Mack Diamond Warranty - Worthwhile or Not?

[freddieg]

Hi guys!
I recently bought a Fuji S5 Pro and I'm debating whether or not to purchase a Mack Diamond Warranty, which covers pretty much everything except loss and water damage by immersion. The warranty is $130 for 3 yrs of coverage. Now, I'm generally very careful with my equipment but I have to admit that even with care things can happen. I had an incident several yrs ago when I was shooting a wedding and my Nikon F3 with MD4 fell from a counter and slammed on the floor. My heart sank but fortunately the F3 is built like a tank and there was absolutely no damage. I am not so confident with todays digital cameras, even the Pro level bodies, because of all the electronics and LCD screens etc... Has anyone had any problems with LCD screens failing or becoming damaged from a small fall, or had any electronic malfunctions as a result of any such incidents?

[Landscaper]

It's an insurance policy, and a very high-priced one at that. Here's how high: most stores pay their sales people 50% of the cost of the warranty as a commission. Think about that. Even after paying the salesperson a 50% commission, the Mack people can STILL make good money on the deal.

That oughta tell ya a lot!

By the way, if I'm not mistaken, the Fuji comes with 1 year warranty, so the $130 for the Mack is for 2 additional years, not three.

Personally, I can find better ways to throw away my money.

[freddieg]

The Mack Diamond Warranty runs concurrent with the manufacturer's warranty because it covers accidental damage, where the manufacturers warranty only covers defects. The regular Mack warranty only covers defects also, so that typically starts after the manufacturer's warranty runs out. I guess I'm just concerned how much it would cost to replace a damaged LCD screen or internal electronics damaged by a drop. I would think the cost would be significantly more than $130, but I don't know. That's why I was hoping someone with experience in having to get some of those items replaced might be willing to impart that knowledge to me. That would greatly help me in my decision-making process. Thanks!!

[clmonk]

A friend of mine bought his P&S at Ritz and got a warranty similar to the one you are looking at. He mistakenly set his S3 on the tire of his tractor and forgot about it. Only noticed it AFTER he had driven over it. Thinking there was NO POSSILE WAY they would honor the warranty, he took it to Ritz anyway, and even explained exactly what he had done. Guess what? They actually replaced his S3 with an S5 at no cost to him. To him, the warranty was definitely worthwhile.

[freddieg]

Well I'm sure he was glad he got his warranty. That's the kind of damage that is supposed to be covered by Mack's Diamond Warranty. I don't think I would waste my money on their regular warranty, because I'm a firm believer that if anything is DEFECTIVE it is gonna show up in that 1st yr which is covered by the manufacturer for defects!!!

[JWurst]

On average, insurance is always a bad deal. Insurance companies always charge more than the average repair or replacement costs. There are two situations when insurance makes sense: 1) an uncovered loss would result in severe financial strain. This isn't likely for any camera unless you are a full time pro and this camera is your bread and butter. Or 2), your use of the camera is not average and is very risky...and if this risk is not factored into the price of the insurance. i.e, if you regularly take your camera scuba diving in a zip-lock sandwich bag then this insurance may be a wise choice.

Otherwise let your savings provide you with self insurance and put your $130 into savings to serve as that insurance. Between that money and all of the money from other insurances that you declined, on average you will more than break even.

[Derrel]

Freddie,
Here are some numbers on buying a new S5 Pro from the UK. I myself bought one late last year from Ffordes in Scotland,and the Royal Mail freight charges were right at about $10 US dollars. Took eight days to receive a brand new S5 Pro in a sealed package with anti-tampering sticker holding the bagged body closed. Battery,strap,manual,CD with software,all perfect. Battery charger needed a US computer printer type power cord, which I had about five of laying around.
439 pounds at Jessops UK $636.92 US dollars
449 pounds at Calumet UK $651.42 US dollars.
499 pounds from Ffordes Photographic $723.97 US dollars

A $130 warranty over 36 months is roughly $3.60 per month or 90 cents per week to INSURE a camera. A new S5 Pro from Jessops,with a $10 Royal Mail shipping cost to the USA, would run you $17.97 per month over 36 months. Roughly $4.50 per week will buy you another entire S5 Pro. The Mack Warranty is about 25% of the cost on an entire,brand-new camera if bought from the UK,where S5 Pros are selling for about $200-$250 LESS than if bought in the USA due to currency issues.

An LCD replacement + labor on an S5 Pro in two years' time will probably exceed the used market value of that camera,so the insurance would be worth it. However,if you like the S5 Pro,it's probably not going to be available much longer,and it looks like it is Fuji's last hurrah in the d-slr market. "Replacement: of an S5 Pro in 12 to 36 months' time might mean a Nikon replacement camera. Does this help at all?

[Landscaper]

"if you regularly take your camera scuba diving in a zip-lock sandwich bag then this insurance may be a wise choice."

Not if the insurance company finds out. Insurance is designed to provide financial protection against foreseeable, but unlikely losses. It is not designed to protect you in exercises of stupidity or highly predictable risk unless you are prepared to pay for the extra coverage.

For example, life insurance is relatively cheap, but no one will pay off on the policy if you die during a scuba dive or a sky dive. The average life insurance policy assumes you take reasonable precautions to keep yourself alive.

The same principles apply to insuring your physical property. Of course, you could lie about the circumstances of the loss, but there's a pretty serious penalty attached to insurance fraud.

[freddieg]

Derrel,
That's very interesting info. I do like Fuji's approach to their sensor which increases the DR for high contrast images, i.e. wedding shots with white gowns and black tuxes. Do you know why Fuji may be exiting the DSLR market? Are there just not enough wedding and portrait shooters out there? It seems like the mail order stores in New York have a hard time keeping the S5's in stock!!!

[Derrel]

Freddieg,
One reason Fuji's exiting the market is that the market has matured; the N80-based S2 sold for $2499 when new, the N-80 based S3 Pro was priced similarly to the S2 Pro at intro. The D200 is the Nikon body the S5 Pro is built upon,and the S5 premiered at $1899 in 2007. Nowadays, the MP counts are going up and up,and frankly the amount of profit Fuji can make by buying a D200-class body from Nikon and then modifying it with a Fuji sensor is not enough to make it a worthwhile business proposition for Fuji. When the S2 Pro was one of the very best d-slr's on the market, Fuji built on the $389 Nikon N80 film body,and the same with the S3 Pro--an under-$400 Nikon FILM body was the chassis Fuji converted to a d-slr to make the S3 Pro.

When the S5 Pro was designed and built, the enthusiast/wedding pro/studio segment of the market demanded a lot better performance than an N80 could deliver. Once Fuji,and its customers felt they needed a D200-class body, the days of buying under-$400 donor film bodies lopped off the substantial markup of the S1,S2,S3 generations. Other d-slr builders like Canon and Nikon and Sony have much larger R&D budgets,and are making high-MP count cameras,and FF cameras. When it was possible to affordably buy a donor FILM body and add digital guts for a high markup,Fuji was in. Now....it seems like they want to be out of the d-slr biz. Fuji's niche market has many more options now,at great prices.