Another one of those"what shall I do" questions

treeman

treeman

Messages
4,094
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
I'm obviously spending too much time with women lately, as I can't seem to make a decision on this (sorry ladies, but you know what you're like):)

I want to get a D3. I can get a S/H low shutter count one for around £2100, but for £700 more I could get a brand new one with 2 year warranty.
Ok, £700 is a lot of money, but is the two year warranty worth £700? Is there really that much that could go wrong that's going to cost that much to fix? :shrug:
 
Does the S/H one still have any warrenty left on it and is it transferable?

If it was me I would go for the S/H one generally with things like the D3 if it is going to go wrong it will do in the first year.

As it is a £3K camera I would think fixing anything on it would not be cheap :shrug:
 
get the new one then Treeman, you'll have the warrenty for the full period and you'll have the peace of mind thats its not had any drops or bumps (well apart from the delivery driver)
 
I'd go for the new one, as has been said i would imagine anything on a 3 grand camera will not be cheap to fix and i suppose if your willing to spend money on a really nice piece of kit then an extra £700 is worth it even it means waiting a bit longer.
 
I've had er a few bodies, all bought secondhand including a D3, never had a fault with any of them, if the D3 is in good condition and working perfectly a £700 saving would be enough to convince me to buy it.

D3s don't break unless you drop them and even then it'd have to be off a building
 
I've never had a camera go wrong in almost 40 years - go for the second hand one - it would need to be a serious prolem to cost £700 to fix!
 
Few of my thoughts on this:
- Have you considered the D700, for that price (£2100) you could get a D700 with a nice lens, brand new.

-If you are dead set on the D3 - and the warranty is all your after in a new model; surely you could get something such as insurance/cover etc for much less than £700?

Also, you may want to wait a little bit for the new D3x or even see if the rumours about the d700x/s / d800 come to any fruition.
 
wack61 said:
D3s don't break unless you drop them and even then it'd have to be off a building
Click to expand...

this really... even if it did need repairing, it'd have to be something really major go wrong for it to cost over £700, too... even if it needed a new shutter etc, it wouldn't be that much iirc.

though you do miss out on the amazing 'new toy' unboxing feeling ^_^ :(

- Have you considered the D700, for that price (£2100) you could get a D700 with a nice lens, brand new.
Click to expand...

He's already got a D700 :) Plus, aarkady's comments about 'its second best' ring home :P
 
Wigster said:
Also, you may want to wait a little bit for the new D3x or even see if the rumours about the d700x/s / d800 come to any fruition.
Click to expand...

D3x is NOT a replacement for the D3 - the D3s is - although not that much changed - except the addition of video and slightly higher ISO - I had a play with one yesterday - but I won't be buying. What is the point of Nikon making us buy pro bodies tested to 300,000 shutter actuations and then bringing out new ones every couple of years?
 
700 nicker is a lens or a pair of flashguns

which is where I'd rather spend my money

pro bodies rarely fail aside from manufacturing defects/design flaws which usually show up soon and often don't need warranty to fix (I know some firms just fix it if its broke)
 
I would not normally go the used route but £700 is a lump of money so I would go used what could go wrong if the camera is in good condition, what if you buy a new one
and you drop it? warranty is no good for that is it.:D I would go used and get your gear well insured.
 
If it's genuinely a low shutter count, good nick, amateur use or pro backup body then I'd go with the used one in this case. Pro bodies (whatever make) are usually built like tanks anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top