Nasty nasty nasty. Shame on Nikon to let something like this slip them.
It may not be such a big issue now, but if those particles starts to shake off the barrel and on to the lens elements this would be serious.
And on assignments such as weddings or press images it would be really a disaster for the photographer.
Jan 14, 2010 at 07:57 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
gvg45 wrote:
As nice as it is to be the first one on the block with the new toys, sometimes it means you are also the first one to see/experience any flaws or manufacturing issues. I'm sure Nikon will find and resolve the issue.
That being said, anyone looking for a deal on the new 70-200VR2 may want to keep an eye out on the refurbished page at Adorama.
+1, thus the reason I don't buy anything until it has been out on the market for 6 months or costs less than $50.
Jan 14, 2010 at 08:54 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
SHVv wrote:
For a follow up...I called Nikon Service to report the problem and obviously they are aware that this problem exists. The person that I talked to made sure that my lens was in the data-base and I was issued a "case" number. They will inform me via e-mail when they sort the problem out.
As expected, Nikon support was very professional and "supportive".
Steve
I'm not surprised. When people spend $2400 on a lens, they expect quality and Nikon knows this. They WILL fix this problem and quickly.
Companies work hard to avoid such issues, but sometimes despite their best efforts, things slip through.
It might not be anything. Does the problem affect the lens' performance? Could be just cosmetics. Although, I'd rather not have that 'cosmetic' issue when paying 2400 usd.
adam
Yep, makes sense if its a lower density cheap casting and is indeed just a light baffle. Chalk up one more for the 'internet megaphone effect'
SHVv wrote:
I had pre-ordered my 70-200 VR II from Amazon in August, it was delivered at the end of November. I thought that I was passed the 30 day return period, however, since my card was charged during the holiday shopping period, the refund deadline is Jan. 31, '10. Wooo...hoooo..I may have dodged this bullet. Return labels are printed, it's going back in the AM.
I and others have reported, in addition to the 'chipped" threads, silver (metallic ?) particulates in the lens. A picture of this has been posted, this isn't my lens, mine is about 1/2 as bad as the one shown.
In the photo above the flakes look like "glitter". Since when is having flakes of most likely very reflective metal inside of a new $2500 lens OK? Maybe if you don't own one?
My VR II will be here on Friday (after a delay, grrrrr), it will be getting a very careful inspection by me and and if there are flakes inside the barrel or on the elements it is going back.
I already checked all of my other (less expensive) Nikon lenses, no sign of bad threads or coatings coming off inside of the lens.
Jammy Straub wrote:
You know those may not be loose particles at all and could just be reflective bits in the finish, could be.
That is also true..several edges of internal "rings" are silver and reflective, not black...a few of the silver colored particles are on the optical elements. There is a problem with this lens and trying to determine what it is by looking in with a pen light is pure speculation on my part. Hopefully Nikon will sort it out and fix it. Mine is going back to Amazon today....I will re-order when I can be confident that a new production run is up to prior Nikon standards of quality.
zoomer200400 wrote:
Mine is at Nikon California as of today for the issue. I'll let you all know what happens. Even if they choose to NOT fix it, I'll have the DOC that I sent it in if they ever decide to issue a recall.
We shouldn't have ANY issue for a lens that costs $2500.00 - even if is doesn't affect performance. We don't need camera equipment to start being like software - that's broken when you buy it brand new and you have to apply fixes.
Jason
I will be curious to hear if they do any service. The response that I got from Nikon was that "pits" and debris in the lens were within "standard" for the lens. A bad corporate position for Nikon, IMO. They are basically saying that the defective 70-200 VR IIs aren't defective but the "new" standard of Nikon quality. Very bad move.
Nikon in El Segundo CA sent me a email today, 1/15, regarding my 70-200mm VII and this issue. I had overnighted to Nikon this last Monday 1/11. They have accepted it for repair according to the email. There is no cost for the repair and no time of when the repair will be completed in the email that was sent to me.
Hopefully there are spare parts in enough quantity for repairing those who want the repair done.
zoomer200400 wrote:
Nikon in El Segundo CA sent me a email today, 1/15, regarding my 70-200mm VII and this issue. I had overnighted to Nikon this last Monday 1/11. They have accepted it for repair according to the email. There is no cost for the repair and no time of when the repair will be completed in the email that was sent to me.
Hopefully there are spare parts in enough quantity for repairing those who want the repair done.
Jason
Interesting...perhaps they haven't gotten the SOP corporate response. If Nikon's position is that these defects are within "standard" and then some service centers correct the "standard", that will be an interesting situation. The plot sickens.
I just unpacked my lens and it has plenty of very sparkly 'glitter' inside of it right out of the box! I have not even put it on a camera body yet! Ticked.
I'm thinking that having highly reflective bits of debris inside of the lens could have a detrimental effect on IQ, agree?
I'm curious; has anyone reported any issues with photo's taken with these lenses that have the silvery flakes in them??
Here's what I'm afraid of; A Nikon Recall.....then a few months down the road, your going to see a ton of these lenses that were "recalled" as refurbished units on E-bay, and every other place that sells used photo gear.
I want to get one, in the future.....but, will be following this thread very closely, and holding onto my Nikon 80-200 AF-D for awhile.
LuMax wrote:
I'm thinking that having highly reflective bits of debris inside of the lens could have a detrimental effect on IQ, agree?
Will post photos later. Grrrrrr.
Tim
You're correct, reflective bits inside a lens could cause contrast reducing flare or odd internal reflections. There's a reason the insides of most lenses are matte black.
I'm beat because I just got back to the USA from Hong Kong, but here is a quick pic of the inside of my new, freshly unboxed lens. The "threads" inside my lens actually look very clean, no problem there. I'm not such a big fan of the loose flakes of "glitter" though. Sorry about the crappy quality of this photo, I'm simply too tired to do a proper light setup tonight. I'll post better photos this weekend when I have more time and am rested.
At this point I am almost certain this lens will be returned, I can get dirt & debris inside of my lens myself, I don't require Nikon's help for that.
