D610 or 6D

Worth mentioning that the UK vetoed the EU warranty directive of 6 years a few years back, I seem to recall.

Never, ever buy an extended warranty though. It's almost like buying PPI and we know how that went.
In the UK a 1 year warranty is obsolete as it's actually 2-4 years.

3/4 years will depend on a proof that the item had an inherent fault when you purchased it. ( for example, finding lots of bi tching on Internet forums about the new Nikon identical failures would show that if yours ( if you purchased that camera) developed that fault in 3/4 years time you would have a case as it was a known fault), otherwise you have to pay for a report to prove it, then claim off the shop you purchased from.

The 1 year warranty is a sham really, but no one will tell you the rules as they stand.
I'm sure, however if I've mucked up my explanation in any way, any legal minds on here will correct me accordingly.

Cheers
Dave
 
Last edited:
I've posted this before, but I did a review (or more like a discussion on why I think the D610 is a good upgrade choice) here that you may find useful. I've had a go on a 6D and thought it was a really good camera too. I loved the wifi option, where you can control the camera with your iPhone. Other than taking selfies (!), I couldn't see a viable use for this in my profession, but it's an awesome gimmick none the less.

At the end of the day, you won't be disappointed with the D610 or the 6D. If I was a Canon shooter, I'd choose the 6D over the 5DMKIII personally and use the money I save for some premium glass.
 
boliston said:
Does a spare camera need to be the same brand?
Click to expand...

Yes.. or you'd also need a spare set of lenses, flashguns and accessories to go with it :)
 
David Jones said:
Worth mentioning that the UK vetoed the EU warranty directive of 6 years a few years back, I seem to recall.

Never, ever buy an extended warranty though. It's almost like buying PPI and we know how that went.
In the UK a 1 year warranty is obsolete as it's actually 2-4 years.

3/4 years will depend on a proof that the item had an inherent fault when you purchased it. ( for example, finding lots of bi tching on Internet forums about the new Nikon identical failures would show that if yours ( if you purchased that camera) developed that fault in 3/4 years time you would have a case as it was a known fault), otherwise you have to pay for a report to prove it, then claim off the shop you purchased from.

The 1 year warranty is a sham really, but no one will tell you the rules as they stand.
I'm sure, however if I've mucked up my explanation in any way, any legal minds on here will correct me accordingly.

Cheers
Dave
Click to expand...

Just to add a different spin to this, and I don't want to take the thread off topic but add a slightly different opinion.
Under the Sale of Goods act, for the first 6 months it is down to the seller to prove that the fault did not exist at the point of sale, after this point it is down to the consumer to prove that it was. Any marks to the item would make this harder to prove, so whilst Dave is correct that you could get an item repaired without a warranty, I would imagine a lot of arguing stress and time would be taken up trying to sort it, whilst with a warranty, you take it in, get it fixed and pick it up. Nice and simple.
I'm not quite sure where the 2-4 yr bit and 12 months being obsolete comes from because in the UK there is no legal requirement to give any form of warranty, all there is in the SoGA is this bit about items being of saleable quality.
In the past I also didn't see the value in warranties, however having seen claims statistics I am now a convert. It all comes down to how much it would cost. (Don't get me started on PPI and why this is different :D )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top