
time.

You must have heard the famous saying, "When someone says Duct Tape,
people listen."

Darn tootin'! Nothing says "I love you" more than a
fresh-off-the-production-line full roll of silver duct tape. But most
people ask for "Duck Tape". Quack, quack!

The most inventive use I've ever seen for duct-tape to make the most efficient
and low-cost watercraft ever ------ Red Green used sections of straight and
elbow air-ducts (the large 2x2 ft. variety). Creating two pontoons by taping the
sections together. The elbows upturned at the ends to keep the water out, the
shape making a boat-bow for easier movement in water. A section of chain-link
fence across the two pontoons with some lawn furniture on top. It worked
perfectly.

How is this camera related? If some photographers built one they might be able
to get to some scenes worth viewing by others. Those who inflict the world with
their agonizingly boring cat and birdbath photos need all the help and advice
that they can get. If not for them, then for the rest of us who have to endure
their relentless ****.

HankLanglin wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:27:56 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:

Al Bundy wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in
:

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.
You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.

Absolutely listen to this recommendation. This guy knows his **** big
time.

You must have heard the famous saying, "When someone says Duct Tape,
people listen."
Darn tootin'! Nothing says "I love you" more than a
fresh-off-the-production-line full roll of silver duct tape. But most
people ask for "Duck Tape". Quack, quack!

The most inventive use I've ever seen for duct-tape to make the most efficient
and low-cost watercraft ever ------ Red Green used sections of straight and
elbow air-ducts (the large 2x2 ft. variety). Creating two pontoons by taping the
sections together. The elbows upturned at the ends to keep the water out, the
shape making a boat-bow for easier movement in water. A section of chain-link
fence across the two pontoons with some lawn furniture on top. It worked
perfectly.

How is this camera related? If some photographers built one they might be able
to get to some scenes worth viewing by others. Those who inflict the world with
their agonizingly boring cat and birdbath photos need all the help and advice
that they can get. If not for them, then for the rest of us who have to endure
their relentless ****.

Whose stuff???

lsmft

Al Bundy wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in
:


Jeanette Guire wrote:

I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.








Absolutely listen to this recommendation. This guy knows his **** big
time.

You must have heard the famous saying, "When someone says Duct Tape,
people listen."
Hi,
Or hay wire!

I happen to be one of those who suffered this common problem.

Just to lend some seriousness, duct tape doesn't work. There's enough
continuous upward pressure on the door from the spring-loaded pair of AA cells
that the door gradually shifts the tape, opens slightly, and loses the
electrical connection.

Rubber bands don't work because they happen to pass over various controls
(such as the zoom) that need to be freely accessible.

I envy those who had enough of the surgeon's touch to mount a paperclip. I
myself used the delightfully outside-the-box solution of the metal plate
externally mounted via a bolt through the tripod mount. Brilliant!

I'd also opine that this (rec.home.repair; I see it's cross-posted within
reason) is an appropriate newsgroup, or certainly not inappropriate, for the
discussion of repairing a physical household item. Appliance repair
discussion tends to go here, and this seems little different.

Art

Arthur Shapiro wrote:

I happen to be one of those who suffered this common problem.

Just to lend some seriousness, duct tape doesn't work. There's enough
continuous upward pressure on the door from the spring-loaded pair of AA cells
that the door gradually shifts the tape, opens slightly, and loses the
electrical connection.


Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
it CAN'T move.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Michael A. Terrell wrote:


Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
it CAN'T move.

Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks; one
tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for that.....

--
john mcwilliams

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.

Or rubber bands. Larger applications can use bungee cords. Packing tape
will do in a pinch if you're short on duct tape, but must be supplemented
with twine.

You could have dragged your lazy ass into a store and looked at the camera
yourself. Probably would've taken less time overall than all your whining.
Did it ever occur to you that if you buy a cheap camera at the low end of
the model scale such as CoolPix, you just might get a friggin' piece of
trash? Did it never occur to you that virtually all consumer-grade
electronics have become completely disposable? Or that Nikon has a vested
interest in ensuring that that camera you just bought DOESN'T last 20 years?

