Paul Cretini , Jan 25, 2012; 10:02 a.m.
I thought I posted this two days ago, but can't find the post anywhere.
I recently got my first SLR for Christmas, a 1961 Nikon F in near mint condition, with the original box and leather case. The seller stated that the camera worked properly but I found that the flash sync was off and the seller agreed to fix the camera. When I got it back, I found little dented marks near the front and top of the chassis. I have written to the seller's store and got a reply that they don't know what happened but they are going to write back today. They have been in business for several decades and sell many classic cameras, so I trusted them to be competent for repair, but to me this is totally unacceptable.
The camera was stunning before, it looked like it might have been used only a handful of times. No brassing, no large scratches. Do you all find this as disturbing as I do or am I being overly OCD? In my opinion this is totally pathetic work that makes me very sad and very angry at the same time. What do you all think? I told them that I either wanted a partial refund or to simply send the whole thing back. It makes me mad to even look at the camera right now. Would you all be just as disgusted?
Andrew Gilchrist 
, Jan 25, 2012; 10:07 a.m.
Response to 1961 Nikon F, Bad Repair Job Photo
Not sure this will make you feel much better but I'm disturbed by this.
Stephen Lewis 
, Jan 25, 2012; 10:36 a.m.
Sad, but I'd demand a refund. That's just plain shoddy, unacceptable work for a repair facility.
david carroll , Jan 25, 2012; 10:49 a.m.
I'd return it for a full refund and look for another F. Knowing they they weren't there originally, the sight of all those divots would bug me every time I used the camera (I'm OK with dings that I put there - not with damage resulting from someone else's stupidity). What on earth were they trying to do?. That being said - this camera has a plain finder - right? These are relatively rare and often more expensive than an entire camera. Another option would be to take a partial refund for the damage, then go looking for a decent F Photomic to put your plain finder on.
Michael R. Freeman 
, Jan 25, 2012; 10:55 a.m.
"Do you all find this as disturbing as I do or am I being overly OCD? In my opinion this is totally pathetic work that makes me very sad and very angry at the same time."
You are not being even slightly OCD! That is simply unacceptable. If those dimples weren't there before, then it is nothing short of an incompetent, shoddy and careless repair that would result in this kind of damage. And no question, it is now damaged. I too would demand a full refund. You have every right to be both upset and angry.
Hopefully your vendor will do the right and honorable thing. Let us know how this ends.
Hector Javkin 
, Jan 25, 2012; 11:54 a.m.
Hopefully your vendor will do the right and honorable thing. Let us know how this ends.
Yes. And if the vendor doesn't do the right thing, please, let us know who he is.
Cary Chin , Jan 25, 2012; 12:10 p.m.
I would send it back for a full refund. It should be a crime to damage such a great camera.
John Seaman , Jan 25, 2012; 12:31 p.m.
Totally agree with the comments, its difficult to imagine how this could have happened unless the repairer thought he could dislodge something and fix it by hitting the outside of the camera without taking the top off.
Thing is, the seller promised a response and you should perhaps wait to see what they say before going any further.
john robison , Jan 25, 2012; 12:33 p.m.
That is a really weird pattern of dings. Looks like very rough handling at some point. If they are responsible then the repair facility will own up and give a refund for the whole price or will obtain a clean and acceptable replacement for the body.
Paul Cretini , Jan 25, 2012; 12:47 p.m.
Thank you all so much. I am glad that I'm not being unreasonable. Yes, yes...I can't even look at the thing right now without feeling regret, sadness, anger, frustration, confusion. The sync mechanism is near that Kogaku logo I believe, and to me I think that he used a small punch to try and dislodge the mechanism rather than simply take the time to do a proper repair. Then it was sent back to me with no mention of this monkey's work.
Here is a before photo. I am new at photography but right now I want to learn and master the basics. I do not want anything that requires batteries. I chose this camera because it was a fairly early Nippon Kogaku model, no metered prism, and most of all because it was absolutely stunning original condition, original box and case, original paperwork..etc. I agree with David Carrol 100%. I did not intend to totally baby this camera, it was to be used. If it acquired honest blemishes and dings from everyday, thoughtful use (it happens) then I'd be fine with it, but this looks like the result of a total moron and I have a hard time knowing that I sent this camera to this person. It's like sending your favorite pet to a butcher instead of a vet. Again, here is the before shot.
I'm having a hard time not telling everyone who the vendor is, no matter what happens. No one should have to buy a camera from a store with this disregard and seemingly lack of appreciation for such a nice camera.
If the partial refund they offer is not acceptable to me I will ask for a full refund/return.
