Epson customer service Redux

[loretdem]

Exactly two weeks after FedExing my R-D1 to Epson Indiana, I received a package from Epson containing my brand new replacement camera. My old serial number was 453X and my new replacement's serial number is 468X. Very close in vintage. Since my camera had been replaced I worried that all that I accomplished was trading in one with minor problems for another with unknown problems.

The replacement camera is damn near perfect. Frame lines are square. Focusing patch is also square (very surprising!). Also amazing is no dead/hot pixels even at 1600 JPEG! Rangefinder focusing is so accurate that even my 90mm Elmarit is sharp wide open at f2.8, something impossible with my original R-D1 even when it was brand new. All six of my lenses work perfectly. None of the above was true of my original camera that this one replaced. Not only do I feel extremely lucky but I have to tell you that if you have an R-D1 that is just right it is amazing! I had to shoot a portrait for the cover of a local magazine and decided to use this new R-D1 with the 90 Elmarit and a 50 Summicron. I shot available light and wirelessly with studio strobes, color and b&w. I never needed to break out my backup equipment. The results were superb and the session felt great. Shooting digitally with a rangefinder camera and Leica glass is like nothing else. You can keep your 5D, D200, 1DS, D2X, whatever. No thanks, not for me. This camera/lens combination suits me just fine.

Obviously I'm happy but I think this is a good time to sum up where we're at with this Epson situation based on my experience and of others who have shared theirs on this forum and elsewhere:
-Currently Epson is replacing in-warranty R-D1's in a 2-week timeframe. According to their own Second Level Department there is no post-warranty service program in place at this time. Or they are simply not aware of it. Based on my experience the various corporate service departments Epson has in California, Canada and Indiana do not necessarily know what they are each up to. It seems that the R-D1 project does not merit a comprehensive corporate policy regarding service. Unfortunate.
-It could be that the latest batch of replacements are better than the previous ones although there is no info to back this up. Regardless if your R-D1 is approaching the end of its warranty you might want to take advantage of Epson's only choice for you which is replacement. Of course your experience may not even come close to mine, so this would still be something of a gamble.
-As of early 2006 it is not possible to have an R-D1 serviced or even CLA'd in the United States. This state of affairs is completely unacceptable and we must demand that Epson rectifies it as soon as possible. It seems to me that worldwide sales of this camera have been so low (probably less than 4000) that some higher-up decided it would be economically advantageous to just replace cameras instead of servicing them since they've committed with Cosina to produce 10000 of them. That's just a wild opinion but nevertheless we really need to make some noise so that Epson USA knows that we're serious about this inexcusable situation. Do we need a lawyer?
-I can't see how one can recommend this camera to anyone even though I think it is the greatest digital camera available today. It is too much of an expensive gamble what with Epson's lack of adequate support. They would have to provide independent service centers with parts availability and manuals (like they do in their printer business) and they ought to cut the price to under US$2000 soon. If you can afford to take a chance on this camera as the situation stands today then that's great. Otherwise I'd have to give the R-D1 a thumbs down because of Epson's poor marketing and service policies. That's so tragic given it's such a great camera. I'm lucky I have a good one for now and I'll use it professionally and otherwise until I cannot anymore. Hopefully that will be for a long time. At least until Leica delivers its digital M.

-Carlos Loret de Mola

[ulrik]

No hot pixels at 1600? Too good to be true. Is this in RAW or jpg?
What is your firmware version?

[loretdem]

1600 JPEG, not Raw. I know, it's unbelievable but so far no hot/dead pixels are yet noticeable. I'll keep shooting at this setting to see if they show up randomly but so far so good. Like I mentioned I feel VERY lucky. I must've used up some karma on this one.
How do I check for firmware version?
-Carlos

[ulrik]

Not completely sure, but my metadata is created by E04106-0100. Assume this it the software in the camera, it's visible from Bridge under "software".

[saxshooter]

Yeah, what's your firmware version? Maybe they've updated and put them in repair units and didn't tell the rest of us! The hot pixels can be mapped out by a firmware fix, something that they should've done in the first place.