Suck it up and admit to yourself that it was your own damned fault.

Or get a small dog to kick. But whatever you do, do it someplace else.

HeyBub wrote:
Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries.
We unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.

A rubber band is better. Duct tape will mark the camera body.

Dennis.

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:46:16 -0500, HeyBub wrote:


Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

You came to the right place with your concerns.

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Hope this helps.

You're behind the times. Use nylon cable ties instead.
Maybe wash the thing out with some contact cleaner first.

"HeyBub" hath wroth:

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Duct tape is so very 20th century. In the 19th century, the universal
repair solutions were baling wire (used for hay bales) and chewing
gum. Victorian machinery was held together by farm tools. Duct tape
was suitable for most 20th century repairs because the devices were
large enough to handle the tape. It's still useful today on the Space
Station:
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/5598
"They also decided to rig a thermal barrier out of a surplus
reference book and all-purpose gray tape."
but not on small things.

This is the 21st century, where things are getting smaller and
smaller, while Duct tape has remained unchanged since the invention of
ummm... ducting. More important, many devices are being designed with
little concern for repairs or even disassembly. About all one can do
with duct tape today is embalm the device.

I don't know what will become the 21st century equivalent of Duct
tape. My vote is for Superglue, epoxy, and urethane glue and goo. I
had some hope for ty-wraps replacing baling wire, but even ty-wraps
are being replaced by glue and goo. Much home construction and a
growing number of products are already assembled with adhesives.

For the 21st century, it's adhesives, not Duct tape.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
"HeyBub" hath wroth:

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Duct tape is so very 20th century. In the 19th century, the universal
repair solutions were baling wire (used for hay bales) and chewing
gum. Victorian machinery was held together by farm tools. Duct tape
was suitable for most 20th century repairs because the devices were
large enough to handle the tape. It's still useful today on the Space
Station:
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/5598
"They also decided to rig a thermal barrier out of a surplus
reference book and all-purpose gray tape."
but not on small things.

This is the 21st century, where things are getting smaller and
smaller, while Duct tape has remained unchanged since the invention of
ummm... ducting. More important, many devices are being designed with
little concern for repairs or even disassembly. About all one can do
with duct tape today is embalm the device.

I don't know what will become the 21st century equivalent of Duct
tape. My vote is for Superglue, epoxy, and urethane glue and goo. I
had some hope for ty-wraps replacing baling wire, but even ty-wraps
are being replaced by glue and goo. Much home construction and a
growing number of products are already assembled with adhesives.

For the 21st century, it's adhesives, not Duct tape.



Polymorph (mouldable plastic resin) is a rather wonderful invention.
Loads of uses in the workshop.

Ron(UK)

"Ron(UK)" wrote in
:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
"HeyBub" hath wroth:

Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries.
We unaimously recommend:

Duct tape.

Duct tape is so very 20th century. In the 19th century, the
universal repair solutions were baling wire (used for hay bales) and
chewing gum. Victorian machinery was held together by farm tools.
Duct tape was suitable for most 20th century repairs because the
devices were large enough to handle the tape. It's still useful
today on the Space Station:
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/5598
"They also decided to rig a thermal barrier out of a surplus
reference book and all-purpose gray tape."
but not on small things.

This is the 21st century, where things are getting smaller and
smaller, while Duct tape has remained unchanged since the invention
of ummm... ducting. More important, many devices are being designed
with little concern for repairs or even disassembly. About all one
can do with duct tape today is embalm the device.

I don't know what will become the 21st century equivalent of Duct
tape. My vote is for Superglue, epoxy, and urethane glue and goo. I
had some hope for ty-wraps replacing baling wire, but even ty-wraps
are being replaced by glue and goo. Much home construction and a
growing number of products are already assembled with adhesives.

For the 21st century, it's adhesives, not Duct tape.



