Pentax 645Z trouble - advice sought

[rdeloe]

Thank you everybody for your wonderful help and ideas.

This morning (Aus time), I took the camera to a local camera shop to see if they could remove the body cap for me. This they did. When it was removed, the reason for the stuck cap became very clear... The lens mount on the camera is badly bent. This has to be due to a heavy knock in transit. The Pentax repair facility in the Philippines must have had the cap off and mounted a lens to test the camera after the repair, so it cannot have been damaged at that time. But it was as soon as I received it - ergo, in can only have occurred in transit.

I am beyond frustrated by this. Having received such a good service throughout the whole process and got so excited about being back in action, it's quite a blow.

[/url]20200612_093735 by Ed Hurst, on Flickr[/IMG]

That is beyond disappointing. I'm so sorry to see that Ed. I've never had to recover money from a shipper. I hope you get full satisfaction.

 

[tsjanik]

Thank you everybody for your wonderful help and ideas.

This morning (Aus time), I took the camera to a local camera shop to see if they could remove the body cap for me. This they did. When it was removed, the reason for the stuck cap became very clear... The lens mount on the camera is badly bent. This has to be due to a heavy knock in transit. The Pentax repair facility in the Philippines must have had the cap off and mounted a lens to test the camera after the repair, so it cannot have been damaged at that time. But it was as soon as I received it - ergo, in can only have occurred in transit.

I am beyond frustrated by this. Having received such a good service throughout the whole process and got so excited about being back in action, it's quite a blow.

Very sorry to see this. I wonder how could this happen without damage appearing on the body cap or the shipping container?

 

[D&A]

I too am very sorry to hear about this Ed. As Tom mentioned, its hard to understand how this happened during transit (if no apparent damage appears on the outer shipping box). I assume a fair amount of shipping material surrounded the camera body. It's purely conjecture on my part but I wonder if after the repair was completed at the repair facility, the body was handed off to another "packing department" at the same facility who's sole responsibility is prepare items for shipping. It's there that somehow the camera was knocked/dropped and was quickly packed up in the shipping parcel....or alternatively, an accident happened when the camera was received back at the distributor who prepared it for shipping back to you. I would assume the distributor would be responsible for sorting this out but in any case we can all understand the disappointment you feel. I just hope its taken care of swiftly and in a timely manor.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Camera received back with me today! One month and three days after the problem occurred, during which time it's been sent Sydney - Melbourne (to C.R. Kennedy), assessed, sent on to the Philippines (via a couple of Asian stopovers), passed through Philippines Customs, received by Pentax there, assessed, quoted for, repaired, sent back to Melbourne, passed through Australian Customs, received by C.R. Kennedy in Melbourne and then sent Melbourne - Sydney. Quite remarkable, and all in the middle of a major pandemic.

I haven't had chance to test it or find out if the shutter count has been reset (I will update on that when I can, perhaps this evening). But what an achievement... Hats off to everyone involved.

Very glad to hear this, Ed! Now go shooting....
Bill

 

[Bill Caulfeild-Browne]

Now I've read your latest note, I withdraw my "very glad" to read "very sad". Life just isn't fair sometimes. I do hope the mount is repaired quickly.
Bill

 

[Ed Hurst]

Thanks for your messages of support guys. I have to confess, I am utterly banjaxed by this turn of events. It's that feeling of being impotent in the face of capricious fate that I cannot cope with - all I can do is send it right back to C.R. Kennedy and wait an unknown amount of time for a resolution while numerous photographic opportunities pass me by... That's what's killing me!

Re. liability and who might help, to their credit, C.R. Kennedy are taking full responsibility for this damage. Whether the damage occurred while it was directly with them (which seems highly unlikely), with Pentax in the Philippines, while being shipped from Pentax to C.R. Kennedy or while being shipped from C.R. Kennedy to me, all of those options lie within the responsibility that C.R. Kennedy have to me; my responsibility only starts after I receive it. They are acting as Pentax's agent; all shipping was organised either by them or by Pentax. So, however the damage exactly took place, it seems to have been accepted by C.R. Kennedy that it's in no way my responsibility. C.R. Kennedy are responsible to me. No doubt, Pentax, courier companies and others are responsible to them (but that's not my affair).

The box that arrived at my end was externally in good order, though perhaps a little flimsy (both the box itself and the amount of bubble wrap inside it). It looked like a box that C.R. Kennedy had provided for the final Melbourne - Sydney leg. Maybe the box used from the Philippines to Melbourne had been damaged and no one thought anything of it while unpacking it. Or damage may have been done within the Pentax or C.R. Kennedy facilities...

