extended warranties

[polkadotladybug]

My 14 month old S3 fell off an end table two weeks ago - I had purchased the extended warranty from Staples. I called Staples (and was freaking because I only had the receipt - not the warranty info - I think I pulled it out at some point and forgot to refile it - bad habit of mine LOL). The honored the extended warranty with my receipt.

Now how that pertains to a 2+ year old camera - I don't know -but - I would send it if you have it - you don't need it now anyway, do you?

 

[MICKEY88]

found this on dpreview.com

But I think two years after purchase is outside the warranty time and nothing that is wrong wiht it would be their fault anyways, or they wouldn't claim it after that time. Can you make a copy and send it to her, then she can't try to return it but she can make a copy to send to Sony in case of repairs.

When my 3 year old Minolta flash died, {2 years out of warranty} about 1 year ago, parts were no longer available to fix it, the repair center gave me a number to contact sony, sony offered to prorate the value of the flash if I could provide my receipt, luckily I found it, I scanned and emailed a copy to them and they sent me a check for 150, which was way more than I expected to get for it.. at the time I figured they were making an extra effort to pull MInolta users in to the Sony family,

 

[DawnM]

Did you get an extended warranty on your camera?

I just ordered last night and think I can add it still if I need to.

I am just curious. We typically never buy extended warranties on electronics and have never had a need for it.....the only things that have gone out have been cheaper to fix than to have paid the warranty on.

Curious.

Thanks,

Dawn

 

[MarkBarbieri]

No, and this is why.

Warranties are sold by businesses to make money. For that to work, they must charge more for the warranties than the total cost of the repairs. So while some people may benefit, on average the warranties cost more than the repairs.

I look at it as sort of "camera insurance." I insure things for which the cost would be extremely disruptive. I'm insured against car accidents, floods, fires, and other things that might cost me tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. I'm not insured against minor nuisances that might cost me hundreds of dollars. If I could not afford to fix my camera if it broke, I might be tempted to insure against that possibility with and extended warranty. Since I can afford the repairs, I essentially self-insure and save money.

 

[Geoff_M]

Warranties are sold by businesses to make money.

True, but the same can be said for most health insurance plans.

I think there are a few "it depends" in answering the question. The biggest question is the cost of both the camera and the warranty. For example, when I bought my D2h, I was able to add a couple years of coverage for a low price... IIRC, ~$60. Given that a blown shutter can cost many hundreds of dollars to replace (and I knew people that had experienced such a problem), and pretty much anytime Nikon touches the camera you can expect the bill to be several times higher than $60, I bit the bullet. However, that was the only time I've bought one. I didn't buy one for my D70 because the cost of the body was so "low" in comparison, nor did I for my D300 (basically for the same reason). So did I need the warranty after all? No, I did have to send the D2h in for repairs to the meter, but it was covered under a Nikon recall due to a faulty board design. The same was true for my D70.

But I do agree that, with certain exceptions, they are a bad idea in general. My favorite example was last week when I sent to Office Depot to buy a wireless card for a PC that was on sale for $15... and they tried to sell me a "protection plan" for it!

 

[polkadotladybug]

I've usually scoffed at the extended warranties - but when I bought my S3 - I went ahead and got it - it was 50 bucks, but I figured what the heck - I found the camera at a good price, so I'd add it on. that was April 2007. It was a 2 year warranty.

Fast forward to May 2008 - stupid me left my camera sitting on the end table - not in a case. One of my girls was walking by and bumped into it and knocked it off - it fell onto the carpet, but the door to the memory card section broke right off! ACK!

I took it back to Staples - told them the door broke off - I didn't give details, and they didn't ask. They were fully willing to replace the camera - no questions asked. Unfortunately I was not able to get another Canon S3 because they didn't carry it anymore! So I got the Canon S5 - a brand new one. I found a good price for that on another website - printed it out - and Staples matched the price.

Of course that warranty is null and void now - once you use it - that's it. So I did have to buy another one for the NEW camera - but I figure it's a small price to pay for a replacement if needed!

 

[thomas998]

I don't normally see any reason to buy a warranty on electronics... in general if something is going to crap out because of a bad part or defect it will happen fairly quickly... after a few months of useage the only likely problems will be from normal usage and that wouldn't be covered by some warranties anyways.... My theory is simply use the crap out of it for the first couple of weeks so any problem that exists will surface while I can still take it back easily... my goal is to be able to return it under the stores policy and not have to ever deal with the manufacturers warranty, I don't waiting weeks for a service center to return my stuff.

 

[DVC Jen]

always always always and I have used it too. Well worth it - but then again it all depends on the warranty and how good the individual store is at honoring them.

both of my cameras were bought at a Wolf (Ritz) camera and thier extended warranties are really good. I can run over my camera with my car and they will replace if they can no repair it.

 

[boBQuincy]

The odds are in your favor by not buying it. After getting a really hard time from Best Buy on their extended warranty I would definitely not buy one from them. My car radio was in and out three times for a total of about 9 weeks before they finally replaced it.

 

[DawnM]

This is what I have always read too......I just spent $4000 on new appliances for the kitchen. We actually had the same exact appliances in CA, and we didn't get warranties on them either......in the 5 years we had the appliances, we had one thing go out, but DH was able to replace it for under $250 (the computer panel on the stove went out year 4). The warranty would have been $400 for 5 years.

I don't know why I am so worried about this. We never have bought them before.

Dawn

No, and this is why.

Warranties are sold by businesses to make money. For that to work, they must charge more for the warranties than the total cost of the repairs. So while some people may benefit, on average the warranties cost more than the repairs.