Polymorph (mouldable plastic resin) is a rather wonderful invention.
Loads of uses in the workshop.

Ron(UK)


Google seems to say that it is called Friendly Plastic here in the
states. Anybody ever get any? Where?

Duct tape is crap. It is actually not good for ducts (heating and cooling
causes the adhesive to quickly fail):
- - - - -
POPULAR SCIENCE (December 1998)

Tape That Doesn't Live Up to its Name

DUCT TAPE is one of the most versatile materials ever invented. You can
patch a tent, seal up a box, or even repair a leaky garden house with it.
But according to the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, there's one thing duct tape doesn't do well: seal a duct.

In leak tests at the lab, researchers Max Sherman and Iain Walker forced
alternating hot and cold air flows through finger-jointed metal ducts sealed
with a variety of products --including duct tape, clear plastic tape,
foil-backed tape, mastic, and injected aerosols. The researchers also baked
the sample ducts at temperatures of 140 to 187 degrees F, simulating the
conditions in many attics.

"Of all the things we tested," says Sherman, "only duct tape failed. It
failed reliably and quite often catastrophically."

Duct tape consists of a cloth backing and a rubber adhesive. "We think that
heat degrades the glue, and that's what's killing the duct tape," Walker
says.

The researchers are recommending that duct tape manufacturers reformulate
the glue to work better at higher temperatures, and that longevity standards
be developed for all duct sealants. Whether that will happen remains to be
seen; as of press time, manufacturers were studying the test results.

In the average house, 20 to 30 per cent of the energy used for heating and
cooling is lost through ducts.
- - - - -
There is a different type of duct tape that works. It's black and actually
sold in better heating & cooling supply stores.

The original that I remember was available from drama supply stores called
gaffer's tape. It is of a different constitution and doesn't leave a residue
when you take it off after a week or 2.

SparkyGuy wrote in
obal.net:

Duct tape is crap. It is actually not good for ducts (heating and
cooling causes the adhesive to quickly fail):
- - - - -
POPULAR SCIENCE (December 1998)

Tape That Doesn't Live Up to its Name

DUCT TAPE is one of the most versatile materials ever invented.
You can
patch a tent, seal up a box, or even repair a leaky garden house with
it. But according to the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, there's one thing duct tape doesn't do well: seal
a duct.

In leak tests at the lab, researchers Max Sherman and Iain Walker
forced
alternating hot and cold air flows through finger-jointed metal ducts
sealed with a variety of products --including duct tape, clear plastic
tape, foil-backed tape, mastic, and injected aerosols. The
researchers also baked the sample ducts at temperatures of 140 to 187
degrees F, simulating the conditions in many attics.

"Of all the things we tested," says Sherman, "only duct tape
failed. It
failed reliably and quite often catastrophically."

Duct tape consists of a cloth backing and a rubber adhesive. "We
think that
heat degrades the glue, and that's what's killing the duct tape,"
Walker says.

The researchers are recommending that duct tape manufacturers
reformulate
the glue to work better at higher temperatures, and that longevity
standards be developed for all duct sealants. Whether that will
happen remains to be seen; as of press time, manufacturers were
studying the test results.

In the average house, 20 to 30 per cent of the energy used for
heating and
cooling is lost through ducts.
- - - - -
There is a different type of duct tape that works. It's black and
actually sold in better heating & cooling supply stores.

The original that I remember was available from drama supply stores
called gaffer's tape. It is of a different constitution and doesn't
leave a residue when you take it off after a week or 2.



Duct tape just a tradational ha-ha. Personally I like to stick pun
intended) with Covalence Adhesives products like Polyken & Nashua.

http://covalenceadhesives.com

On Oct 15, 9:45 am, Jeanette Guire
wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch molded as
a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

I guess the Nikon name just doesn't carry the same weight it once did,
if its cameras are associated with China manufacturing then they've
just sold that venerable good name down the river, it's mudd now.