However, it remains a mystery how the camera itself could have been so badly damaged in this way; if it happened before the body cap went on, how (and why) did they attach it to a bent mount?; if it happened after the body cap went on, why are there no marks on the cap, from what must have been a severe blow?

It would be grossly unreasonable for C.R. Kennedy to ask me to take this up with the couriers that they engaged, with Pentax, or with the couriers that Pentax engaged. Thankfully, there's no suggestion of that. So I really have no complaints as far as taking responsibility is concerned. My main concern is that the bloody camera is still not with me! As we speak, it's on its way back to C.R. Kennedy in Melbourne, so we shall see what transpires. They can replace a lens mount themselves. If that's all that's damaged, I may have it back fairly soon. If there is damage to parts other than the mount (which is possible/probable, given the obvious force involved in the impact), they may or may not have to send it to the Philippines again. And then, God knows how long I will continue to be without it...

Meanwhile, there is (of course) a very good forecast for astro photography for Sunday and Monday nights and I will be missing that. Who could ever compensate me for lost pictures that I will never get to take?

Ed

 

[AlanS]

Oh Ed! Looking at the pic, I think you may be "lucky" in that it is only the mount that is damaged so should be straight forward for them to replace. There appears to be no damage to the body. I do hope this is the case and you are up and running soon!

 

[D&A]

Ed, if there is one good thing to come out of all this, its that C.R. Kennedy is taking responsibility to get this rectified and in no way suggesting that you're responsible either for the damage nor for being responsible to assess who's responsible and take appropriate action. That says a lot about C.R. Kennedy and being a standup distributor. Of course its no consolation for the missed photographic opportunities lost but just hoping that its simply the mount that needs replacing and not any underlying parts or structure requiring a trip back to the Pentax repair facility. Fingers crossed that you have your camera back in your hands in short order.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

Terrible disappointment Ed! I hope the body is still oké and only the metal mount has to be replaced otherwise they have to replace the camera for a new one. You are such a great signboard for Pentax!

 

[B L]

Just a thought, perhaps a crazy one, is there any possibility that wherever ED's Pentax ended up for service/repair, they (by mistake) might have returned a camera which was already there with a stuck body cap ! ED, we are all with you.

 

[Shashin]

Thanks for your messages of support guys. I have to confess, I am utterly banjaxed by this turn of events. It's that feeling of being impotent in the face of capricious fate that I cannot cope with - all I can do is send it right back to C.R. Kennedy and wait an unknown amount of time for a resolution while numerous photographic opportunities pass me by... That's what's killing me!

Re. liability and who might help, to their credit, C.R. Kennedy are taking full responsibility for this damage. Whether the damage occurred while it was directly with them (which seems highly unlikely), with Pentax in the Philippines, while being shipped from Pentax to C.R. Kennedy or while being shipped from C.R. Kennedy to me, all of those options lie within the responsibility that C.R. Kennedy have to me; my responsibility only starts after I receive it. They are acting as Pentax's agent; all shipping was organised either by them or by Pentax. So, however the damage exactly took place, it seems to have been accepted by C.R. Kennedy that it's in no way my responsibility. C.R. Kennedy are responsible to me. No doubt, Pentax, courier companies and others are responsible to them (but that's not my affair).

The box that arrived at my end was externally in good order, though perhaps a little flimsy (both the box itself and the amount of bubble wrap inside it). It looked like a box that C.R. Kennedy had provided for the final Melbourne - Sydney leg. Maybe the box used from the Philippines to Melbourne had been damaged and no one thought anything of it while unpacking it. Or damage may have been done within the Pentax or C.R. Kennedy facilities...

However, it remains a mystery how the camera itself could have been so badly damaged in this way; if it happened before the body cap went on, how (and why) did they attach it to a bent mount?; if it happened after the body cap went on, why are there no marks on the cap, from what must have been a severe blow?

It would be grossly unreasonable for C.R. Kennedy to ask me to take this up with the couriers that they engaged, with Pentax, or with the couriers that Pentax engaged. Thankfully, there's no suggestion of that. So I really have no complaints as far as taking responsibility is concerned. My main concern is that the bloody camera is still not with me! As we speak, it's on its way back to C.R. Kennedy in Melbourne, so we shall see what transpires. They can replace a lens mount themselves. If that's all that's damaged, I may have it back fairly soon. If there is damage to parts other than the mount (which is possible/probable, given the obvious force involved in the impact), they may or may not have to send it to the Philippines again. And then, God knows how long I will continue to be without it...

Meanwhile, there is (of course) a very good forecast for astro photography for Sunday and Monday nights and I will be missing that. Who could ever compensate me for lost pictures that I will never get to take?

Ed

I can only imagine this situation. I am sure you when you saw this you said, "oh no," or the French equivalent. But I have always felt the same way when I don't have access to my camera--what am I missing? When a board in my 645D went down, I sent my camera to Japan. They were very good and responsive. I even got it back in great shape.

Can they send you a loan of a body while you wait? To be honest (and I am sure you don't want to hear this), but bending the mount need some force and what are the other problems it will cause?

 

[MGrayson]

Ed,

Just adding my voice to the "That Sucks" chorus. Most, but not all, of the damage to my cameras has been my fault. But the worst is when it gets damaged on the way back to you, supposedly all better. That's what got me out of tech cameras. The lenses were too fragile to ship. A blow like your camera took would leave a copal shutter looking like a pretzel.

Good Luck,

Matt

 

[Ed Hurst]

OK. Quick update. The camera has been received/assessed by C.R. Kennedy in Melbourne and they have decided that the camera needs to go back to Pentax in the Philippines. They are of the view that checking the mount alignment (and ensuring there are no other issues with the body) can better be done there. I think Pentax also want to see it themselves so that they can take the issue up with their shipping providers...

In the meantime, they are sending me a loan camera (which they indicated, when I initially wanted the shutter to be replaced, wouldn't be possible; I suppose there's a greater wish to make things possible after I have the camera was damaged!). There will be no charge to me. All of this seems like reasonable handling of the issue.

I have indicated that I remain worried, even after the repair is done, that other problems might eventually surface due to the knock my camera received. C.R. Kennedy have indicated that they think that unlikely, but that they would take responsibility for that if it arises. Of course, I would rather have a new replacement camera, but I am willing to take the chance and see what happens. However, if anything else goes wrong that could in any way be attributed to this knock, I will certainly change my approach, insist on a replacement and make a much bigger fuss than I have so far. I realise some of you believe that I should be pushing for a replacement camera now; I see this point and thank everyone for it. However, given the provision of a loaner, their ongoing willingness to take responsibility for issues that arise and the very helpful support I have received from C.R. Kennedy throughout, I am willing to accept their approach for now. But my attitude will change if any other issues are experienced as a result of my camera being badly bashed.

The main thing, which no one can ever resolve, is that I will receive the loan camera just after two perfectly clear nights which would have been ideal for astro photography. Not just normal clear nights, but the sort of special clarity, all the way down to the horizon, that I haven't seen for years. That is extremely galling... But there's nothing anyone can do about it.

As for everyone's excellent points above about the mystery of how it happened, I am as mystified as you all are. I don't see how this could occur within a proper package. I don't see how it could occur at all and leave the body cap unscathed. And if the body cap wasn't attached at the time, I don't see how it could have been mounted after the damage. I am unable to produce a clear or logical account of what happened. All I know is that it did happen while not on my watch and I am just mightily glad that C.R. Kennedy are taking responsibility for offering me a solution here. They jolly well should, of course; but that doesn't automatically mean that they would. So kudos to them for that.

Looks like I will be back in action in a day or two. Just in time to pine for the conditions I have just missed!

Thanks to everyone here for your most excellent support, advice and empathy

P.S. - to BL: this is my camera - the serial numbers match, so I can't escape the issue that way. But thanks for the idea - good one to check!

 

[ErikKaffehr]

OK. Quick update. The camera has been received/assessed by C.R. Kennedy in Melbourne and they have decided that the camera needs to go back to Pentax in the Philippines. They are of the view that checking the mount alignment (and ensuring there are no other issues with the body) can better be done there. I think Pentax also want to see it themselves so that they can take the issue up with their shipping providers...

In the meantime, they are sending me a loan camera (which they indicated, when I initially wanted the shutter to be replaced, wouldn't be possible; I suppose there's a greater wish to make things possible after I have the camera was damaged!). There will be no charge to me. All of this seems like reasonable handling of the issue.

I have indicated that I remain worried, even after the repair is done, that other problems might eventually surface due to the knock my camera received. C.R. Kennedy have indicated that they think that unlikely, but that they would take responsibility for that if it arises. Of course, I would rather have a new replacement camera, but I am willing to take the chance and see what happens. However, if anything else goes wrong that could in any way be attributed to this knock, I will certainly change my approach, insist on a replacement and make a much bigger fuss than I have so far. I realise some of you believe that I should be pushing for a replacement camera now; I see this point and thank everyone for it. However, given the provision of a loaner, their ongoing willingness to take responsibility for issues that arise and the very helpful support I have received from C.R. Kennedy throughout, I am willing to accept their approach for now. But my attitude will change if any other issues are experienced as a result of my camera being badly bashed.

The main thing, which no one can ever resolve, is that I will receive the loan camera just after two perfectly clear nights which would have been ideal for astro photography. Not just normal clear nights, but the sort of special clarity, all the way down to the horizon, that I haven't seen for years. That is extremely galling... But there's nothing anyone can do about it.

As for everyone's excellent points above about the mystery of how it happened, I am as mystified as you all are. I don't see how this could occur within a proper package. I don't see how it could occur at all and leave the body cap unscathed. And if the body cap wasn't attached at the time, I don't see how it could have been mounted after the damage. I am unable to produce a clear or logical account of what happened. All I know is that it did happen while not on my watch and I am just mightily glad that C.R. Kennedy are taking responsibility for offering me a solution here. They jolly well should, of course; but that doesn't automatically mean that they would. So kudos to them for that.

Looks like I will be back in action in a day or two. Just in time to pine for the conditions I have just missed!

Thanks to everyone here for your most excellent support, advice and empathy

P.S. - to BL: this is my camera - the serial numbers match, so I can't escape the issue that way. But thanks for the idea - good one to check!

Hi Ed,

Happy to hear you get a loaner! I wouldn't be too much concerned about the damage causing issues once the camera is repaired, as I would guess it would be restored to factory tolerances in repair.

Still, I would suggest that you try 'Jim Kasson's screening test' on both the loaner and on your repaired camera: https://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/

In short, the idea is that you shoot 9 images at sufficient distance to that focus/recompose error does not matter. If all corners are good and similar, it indicates that lens and sensor is well aligned.

Best regards
Erik

 

[Ed Hurst]

Thanks, Erik - I'll look into that!

Ed

 

[D&A]

Thanks for the update Ed as I know this whole ordeal is frustrating. I agree with Erik...that comparing the performance between the loaner and your repaired camera is a good idea. I would go so far and suggest to request holding onto the loaner until you receive your repaired camera back so that you'll have both in hand and can test one against the other under the exact same shooting circumstances. That should put your mind at ease that your repaired camera is up to spec. As always looking forward to your fabulous images.

Dave (D&A)

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Thanks, Erik - I'll look into that!

Ed

Hi Ed,

What are the news?!

Kind regards
Erik

 

[Ed Hurst]

Quick update: my camera is back with C.R. Kennedy in Australia, having made its second trip to the Philippines to be repaired following the damage-in-transit on its way home from the first repair.

Here's a description of what needed to be done:
"The impact damage on the camera consisted of damage to the bayonet ring, front cover and the sensor. The technicians replaced all of those components as required. Exposure/focus and collimation were all checked/tested/adjusted as necessary using the service jigs/tools. After the repair was completed by one technician the supervisor of the department then rechecked and confirmed the camera is now working to specification."

So the camera now has a new shutter (from the first repair), new sensor, new lens mount and new front cover. Quite a list! You'd have thought a replacement camera would have been an easier and more viable solution, but that's not what was done... The work has (of course) a warranty on it. So, with a bit of luck, the camera should now keep going for many years to come. Needless to say, I will be doing some vigorous testing to make sure once I have camera back in my paws. When it's with the Sydney branch of C.R. Kennedy, I will be going in to give back the loaner and receive my camera back.

There never has been any explanation of how the damage could have occurred. How it could have been hit hard enough to do such damage without leaving any marks on the packaging. Etc Etc. C.R. Kennedy have taken full responsibility for this throughout and I must say their response has been impeccable... I very much doubt that they have been able to recoup the cost of the new repairs from Pentax or the shipping people, so they will have had quite a bill to pay given the extent of the repairs!

Hopefully it will prove to be in perfect working order both now and long into the future!

To those of you who were curious, I will check the shutter count once I have the camera and see if it was reset following the installation of the new shutter.

 

[Abstraction]

For all that's been done, I'm surprised they didn't just give you a new camera. Good luck and let us know how it goes. I hope this isn't the beginning of a long list of headaches related to the repair.

 

[Ed Hurst]

For all that's been done, I'm surprised they didn't just give you a new camera. Good luck and let us know how it goes. I hope this isn't the beginning of a long list of headaches related to the repair.

Thanks! Yes, that's my concern as well... Needless to say, if I end up having enduring problems that only surface later, as a result of poor handling that wasn't in any way my responsibility, I would be deeply irked. There is a guarantee on the repairs and I have every confidence that, if something were to crop up later (i.e. after the end of the guarantee), C.R. Kennedy would do the decent thing there too. So I am hopeful all will be well. But, I must admit, I would have been more comfortable with a whole replacement camera, given the extent of the damage and the forces that must have been involved.

Time will tell!