NANPA benefits

Consider myself a serious nature photographer who teaches a few local programs and travels a bit in an active retirement. I keep bouncing around the idea of joining NANPA but don't clearly see the benefits if I'm not trying make a living at this.  (Very few can actually do that, eh?)  So, I'd like to hear the pro and con of joining.  Is the travel insurance worth it? How about the equipment insurance?  How's the quarterly online magazine?  It would be nice if there was a way to sample the online magazine, but doesn't appear to be available.  What else if a good part of the membership? 

Hope to hear some objective comments.

Thanks.

Call me Pablo.

I belong to Nanpa primarily for the equipment insurance. It covers accidental damage to equipment. I have had several drops of my large lenses and cameras and they paid to either replace or repair them without question.

Good comment on the insurance.  Thanks for the idea.

It is interesting that the NANPA policy includes much more than the coverage I have as a rider on my home owners.  I did follow up and get the policy details.  The policy is an "all risk" one that basically covers anything not specifically excluded. Wars, civil insurrections and nuclear accidents are not covered. A clumsy friend's dropping a camera bag is covered.  Seems to overlap to provide the coverage I'd have if I bought an extended warranty when I buy a lens or camera new. Does cost about double of my current rider but that adds coverage for accidental damage is worthwhile. It's not the same as I currently have.

Now, this brings up another aspect of insurance which I struggle with each time the policy needs renewal.  Do you cover everything including lens hoods, filters, mounting plates?  Or do you cover just the newest and most costly items?  Do you cover an older back-up camera body?  I reason that the repair coverage is really only needed on cameras, lenses and maybe tripods.  Do you cover new value for newest items and used replacement for older lenses?   

Any wisdom to share on this?

Pablo
 

pablo wrote:Good comment on the insurance.  Thanks for the idea.

It is interesting that the NANPA policy includes much more than the coverage I have as a rider on my home owners.  I did follow up and get the policy details.  The policy is an "all risk" one that basically covers anything not specifically excluded. Wars, civil insurrections and nuclear accidents are not covered. A clumsy friend's dropping a camera bag is covered.  Seems to overlap to provide the coverage I'd have if I bought an extended warranty when I buy a lens or camera new. Does cost about double of my current rider but that adds coverage for accidental damage is worthwhile. It's not the same as I currently have.

Now, this brings up another aspect of insurance which I struggle with each time the policy needs renewal.  Do you cover everything including lens hoods, filters, mounting plates?  Or do you cover just the newest and most costly items?  Do you cover an older back-up camera body?  I reason that the repair coverage is really only needed on cameras, lenses and maybe tripods.  Do you cover new value for newest items and used replacement for older lenses?   

Any wisdom to share on this?

Pablo
 

All thoughts I am having Pablo...with my homewner rider, everything is covered (unless you make a claim and the fine print comes into play HA,HA).  I have replacement value for 4 lens 70/400 $2200, Minolta 600 f4 $6200 (good luck replacing it), 70/200 f2.8 $2000, and 500 f4 $13,000.  The total is $254 a year and really hurts to pay.  Is Nanpa in the same ballpark?  Forgot a 300 2.8 valued at $7000 is included in that 254 figure.

pablo wrote:Now, this brings up another aspect of insurance which I struggle with each time the policy needs renewal.  Do you cover everything including lens hoods, filters, mounting plates? 
Pablo
 

A Nikon lens hood made of carbon fiber costs about $600 or so! Just a thought in case the lens is dropped. It should be covered as part of the lens, IMO.

Joe

First, I don't believe my homeowner's is "all risk", maybe yours is different.

The NANPA sponsored coverage is 0.0245 times the declared value. There is a minimum of $350. Sounds like you are way over the minimum. I think the key is that it is "all risk" whereas my homeowner's rider is basically theft and fire.

I recall that when I first took out the homeowner's, the company wanted me to get an appraisal on the big 400mm lens, and could not understand that I would have incurred a big expense just to get it to a dealer for appraisal. Tells me they don't know what they are insuring, eh? Makes me think the NANPA will have fewer hassles if I have a claim. Note the first input above to my post.

Pablo

My homeowners is "all risk" (Met life)and declaring my lenses, they just wanted a serial # and how much I wanted to declare value. I have never made a claim, so I don't know if they pay up as advertised. By the way, the hood on my 300, I have seen quoted at $1200 to $1500, I think Sony has to make a replacement from scratch.

pablo wrote:Good comment on the insurance.  Thanks for the idea.

It is interesting that the NANPA policy includes much more than the coverage I have as a rider on my home owners.  I did follow up and get the policy details.  The policy is an "all risk" one that basically covers anything not specifically excluded. Wars, civil insurrections and nuclear accidents are not covered. A clumsy friend's dropping a camera bag is covered.  Seems to overlap to provide the coverage I'd have if I bought an extended warranty when I buy a lens or camera new. Does cost about double of my current rider but that adds coverage for accidental damage is worthwhile. It's not the same as I currently have.