I look at it as sort of "camera insurance." I insure things for which the cost would be extremely disruptive. I'm insured against car accidents, floods, fires, and other things that might cost me tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. I'm not insured against minor nuisances that might cost me hundreds of dollars. If I could not afford to fix my camera if it broke, I might be tempted to insure against that possibility with and extended warranty. Since I can afford the repairs, I essentially self-insure and save money.

 

[DawnM]

I see health as an entirely different thing. I would never go without it, esp. now that I have 3 BOYS! We have already been to the ER several times and my youngest needed 3 surgeries and will need some more.

I will not go without car insurance either.

Dawn

True, but the same can be said for most health insurance plans.

I think there are a few "it depends" in answering the question. The biggest question is the cost of both the camera and the warranty. For example, when I bought my D2h, I was able to add a couple years of coverage for a low price... IIRC, ~$60. Given that a blown shutter can cost many hundreds of dollars to replace (and I knew people that had experienced such a problem), and pretty much anytime Nikon touches the camera you can expect the bill to be several times higher than $60, I bit the bullet. However, that was the only time I've bought one. I didn't buy one for my D70 because the cost of the body was so "low" in comparison, nor did I for my D300 (basically for the same reason). So did I need the warranty after all? No, I did have to send the D2h in for repairs to the meter, but it was covered under a Nikon recall due to a faulty board design. The same was true for my D70.

But I do agree that, with certain exceptions, they are a bad idea in general. My favorite example was last week when I sent to Office Depot to buy a wireless card for a PC that was on sale for $15... and they tried to sell me a "protection plan" for it!

 

[jfulcer]

I must be really hard on cameras - we got the 4 year extended warranty at Best Buy when I bought my old Kodak. I broke the Kodak. It was replaced with a Canon - a step up. That Canon stopped working. It was replaced with another Canon - another step up. That Canon I broke. I replaced it with another Canon - another step up. That canon the LCD stopped working.

I'm now have the Canon S2 IS. All from the original purchase and a $50 warranty.

It's worked out good for me!

 

[jann1033]

i never buy them...
i figure with a camera it has a 1 yr warranty after that unless i drop it or something am i really going to repair it or just upgrade to get another by the time it breaks which is usually after a number of yrs......maybe something like a $5000+ body i would if the warranty replaced it no questions asked.
canon (after a battle i admit) replaced a lens and my camera body( since they kept insisting either would be the cause of the problems i pretty much twisted their arm and made them)and it was slightly past the regular warranty but i had been dealing with it for months...if i had had an extended warranty i don't know if i would have had an easier time or not
I've always read/hear from consumer advocate types that they aren't worth it, you end up paying more than you use them. and considering how many "this is your last chance " offers they send me begging to get them ( i think i got 4 with escalating catastrophic scenarios for my washer alone ) i kind of don't think they are really that concerned with my welfare

 

[Geoff_M]

I see health as an entirely different thing. I would never go without it, esp. now that I have 3 BOYS! We have already been to the ER several times and my youngest needed 3 surgeries and will need some more.

I will not go without car insurance either.

I agree that camera repair certainly isn't a "life or death" issue, but my point was that you may not need it, but when you DO need it you'll be very glad you had it. In my case I was planning on using the camera a lot and when you have lots of precise moving parts in an object, the more you use it, the quicker it'll wear out parts. It's not uncommon for heavy users to exceed the "rated" number of frames the shutter was designed for and have to have it replaced. It turned out I didn't wear the D2h's shutter out within the extended time frame, but it's starting to "act up" now. When I let it set for 10 minutes or more, I'll get a "dark frame" the first frame I fire after I resume using it. Fortunately, it's my back-up now and I can live with it until it goes "critical".

 

[DawnM]

And will you continue to get the warranty updated?

B&H wanted almost $400 for a 5 year warranty. Do you then pay an additional $400 for the next 5 years? That is the price of a new camera!!!!

I guess that is the way I looking at it.....can you see I am talking my way out of buying it?

Dawn

I agree that camera repair certainly isn't a "life or death" issue, but my point was that you may not need it, but when you DO need it you'll be very glad you had it. In my case I was planning on using the camera a lot and when you have lots of precise moving parts in an object, the more you use it, the quicker it'll wear out parts. It's not uncommon for heavy users to exceed the "rated" number of frames the shutter was designed for and have to have it replaced. It turned out I didn't wear the D2h's shutter out within the extended time frame, but it's starting to "act up" now. When I let it set for 10 minutes or more, I'll get a "dark frame" the first frame I fire after I resume using it. Fortunately, it's my back-up now and I can live with it until it goes "critical".

 

[Tuffcookie]

I hardly ever do. My reason is, I am willing to pay for the repairs if it's my fault. If it's the manufacturer's faulty (re: poorly made and defective item) I will remember that the next time I have to purchase a like item again.

TC

 

[Geoff_M]

And will you continue to get the warranty updated?

B&H wanted almost $400 for a 5 year warranty. Do you then pay an additional $400 for the next 5 years? That is the price of a new camera!!!!

I guess that is the way I looking at it.....can you see I am talking my way out of buying it?

Dawn

I wouldn't buy one at that price. I got the D2h at a "clearance" price of $2K, so the ~$60 was a good deal for an extention.

 

[DawnM]

Ah, yeah, that is inexpensive, although that camera is more than I am spending!

Dawn

I wouldn't buy one at that price. I got the D2h at a "clearance" price of $2K, so the ~$60 was a good deal for an extention.

 

[dolce]

when buying a camera, do you normally buy the extended warranty?

 

[MarkBarbieri]

See this thread.