Thanks Leon, I thought so, but wasn't sure. I've got a couple of lenses that could do with a service, and I've been thinking recently that maybe it's time to look at getting them done.
Dave On 11/4/05, Leon Altoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi David, > > They are authorised repairers of Pentax, Sigma and Hasselblad cameras > and lenses and flashes and probably most other things from these brands > as well. > > Leon > > http://www.bluering.org.au > http://www.bluering.org.au/leon > > > David Savage wrote: > > DO CRK do lens repairs as well? > > > > Dave > > > > On 11/3/05, Leon Altoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi John, > >> > >> Thanks for the offer, but I decided that I didn't trust them enough to > >> have another go. I took it to C R Kennedy yesterday and asked for a > >> rush job and told them the tale. > >> > >> I got a call this morning saying it is ready to go and no charge. The > >> hot shoe contacts needed to be repaired in some way, which means that > >> Phototechnical can't have tested it correctly or the poor packaging they > >> used to return it caused it to be shaken to bits. Either way they > >> aren't getting another one of my cameras. > >> > >> Leon > >> > >> http://www.bluering.org.au > >> http://www.bluering.org.au/leon > >> > >> > >> John Coyle wrote: > >>> Leon, I've used Phototechnical in the past on a couple of occasions, and > >>> they had been excellent. However, they are only just down the street > >>> from me and therefore I did not have to mail anything! > >>> I have to say that the last occasion I thought they were not very > >>> interested in working on Pentax - maybe they have lost the "Old Fred" > >>> who used to know the brand? > >>> > >>> If I weren't going to the UK next week I'd offer to go down for you... > >>> > >>> John Coyle > >>> Brisbane, Australia > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- Wrom: FPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVW > >>> To: <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 3:34 PM > >>> Subject: OAMPS extended warranty and Phototechnical repairs in Brisbane > >>> > >>> > >>>> Hello everyone, > >>>> > >>>> I am currently upset with the service I have received the OAMPS > >>>> extended warranty people and their repairer of choice Phototechnical > >>>> in Brisbane (Australia). > >>>> > >>>> I have just sent off the email below to the companies concerned but > >>>> would appreciate comments about either of these companies or with > >>>> extended warranties in general. At present I am not likely to ever > >>>> purchase an extended warranty again. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Leon > >>>> > >>>> http://www.bluering.org.au > >>>> http://www.bluering.org.au/leon > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> I would like to express my dissatisfaction with the service I have > >>>> received from Phototechnical and OAMPS. The OAMPS extended warranty > >>>> was originally purchased through Michael's in Melbourne (invoice > >>>> xxxxx) who were unaware that the repairs were carried out by a > >>>> Brisbane company. > >>>> > >>>> I recently sent my Pentax *istD to Phototechnical for repair via an > >>>> OAMPS extended warranty. It arrived at the Phototechnical workshop on > >>>> 12/9/2005 and took 7 weeks to be returned to me (The Phototechnical > >>>> website mentions a 10 day repair turnaround - I have to assume this is > >>>> only for your own extended warranty customers as is your freepost > >>>> service which I am not allowed to use). When I rang to check on it's > >>>> progress I discovered Phototechnical had been waiting 2 and a half > >>>> weeks for reply to a quote which OAMPS had never received and which I > >>>> fear if I had not chased up both companies you would still be waiting on. > >>>> > >>>> I originally sent the camera with 9 weeks until I needed to have it > >>>> again. There are now 8 days until I need to have the functioning > >>>> camera back in my hands and the camera works worse than when it was > >>>> originally sent. > >>>> > >>>> The camera had been sent securely packaged, double boxed, and was > >>>> returned very loosely packaged - I dread what happens to more fragile > >>>> equipment that Phototechnical return to its owner. The box used to > >>>> return it was in poor condition and had been recycled from a previous > >>>> delivery and had not been marked as fragile. If you are going to use > >>>> this practice I would have preferred that you reuse the box I > >>>> originally used (which was new) and had appropriate packaging for the > >>>> camera. > >>>> > >>>> The camera had been sent because of a problem with the hotshoe. When > >>>> a flash was connected the digital communication was intermittent, > >>>> requiring pressure to be placed gently on the left of the flash > >>>> (looking at the rear) in order to get connection. Now that it has > >>>> been returned to me there is no communication between camera and flash > >>>> except when the camera is fired. I tested the original and new faults > >>>> using 3 different Pentax AF360FGZ flashes and another *istD body with > >>>> exactly the same configuration to clearly identify the cause of the > >>>> problem. > >>>> > >>>> The original minor fault made using the camera slightly annoying but > >>>> not impossible. As I now can not use it with an external flash it is > >>>> not functional for my use. > >>>> > >>>> When I rang through to the Phototechnical office today I found no one > >>>> in authority to be able to talk to me about the problem and a company > >>>> procedure of not letting the customer (me) talk to the technician. > >>>> When I asked for a message to be relayed to the technician the answer > >>>> did not inspire confidence. > >>>> > >>>> I asked which lens and flash were used to check the camera > >>>> functionality. The answer was that they did not know. Before I trust > >>>> my camera back to the care of Phototechnical, I need to know that > >>>> their technicians have the skill to diagnose faults and test > >>>> functionality after the repair. I was not asked to supply extra > >>>> equipment to help the Phototechnical technicians, nor should I have to > >>>> if you are as claimed by OAMPS authorised Pentax repairers. > >>>> > >>>> If a flash unit had been placed on the camera during final testing, it > >>>> would have been evident that there was a problem. I can only assume > >>>> that this did not happen, either through poor quality control in the > >>>> workshop or through laziness of the technicians - neither inspire > >>>> confidence in the ability of Phototechnical to repair my camera on a > >>>> second attempt. > >>>> > >>>> I await a phone call from Phototechnical to confirm that they have the > >>>> equipment required to test my camera's functionality fully after the > >>>> repair. Having observed their shipping department's packaging ability > >>>> I am not inclined to send along a flash and lens for testing as I do > >>>> not believe they would be returned to me undamaged. > >>>> > >>>> If Phototechnical are unable to satisfy me that their technicians have > >>>> the ability to do this repair correctly and return it to me by Friday > >>>> November 11, I shall have it repaired by CR Kennedy and send the bill > >>>> to Phototechnical. Failing this I will be seeking a full refund of > >>>> the original purchase price of the extended warranty from Michael's > >>>> (who I assume will recover it from OAMPS). > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >
