Blackmagic Forum

Reading the many sad stories of users who shared images on the various Faceboopk groups who bought either/or the Pocket 4K/6K, opened the box (even some were videoed) to show damage like cracks, scuffs, scratches, and marks that do not wipe off on their cameras!
This is poor on BMD! Do they not employ competent quality control staff? Are these cameras being rushed out to meet the demand?
Some explanations please! You cannot blame thos on packaging or shipping. Many users have never had these issues. We pay for quality.
(I'm sure the resident apologisers will troll me, but this has to be said, and I hope the admin respect this post - this is to help BMD improve it's QC dept and restore confidence in it's great products)

Jean, we agree but BMD has already responded on the forum before your post and is improving the packaging. So it’s not a quality control issue on the production line, but poor design of some packaging. It’ll be corrected. BMD is accepting returns of goods damaged in shipping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Also, some of these marks are the result of poor packing in the factory, and unduly rough handling by the shippers handling the cameras after they leave the factory. As Rick stated, BMD is redesigning the packaging to deal with this situation.
Cheers

rick.lang wrote:Jean, we agree but BMD has already responded on the forum before your post and is improving the packaging. So it’s not a quality control issue on the production line, but poor design of some packaging. It’ll be corrected. BMD is accepting returns of goods damaged in shipping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks Rick, but if that is the case, and the same packaging is the same for all cameras, where are many not damaged at all? Mine wasn't.

I use to work at ups and yes they throw packages in the trucks. So this can definitely be a shipping problem

Jean Capdouzey wrote:Thanks Rick, but if that is the case, and the same packaging is the same for all cameras, where are many not damaged at all? Mine wasn't.

Mine seemed perfect too thankfully. Hopefully BMD will be reviewing with their shipper as well as improving the packaging. Good to prod them about this, and I shudder to think how many sales they lose every time the internet jumps on them for these things. Bad news spreads like wildfire and most people will never post a follow up when things are corrected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rick.lang wrote:

Jean Capdouzey wrote:Thanks Rick, but if that is the case, and the same packaging is the same for all cameras, where are many not damaged at all? Mine wasn't.

Mine seemed perfect too thankfully. Hopefully BMD will be reviewing with their shipper as well as improving the packaging. Good to prod them about this, and I shudder to think how many sales they lose every time the internet jumps on them for these things. Bad news spreads like wildfire and most people will never post a follow up when things are corrected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess we'll only find out when the shipping issue is eliminated.
I read some comments that even suggest BMD have used returned bodies and rehoused them! LOL

Jean Capdouzey wrote:I guess we'll only find out when the shipping issue is eliminated.
I read some comments that even suggest BMD have used returned bodies and rehoused them! LOL

The good old "someone on the internet has claimed something, therefor it must be true".

BTW, the website http://www.jeancapdouze.com does not exist and apparently you are using a fake name, or you are the ghost of a rugby player who died in 1999 using a portrait photo of Manfred Mann as yours.
This is a REAL name forum.

Robert Niessner wrote:

Jean Capdouzey wrote:I guess we'll only find out when the shipping issue is eliminated.
I read some comments that even suggest BMD have used returned bodies and rehoused them! LOL

The good old "someone on the internet has claimed something, therefor it must be true".

BTW, the website http://www.jeancapdouze.com does not exist and apparently you are using a fake name, or you are the ghost of a rugby player who died in 1999 using a portrait photo of Manfred Mann as yours.
This is a REAL name forum.

Ich entschuldige mich für den Tippfehler oh großartiger Anführer.

Are you here purely to s**t on BMD ?

I mean, no offense but every single one of your post I see is negative and just spits hate towards BMD on X or Y subject. What are you even doing here ?

This guy is constantly negative. Definitely a troll.

Adam Silver wrote:This guy is constantly negative. Definitely a troll.

Is there an ignore function on the forums ?

Jean Capdouzey wrote:

Robert Niessner wrote:

Jean Capdouzey wrote:I guess we'll only find out when the shipping issue is eliminated.
I read some comments that even suggest BMD have used returned bodies and rehoused them! LOL

The good old "someone on the internet has claimed something, therefor it must be true".

BTW, the website http://www.jeancapdouze.com does not exist and apparently you are using a fake name, or you are the ghost of a rugby player who died in 1999 using a portrait photo of Manfred Mann as yours.
This is a REAL name forum.

Ich entschuldige mich für den Tippfehler oh großartiger Anführer.

The http://www.jeancapdouzey.com doesn't exist either.
And your constant provocative behavior screams you are a troll.

Valentin Remy wrote:

Adam Silver wrote:This guy is constantly negative. Definitely a troll.

Is there an ignore function on the forums ?

Valentin, yes there is. If you go into your user control panel there is a Friends & *oes index. Under *oes you can add a member's username you want to ignore.

* F o e s
is apparently a banned word in the forum software, so you can't post a text with this word in it.

Troll

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

The issue with the camera bodies is real, but I don't see why BMD is willing to take the blame.

These aren't "the camera got knocked around in a sealed box"-scuffs, but clearly(?) cameras that have been out of the box and used?

My P6K came, and I hope I remember this correctly now, in a box with sealed plastic around it. Certainly not in a box that I could just open without cutting through a seal of some sort (I seem to remember plastic + a small but sturdy sticker over the lid).

But seeing how BMD already had cameras out in the stores at the time of the launch, there is a possibility the very first batch was less securely sealed off and more in a beta stage in terms of packaging?

My guess is that some stores (including B&H, because Matt Allard from Newsshooter also got a scuffed one from there) didn't do a good job of separating new from 'demo'.

Valentin Remy wrote:Are you here purely to s**t on BMD ?

I mean, no offense but every single one of your post I see is negative and just spits hate towards BMD on X or Y subject. What are you even doing here ?