[loretdem]

In JPEG metadata only, the software number is E04106-0101.
-Carlos

[rami G]

loretdem,
I share the experience and the worries. I also received a replacement unit recently (mid-late 46xx) and it is my best body so far, (had too many). No hot pixels (1600 raw, didn't try jpeg), but it is also much better taken care of- very fine rangefinder adjustment, etc. I also thought they might have added a hot pixel mapping algorithm.
I am waiting to see what's from Leica, but I need another body. I don't like changing lenses with a rangefinder (have 3 M film bodies) especially not with lenses I like on my body all the time. (now it is the 12mm VC and the 35 lux asph). However, I am extremely worried to make a total 6000$ investment for a one year camera.... Until Epson says something about repair in the future I feel it is an extremely irresponsible step to take. If they reallly going to turn back to us then my epson goes to the "collectible" shelf, btw, a very respectible achievement for a2005 product.

[loretdem]

Originally Posted by rami G

loretdem,
I share the experience and the worries. I also received a replacement unit recently (mid-late 46xx) and it is my best body so far, (had too many). No hot pixels (1600 raw, didn't try jpeg), but it is also much better taken care of- very fine rangefinder adjustment, etc. I also thought they might have added a hot pixel mapping algorithm.
I am waiting to see what's from Leica, but I need another body. I don't like changing lenses with a rangefinder (have 3 M film bodies) especially not with lenses I like on my body all the time. (now it is the 12mm VC and the 35 lux asph). However, I am extremely worried to make a total 6000$ investment for a one year camera.... Until Epson says something about repair in the future I feel it is an extremely irresponsible step to take. If they reallly going to turn back to us then my epson goes to the "collectible" shelf, btw, a very respectible achievement for a2005 product.

Very well put. Thank you for your response. I would like to think that the latest R-D1's being delivered from now on are all as good as my sample. I have another thread going here asking for any info on R-D1's over serial number 5000. So far it's been a dead thread, as I expected. I'd love to see Epson sell the remaining 5000 cameras (soon!) and be able to rectify the problems of the few troublesome samples from the first 5000 in a manner that is fair to those intrepid owners who invested early on in this first-of-its kind digital camera. Replacement cameras with good quality control is, I think, fair enough for in-warranty service. Out-of-warranty is where Epson needs to put their attention. I'd just like to get my camera CLA'd every now and then.
I, too, prefer the 12 UW Heliar and the 35 Summilux ASPH with this camera. Great combination. An R-D1 plus a Leica digital M with these 2 lenses would be, for me, the foundation of the ultimate digital kit. Total cost of my ultimate basic digital kit: about US$11000. Trying to justify the high cost of digital rangefinder photography to the Nikon/Canon DSLR crowd: not priceless. Not even possible!
BTW, I found ONE hot pixel at 1600 JPEG. Still pretty good, though.
-Carlos

[Sean Reid]

Just one hot pixel....wow...that is a rare R-D1. You're making me jealous. <G>

Sean

[saxshooter]

So can we recap; what will Epson accept for a warranty replacement (or what they may call warranty service) aside from the obviously defective units?

1. hot pixels?
2. off kilter RF or frameline patches?
3. back/front focusing of lenses?

So you just ring up Epson customer service and explain the problem and they give you a return/service number and you ship it back to them?

And can others attest that the turnaround recently has been around two weeks?

Thanks, Charlie

[andyturk]

Originally Posted by saxshooter

So you just ring up Epson customer service and explain the problem and they give you a return/service number and you ship it back to them?

And can others attest that the turnaround recently has been around two weeks?

That's pretty much the process that I went through. When I made the initial contact, the rep said my laundry list of problems included a couple that would justify returning the camera. I don't know which issues specifically though.

The story I got is that it takes 7 to 10 working days for them to "fix" a product. I suspect that's just a standard Epson answer that doesn't take any R-D1 peculiarities into account. They've had my camera for two weeks, but I think the repair timeframe got stretched due to the holidays.

[loretdem]

Originally Posted by andyturk

That's pretty much the process that I went through. When I made the initial contact, the rep said my laundry list of problems included a couple that would justify returning the camera. I don't know which issues specifically though.

The story I got is that it takes 7 to 10 working days for them to "fix" a product. I suspect that's just a standard Epson answer that doesn't take any R-D1 peculiarities into account. They've had my camera for two weeks, but I think the repair timeframe got stretched due to the holidays.

Well...
the deal is to get them to issue you a return authorization. Back/front focus is a likely candidate. They might tell you that that is a very rare problem (!) and that they will FIX it in Indiana. What is most important to remember (and certainly NOT recommended to discuss with Epson's customer service reps) is that intercommunication between the various departments is virtually nonexistent and that any statement made by any rep at any time may be contradicted later, even by the same rep on a different day!
So...
if you get them to take it back (which isn't too hard to do, just go with the flow until they agree to do so), it is pretty certain that 2 weeks or so later you will get a new replacement returned to you. My comments only apply to Epson USA.
My experience was similar to what Andy is describing but I received my replacement exactly two weeks later regardless of the holidays.
-Carlos Loret de Mola

[andyturk]

I just got 001871 back as an exchange for my original body, 004600. The new one looks unused. It's got bunch of hot pixels as shown by a 1 second exposure at ISO 1600 with a lens cap mounted. The vertical alignment is slightly off, but the infinity focus is *way* out. It doesn't front-focus as badly as my original, which is nice.

So, should I send it back, send it off to DAG, or just get out the screwdrivers?

[loretdem]

Originally Posted by andyturk

I just got 001871 back as an exchange for my original body, 004600. The new one looks unused. It's got bunch of hot pixels as shown by a 1 second exposure at ISO 1600 with a lens cap mounted. The vertical alignment is slightly off, but the infinity focus is *way* out. It doesn't front-focus as badly as my original, which is nice.

So, should I send it back, send it off to DAG, or just get out the screwdrivers?

Andy, are you in the USA? Did you send your camera to Epson in Indiana? Do you know the firmware/software versions for both cameras in your JPEG EXIF? When you say that the new one looks unused are you saying that the inner smaller box that the actual body was in was sealed and never opened? Was the packaging "virginal" as in all documentation, software, etc never used, including the charger cable and neckstrap?
Your experience so far has been so different to mine. Could others chime in with their recent Epson warranty experiences and state in which country they're located?

[andyturk]

Originally Posted by loretdem

Andy, are you in the USA? Did you send your camera to Epson in Indiana? Do you know the firmware/software versions for both cameras in your JPEG EXIF? When you say that the new one looks unused are you saying that the inner smaller box that the actual body was in was sealed and never opened? Was the packaging "virginal" as in all documentation, software, etc never used, including the charger cable and neckstrap?
Your experience so far has been so different to mine. Could others chime in with their recent Epson warranty experiences and state in which country they're located?

Yes, I'm in the USA and I sent my original camera to Indiana (the people on the phone were Canadian though).

I'm not sure how to find the firmware versions. How does one do that?

The replacement camera arrived in the inner box, but without the fancy outer with the nice gray/black graphics. The replacement wasn't exactly sealed, but it did look clean and still had the protective film on the viewfinder. There wasn't any film on the dial glass though. I say it looked "unused" just because it was very clean and apparently in mint condition.

It had a battery inside, but no other accessories.

[brightsky]

This is exactly what scares me about Epson.

Complete and total inconsistency in handling replacements. It seems as though the "policy" is made up on the spot by whoever happens to be answering the phone. "Seat of the pants" policy this far along is not reassuring.

I'd DRIVE to Indiana to pick up a replacement if I could, but I am not willing to play the ship and pray game.

[loretdem]

Originally Posted by andyturk

Yes, I'm in the USA and I sent my original camera to Indiana (the people on the phone were Canadian though).

I'm not sure how to find the firmware versions. How does one do that?

The replacement camera arrived in the inner box, but without the fancy outer with the nice gray/black graphics. The replacement wasn't exactly sealed, but it did look clean and still had the protective film on the viewfinder. There wasn't any film on the dial glass though. I say it looked "unused" just because it was very clean and apparently in mint condition.

It had a battery inside, but no other accessories.