RickH wrote:

I guess the Nikon name just doesn't carry the same weight it once did,
if its cameras are associated with China manufacturing then they've
just sold that venerable good name down the river, it's mudd now.

You get what you pay for.

Nikon have, do, and will continue to make cameras in their range that are
almost indestructible. Not the entire range they offer, just some.

Price is a good indicator.

If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling yourself.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
http://counter.li.org

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:35:23 +1000, John Tserkezis
wrote:

If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling yourself.

Then explain the titanium shell of Sony P&S cameras that have even withstood
being run over by a jeep and still kept working as new (true story). Story and
photos online in one of dpreview.com's discussion forums.

You're fooling yourself by thinking that money = quality. Lengthy research into
which ones are worth buying = quality. Cost isn't an indication of anything
these days, other than the seller's bank account .... at the expense of fools
who love nothing better than to parrot outdated sayings that no longer hold any
truth whatsoever.

Billy_Bancroft wrote:

If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling yourself.

Then explain the titanium shell of Sony P&S cameras that have even withstood
being run over by a jeep and still kept working as new (true story). Story and
photos online in one of dpreview.com's discussion forums.

I can't explain it. Because I can't find any evidence of a Sony P&S with a
titanium casing. I've had a look on the sony site, and dpreview.com, but
there's too many cameras for the time that I can afford to look through
(looked at the first dozen or so, no find on "titanium").
What models where you talking about?

You're fooling yourself by thinking that money = quality.

I didn't imply that. I said "Price is a good indicator", not price is the
ONLY indicator.

Lengthy research into which ones are worth buying = quality.

Agreed.

Cost isn't an indication of anything these days, other than the seller's bank
account .... at the expense of fools who love nothing better than to parrot
outdated sayings that no longer hold any truth whatsoever.

It doesn't mean a thing. You do your homework and if you find that Product
A offers similar quality and features to Product B, but Product A is cheaper,
then you buy Product A. Duh.
Just because Product B is outlandishly expensive doesn't mean it's because
of any of the reasons you outlined, there are hundreds more reasons why. And
the bulk of those reasons have nothing to do with how far the manufacturer has
their finger up their backsides.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
http://counter.li.org

you are Linux user my heart goes out to you


"John Tserkezis" wrote in message
u...
RickH wrote:

I guess the Nikon name just doesn't carry the same weight it once did,
if its cameras are associated with China manufacturing then they've
just sold that venerable good name down the river, it's mudd now.

You get what you pay for.

Nikon have, do, and will continue to make cameras in their range that are
almost indestructible. Not the entire range they offer, just some.

Price is a good indicator.

If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling
yourself.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
http://counter.li.org

I realize things now are made pretty thin and flimzy but the makers
cannot be responsable when the product is dropped on a hard surface or
it was treated with rough hands .

Ken G. wrote:

I realize things now are made pretty thin and flimzy but the makers
cannot be responsable when the product is dropped on a hard surface or
it was treated with rough hands .

Agreed. I've said it before, and I'll say it again (regardless of the nut
cases who insist that cheap garbage should be as good as the high-end gear):
You get what you pay for.

Some time back, a colleague who worked at our local Nikon distributor here
in Australia told of a story where someone in a hurry to get where they're
going threw their "happy snappy" style Nikon onto the back seat and closed the
door.

In reality, it slipped off the seat, the cord being snagged by the door,
with the camera now resting on the ground.

They drove to wherever they were going, all the while thinking there was
something seriously wrong with the engine with all that clicketing going on.

Anyway, get to their destination, thought to worry about the engine later,
and come round to collect the stuff (camera included) from the back seat.

Horrified to find a now very battered camera.


Fast forward to how Maxwell's found out, they had brought it in to see what
can be done about the metal "case" (still worked after all that). Maxwell's
offered to take the camera off their hands, replace it with a new one, and
keep the old battered one on a glass shelf in the reception area demonstrating
what the things will endure and still work.