I think he's paid by a BMD competitor to stir up discontent

Those pictures don't show poor quality, they show damage.

Yes, I agree, it is damage from some source, other than BMD. If I received a camera in that condition, I would be sending it back — problem solved.

2. I just bought my Blackmagic pocket 4k camera. I opened the box and it's a scary sight. The camera is scratched all over. It is a very sad situation

pulalis wrote:2. I just bought my Blackmagic pocket 4k camera. I opened the box and it's a scary sight. The camera is scratched all over. It is a very sad situation

Perhaps you got one from an older batch. they fixed this. Mine was like this, but BMD replaced it. Just call customer service. I sent my camera in and within a couple days they sent me a new one with the new inside packaging.

Jean Capdouzey wrote:Thanks Rick, but if that is the case, and the same packaging is the same for all cameras, where are many not damaged at all? Mine wasn't.

Simple, in the hand of happy users
ok it's a joke, but ... like i start months ago the thread of pocket4k happy user to give good voice against bad voice, i answer to you in a simple way : happy user use his tools, unhappy user write on forums.

most of people miss that an happy user not think to write that he is happy, it is granted, unhappy user do it immediately.

about bad quality check i could tell you my history?
redone arrived with many scratch on surface
first Arri Alexa that i used has firmware 0.9, no audio, no more res recording more than FHD, reboot every 5-6 clip recorded (but body is untouched)
gh2 arrived seald without two screw of monitor, back on vendor
gh3 arrived sealed with scratch read the monitor, back on vendor
bmd cinema camera perfect
bmd production camera 4k perfect
SonyA7R battery contact defective, sometimes powerOff standalone, back on vendor
Canon 60D arrived sealed, mount weak, i mount first lenses and mount stay on lens and not on camera
gh5 good but problem on optional log profile
UMP perfect (i scrateched later the paint against internal grid of backpack)
pocket4k (first batch) perfect
fuji xt3 sealed, doa... never power On, replaced after three weeks of waiting from fuji
pocket 6k (first batch) perfect

For my point of view and from my statistics of last ten years, Bmd had best Quality check level... it's only matter of luck, if you check all forum, also for Red, SonyHighEnd cameras (cinealta), Panasonic, Canon, etc... everyone had unlucky situation, in these forums yo can find problems like here : fpn, noise, diffiraction, compression, error on support and more

The distributor took the camera back and gave it a new one. They provided a quick solution

they are pretty quick with fixing issues

There seems to be a problem with many filming gear not just BM devices. I'm not sure why is that, perhaps due to some consumer laws, but a lot of gear are shipped without a factory seal. Therefore, depending on the country's laws and retailer, somebody could buy a camera, use it for a couple of days or more, pack it back, and return it, no questions asked. Again depending on the laws and policy, the retailer could simply get the camera and put it back for sale as brand new. It also seems to me that in some countries the retailer might have the right (or do it anyways) to (re)seal the product.
If you think that's bad with a camera, let me introduce you to a bigger hazard: lenses. You can buy a brand new, $5k Zeiss lens and it is NOT factory sealed! This means, that there are some good chances you were not the first to open and hold the lens; in some cases others might have used it. I'm reading in forums many people that have close friends in retailers, they get to go through the whole stock of a lens to find the best performing sample for example. Others do it more manually, just keep getting one, returning, re-buying. This creates a long list of touched/used "new" goods.
As a nice example, I recently got 5 "brand new" Zeiss lenses from the local official Zeiss distributor. After coming back opening the boxes I found some slight usage marks on one of the lenses. Nothing crazy that couldn't be cleaned but the lens was obviously used before for a bit a little more than simply taking out of the box to inspect. When registering my lenses for warranty, I found out that the lens was actually already registered back in 2017! Obviously by somebody that got the lens, used it for a few days, registered it and then decided to return it. The retailer simply did a quick check (if at all) and put the box back for sale till I got it. In my case they didn't have another copy of that lens and it's not made anymore so I negotiated a significant discount. Another lens I got that day had really stiff focus. I used it for a couple of days but it didn't relax at all. So, they replaced with another copy for me and that's after they let me sample through another 3 copies. They of course put the box I returned right there for sale.
So... you see, what you buy as "brand new" with expectations that is in the condition that the manufacturer put it in at the factory, might not be new at all, and that might have nothing to do with the manufacturer. I don't know if that's the whole story with Blackmagic but it certainly is part of the story and a likely reason why many people receive their cameras in a state less than "brand new".
In my opinion, for such products, there should be a special factory-only seal, so we know that the product wasn't tampered with. If a product is returned, it should go back for inspection, if not at the factory, at a local specialised distributor that can seal it back after inspecting. It's a bit weird that professional gear is treated like toasters but I'm guessing local consumer laws and policies are the main factor here. From what I read, Blackmagic always comes in to replace any goods if such problems arise.

Curiosity. Once upon a time, dealers and resellers of new product unpacked and did pre-delivery checks. Could that be a factor in some observations of marks on cameras and lenses. Another once upon a time was the peculiar phenonmyn, that of an item being defined as "shop soiled". If intervening parties open goods and introduce pieces of shop dust or debris from packaging, then repack without due hygiene, those materials may injure the surface finish. Just a thought. The surface finish on the original big Ursa seemed to be easily scuffed. Damage to finish over metal versus finish over plastic of the same colour may be more appoarent.

robert Hart wrote:Curiosity. Once upon a time, dealers and resellers of new product unpacked and did pre-delivery checks. Could that be a factor in some observations of marks on cameras and lenses.

In the case of the Pocket 4K, at least, Blackmagic Design verified that the scuff marks and other signs of use were caused by the packaging itself damaging the cameras during transit (there is another thread about this) and they have switched to different packaging.