One trivia about imports: As the actual manufacturer might be put of reach to enforce warranty claims, e.g. because it is a non-EU based company without a legal

One trivia about imports: As the actual manufacturer might be put of reach to enforce warranty claims, e.g. because it is a non-EU based company without a legal entity in the EU, the importer of record is liable for the one or two year warranty for used and new goods respectively. Or for any other product liability. That why Incoterms, import declarations and customs papers matter much. As concrete example, if private person A buys something from commercial seller B in a third country and person does the import into his home country, seller B is not liable for any warranty or product claims in that country. Seller B is liable for those in his own home country. And I guess that might be the root cause for, in our example, Nikon (Canon seems to be the same so, judging from comments) is so picky about repairs and warranties on grey imports. US product liabilities and laws are quite special and severe, and I would understand if companies want to avoid any unnecessary risk here. Because those topics are no problem in the EU, I never heard of a case where repairs have been rejected based on country of origin. Warranties might be different so, for reasons see above. Edit: What Nikon says is actually very reasonable, and a lot of companies do the same regardong grey imports: we repair them for price X, but don't offer warranties since our local entities are not liable for it. That also means, the camera you bought while in Japan should be covered by Japanese warranties. Everything beyond that is basically good will.