And these guys are whining about a measly door clip. Wimps.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
http://counter.li.org

These kinds of small issues that plague consumers are rarely considered in
reviews. While some of these design flaws may be significant they just don't
come up in reviews that are focused solely on image quality.
Even more to the point is the suspicion that reviewers get cherry picked
cameras/lenses that are not of the build quality that the consume can
expect. How else to explain the frequent discrepancy between lens reviews
and what users actually experience?
I'm looking at the rubberized side caps over the electonic ports in my D80
and wonder how long they would last if frequently used.

Do you feel better now?

We're you expecting a real answer?

"Jeanette Guire" wrote in message
et...
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

You broke your battery door. And its everyone else's fault?

/M

Moro Grubb of Little Delving wrote:

You broke your battery door. And its everyone else's fault?

Don't forget the subsequent whining about how the paperclip repair is
supposed to be bent. Now it's the fault of those who offer repair techniques too.

--
Linux Registered User # 302622
http://counter.li.org

Jeanette Guire wrote:

I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

Because today's revieweres are merely there to provide support for the
magazine's advertisers.

Graham

On Oct 15, 11:45 am, Jeanette Guire
wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch molded as
a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

It's nothing a little Red Green Duct Tape can't fix.

I mean, it could be worse..

Stoneman

On Oct 15, 11:45 am, Jeanette Guire
wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally
missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should
have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?

I've had a CoolPix for a couple of years now. Until you brought it up here,
I've never noticed the latch and never thought of it being a defect. Just
as the designer did not think it would have the faults that shoed up.

I really doubt that the reviews missed it, they just did not see it being a
problem. Yes, sometimes companies take a chance a launch a product with a
flaw, but most never see it until the unit is put to use for a period of
time and in greater numbers than their test panels.

Mine has thousands of photos and thousands of miles on in and still works so
I don't see it as a design flaw. If it does, I may change my mind.

Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch molded as
a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

Most likely all three, but also because they just don't use the cameras
long enough to notice such potential weak points.

Ron Hunter wrote:
Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed
a very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix
camera body. The fix has been described in various ways by various
users in other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could
the reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have
totally missed the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a
brick due to the obvious poor engineering that wasn't visible to the
consumer but which should have been wholly obvious to the
"professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

Most likely all three, but also because they just don't use the
cameras long enough to notice such potential weak points.

Yeah! I think in future reviewers should use the camera extensively for
around 3 years before writing a review. By that time the camera will have
been replaced about 5 times with newer models, so it won't matter if the
battery door fails. You can sell it on E-Bay with an elastic band round it,
pointing out that this is a design feature.

Dennis.

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 08:22:27 GMT, "Dennis Pogson"
wrote:

Ron Hunter wrote:
Jeanette Guire wrote:
I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed
a very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix
camera body. The fix has been described in various ways by various
users in other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.

DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/

DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ni...ix3100-review/

STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_...nikon3100.html

The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could
the reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have
totally missed the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a
brick due to the obvious poor engineering that wasn't visible to the
consumer but which should have been wholly obvious to the
"professional" camera reviewer?

Is it that the reviewers a
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???

Most likely all three, but also because they just don't use the
cameras long enough to notice such potential weak points.

Yeah! I think in future reviewers should use the camera extensively for
around 3 years before writing a review. By that time the camera will have
been replaced about 5 times with newer models, so it won't matter if the
battery door fails. You can sell it on E-Bay with an elastic band round it,
pointing out that this is a design feature.

Dennis.



I broke the one on my 990 by dropping it down the stairs. Maybe they
should do that as well.

I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.

1. Depending on the venue (magazine, not-for-profit web site, etc.), if Nikon
or one of their distributors advertises in/on their venue editorial policy
may dictate that reviewer must not bring out negative traits of the product
(for fear of losing advert revenue).

2. Having the camera in hand for such a short period of time (hours? days?)
it's simply not possible to "road test" it to the extent that the normal
owner may eventually do so.

Good luck on the next one.