Well I'm totally baffled. And I must agree with brightsky's feelings about this weird situation.
If you use Photoshop you can use either Bridge or the File Browser to preview your images before opening the actual files. Select a JPEG, not a RAW, that you shot with your old camera and one that you shot with your replacement. Check in the Metadata tab for the software version under Camera/EXIF data. Mine reads E04106-0101 (current JPEGs). BTW are the file numbers back to the beginning (EPSN0001.xxx)?
My replacement arrived earlier this month as if I had bought a brand new camera from B&H. And as I've mentioned it's a damn good sample.
I'm not you and you have your own priorities but I would call them back and start over again. I know, I know... and honestly I don't envy you but that's what I would do. I didn't mind shooting with my M2 while this R-D1 business got resolved to my satisfaction, and under your circumstances I'd just continue shooting film until they provide you with a replacement that suits you. Just my opinion, that's all.
-Carlos

[EricC]

Reading all of the above is very worrying.

I have just returned my 2nd R-D1 back to Epson UK.

I contacted them about the first one as it was front focussing. I took that one back to the dealer that i bought it from and he sent it back. It was just the body and the boxes that went back.

Seven weeks later a brand new body, but with my hotshoe ( serial number ) on it.
However the box that it was in had certainly done the rounds.
Finally got around to trying out this body at close focussing distances with my 35, 50 and 90.
The 35 and 50 are showing a rear focus problem, IE focussing behind the actual point focussed on, but the 90 appears to be spot on !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Also the vertical alignment is out, and really throws you if there is any text in the focussing patch.

After speaking with Epsons Helpdesk and sending them some JPegs taken with each of the lenses, they agreed that there was indeed a problem and arranged for a Courier pickup of the body only and boxes again, so that they could check it out and "fix it".

That was yesterday.

Today i received a telephone call to say that it had arrived and they would get back to me.

I also put in a covering letter mentioning the previous seven week wait and asked about a temporary body to use, however i have not heard anything and am not holding my breath.

Eric.

[brightsky]

Carlos, I discovered something odd with these firmware versions.

Because you seem to have one of the newest serial numbers, I assumed that E04106-0101 was the "latest" firmware version and E04106-0100 was the original.

However, when I checked the firmware version on my 0019xx serial number camera I was quite surprised to see E04106-0101. My camera was purchased in July 2005.

Problems with these units do not appear to correlate with batches of serial numbers so I am perplexed about the two different firmware versions interspersed among the serial numbers. If date of production is not the key, what is?

I wish they were sold through Target, as the return policy would be straightforward and consistent.

[ulrik]

So, brightsky - what's your hot pixel situation? Any chance that E4106-0101 might acually map out a few of my hotties?

[RML]

Originally Posted by brightsky

Carlos, I discovered something odd with these firmware versions.

Because you seem to have one of the newest serial numbers, I assumed that E04106-0101 was the "latest" firmware version and E04106-0100 was the original.

However, when I checked the firmware version on my 0019xx serial number camera I was quite surprised to see E04106-0101. My camera was purchased in July 2005.

Problems with these units do not appear to correlate with batches of serial numbers so I am perplexed about the two different firmware versions interspersed among the serial numbers. If date of production is not the key, what is?

I wish they were sold through Target, as the return policy would be straightforward and consistent.

IIRC, Stephen Gandy has been on a tour through the Cosina plant and has ssen the assembly line for the R-D1. Cosina makes the body and RF/VF. Then the body is sent to Epson for fitting the digital innards. I think that somewhere between leaving the Cosina plant and the completed camera ending in a box someone isn't as careful with the RF/VF as he/she should be. And since Espon probably doesn't quality check the RF/VF anymore (Cosina sent the it out up to the standards of their QC), it's easy to end up with a less than satisfying RF/VF unit. Just my opinion but since we have nothing better....

[brightsky]

Originally Posted by ulrik

So, brightsky - what's your hot pixel situation? Any chance that E4106-0101 might acually map out a few of my hotties?

Based on my sample, I'd say no chance at all.

Your question prompted me to do a little testing. FWIW, lens was a 28 Cron ASPH. Control is 1 second exosure, cap on. I stepped through RAW and JPEG-H at each ISO setting; 200, 400, 800, & 1600. Epson RAW was used as the converter and the only change from ERF was setting the file to 16 bits. The results are as follows:

JPEG-H ISO 200 Count=7
JPEG-H ISO 400 Count=11
JPEG-H ISO 800 Count=18
JPEG-H ISO 1600 Count =28
_________________________

RAW ISO 200 Count=3
RAW ISO 400 Count=10
RAW ISO 800 Count=13
RAW ISO 1600 Count=29

ISO 1600 is simply unusable and blotchy. The hot/stuck pixels varied in size and color. There are 2 or 3 red ones that are quite noticeable and common to each test, several blue, a few green, and white.

If you really want to cause yourself some angst, click Photoshop's magic wand anywhere in the photo and see if you can name the constellation.

To be fair, reality differs somewhat from the results. For all but medium low to low light, most of the aberrant pixels blend with the scene and do not need to be fixed. Healing brush is a panacea for the remainder.

There exists a plug-in that will supposedly fix hot pixels, but I have not tried it as using Photoshop tools seems to be the ticket for now, although I have slowly given up hope of Epson ever addressing the issue.

It would be interesting to see what numbers everyone else posts regarding their samples. After all, misery loves company.

[loretdem]

Originally Posted by brightsky

Carlos, I discovered something odd with these firmware versions.

Because you seem to have one of the newest serial numbers, I assumed that E04106-0101 was the "latest" firmware version and E04106-0100 was the original.

However, when I checked the firmware version on my 0019xx serial number camera I was quite surprised to see E04106-0101. My camera was purchased in July 2005.

Problems with these units do not appear to correlate with batches of serial numbers so I am perplexed about the two different firmware versions interspersed among the serial numbers. If date of production is not the key, what is?

I wish they were sold through Target, as the return policy would be straightforward and consistent.

I would like a confirmation from someone that there actually was a version number E04106-0100. I do not believe that the current software E04106-0101 does any pixel mapping and your testing seems to confirm this. I am still thinking that in general new R-D1's with serial numbers above, say, #4650 or so MIGHT be better QC-wise than earlier ones, although andyturk did not care for his #4600. I would like to think that someone at Epson Japan finally got wind of the RF/VF problems and brought it to the appropriate party's attention to be rectified. When eyeman finally gets his new very late serial number R-D1 that his dealer is waiting to receive, we may learn more and I'll revisit my opinion on this matter. In the meantime I'm just guessing and trying to be somewhat hopeful that things are progressing and not degressing. I was really wanting my very nice replacement camera from Epson to be a sign of better things to come.
-Carlos

[loretdem]

Originally Posted by RML

IIRC, Stephen Gandy has been on a tour through the Cosina plant and has ssen the assembly line for the R-D1. Cosina makes the body and RF/VF. Then the body is sent to Epson for fitting the digital innards. I think that somewhere between leaving the Cosina plant and the completed camera ending in a box someone isn't as careful with the RF/VF as he/she should be. And since Espon probably doesn't quality check the RF/VF anymore (Cosina sent the it out up to the standards of their QC), it's easy to end up with a less than satisfying RF/VF unit. Just my opinion but since we have nothing better....

Stephen's very reliable and if he witnessed this then I believe him. This would mean that anyone who can fix a CV Bessa could fix an R-D1 (at least the RF/VF). DAG doesn't seem afraid to go there but others won't touch it. Why is this?
So why won't Epson offer DAG and others authorized service support? Even their printer business model leaves a lot to be desired. When they introduce a new line they also introduce new inks that cannot be used in their previous printers, so you must buy new printers to use the new inks. It is ridiculous that they could not offer the improved inksets for their legacy printers, even if they have less or different printheads in them. Imagine that every time Kodak improves their Ektachrome film they change the film format ever so slightly so that you'd need to buy a new camera just to use their latest and greatest color film? Of course in this digital era my analogy using Kodak film is pretty pathetic but you get the idea. Epson is a weird company and we are at their mercy.
-Carlos

[Jim Watts]

"I also put in a covering letter mentioning the previous seven week wait and asked about a temporary body to use, however i have not heard anything and am not holding my breath."

Eric,
Sorry to hear of your ongoing problems. Did you receive your R-D1 Owners Club membership and letter? In the letter for the U.K. Epson states "In addition to these items, membership to the Epson R-D1 Owners Club also provides you with an exclusive 1 year replacement warrenty. This entitles you to receive a loan camera should your Epson R-D1 require service within its first year".

It might be worth reminding them that as they have left you without a camera for 7 weeks that are not respecting their promises and are in breach of contract.