Now, this brings up another aspect of insurance which I struggle with each time the policy needs renewal.  Do you cover everything including lens hoods, filters, mounting plates?  Or do you cover just the newest and most costly items?  Do you cover an older back-up camera body?  I reason that the repair coverage is really only needed on cameras, lenses and maybe tripods.  Do you cover new value for newest items and used replacement for older lenses?   

Any wisdom to share on this?

Pablo
 

The Nanpa policy includes  coverage for miscellaneous items such as filters flashes etc.  If you drop the lens with the hood on it and the hood breaks they will pay to fix or repair it.  When you list the item on the declaration, you insure it for the purchase price which includes all the items you bought with the lens including the expensive lens hoods.

I only insure my high value items such as my 600mm, 500 mm and the DSLR's.  As a ballpark, I have about $30 to $35000 in declared items on the Nanpa policy and my premium is about $850 I think. Its expensive but I can tell you from experience, there is no question that they will cover a claim quickly and professionally. 

Most riders should be all risk.   That's why you get a rider, isn't it?  Because you're not satisfied with the "fire & theft only" limitations on your straight homeowner's policy?  In fact, if all your rider gives you is F&T, then why get a rider at all?  Most homeowners policies will cover photo gear with the same F&T coverage that your other belongings receive, no rider required.

Anyway, when I had a rider on my homeowners policy, it covered everything.  I asked my agent, "what if I drop it into a lake and cannot recover it", he said, "completely covered".  What if I leave it at a picnic bench in a public park and don't remember leaving it there for 2 or 3 days, go back, and it's gone?"  "Completely covered", he said.  

Those riders are pretty much universally known to provide really really really good coverage.  If yours is as bad as you say it is, perhaps you should change companies.  But then again, if you make any money from your photography (even "hobby income"), then most companies will not give you a rider at all, and you will have to get a separate business policy.

Another thing to watch out for in a homeowners policy is will it be covered if it is stolen out of your car or hotel room or lost by the airlines? If stolen from a car, it may be under the car insurance and only then if the car insurance has a clause about any contents.

Roger

Slightly off topic with the OP but relevant to insurance: I keep my camera gear away from homeowners. With homeowners there would be a $500 deductible AND if I make a claim it can raise the rates for a couple year period. All my gear is insured through State Farm under a personal articles policy. No deductible, no questions asked coverage for damage or loss at replacement value of a new item (or repair if possible). Coverage is good while traveling, against dropping, stealing, water, etc... I think it's about $1.25/hundred on coverage (higher for professional use) and it will not have any impact on my other policies should I have a claim. Also, if I have a claim there will not be a rate increase. So far over the last 5 years they have only made money! (Knock on wood)

I use State Farm, but many companies offer similar coverage... maybe even your current carriers.

Like Chris, I used to have a State Farm personal articles policy until my equipment got stolen in Costa Rica tour a couple of years ago. They paid out the insured amount immediately ($9000), but refused to renew the policy when it expired. After that, I took the Nanpa Chubb insurance and pay a 3X premium, compared to State Farm, but with the piece of mind that they will not drop me if I make a claim.

Note that, at least as of a few years ago when I did my initial insurance research, many homeowners insurance policies will NOT cover camera equipment if it is used for business. This means if you ever have or will make money from your camera equipment, even just selling the occasional print here or there, and your insurance company can prove it, they will not cover your gear. So I would not recommend using your homeowners insurance if you have a website that lists prints or services for sale.

I had the NANPA policy for a while and made a few claims and never had an issue getting covered for my mishaps. The years I carried the insurance it paid for itself. I no longer carry the insurance because I travel and photograph far less than I used to and no longer rely on photography as my main source of income. I suspect I will get camera insurance again at some point in the future, but I am not sure when and I think I will shop around a bit to learn more about various coverage options. I have no complaints about the NANPA insurance, but don't feel the extra $350 expense is really a wise investment for me at the moment since I use my gear so little these days.

I have been a NANPA member since 2010 and I feel you get out of it what you put into it. I have some definite frustrations with the organization - it does not feel like it offers as much to me that is accessible and affordable compared to other organizations I belong to. However, since I have chosen to get involved and not be just a member, I do get more out of it and I believe that the organization is headed in a positive direction. The current leadership is working to make NANPA much more relevant in the nature photography world, and actively promoting conservation and education. NANPA has been around for a while and I think it has a lot of growth potential, it just needs to catch up with the digital world we live in now. If you join NANPA and become an active member of a committee or meet-up group or attend the summit, road shows, or regional events, I think you'll find that the community NANPA provides is really a wonderful one and it is a great resource for networking and growing your craft.

I have NANPA insurance and used it this year when a 400 DO broke in half. They made the payment immediately, and we had a 500mm replacement before we even sent the broken lens to them. All they asked was a photo of the broken lens. I was very impressed.