Nikon repair

[Matt K.]

Woe is me ... my Nikon 70-200 has been giving me grief, the focus sytem has started to tell me: no lens attached. So I sent it in to Nikon. Here is the estimate:

Install new circuit system for the lens, clean and adjust: 479.00
Parts (including the VR system): 177.00
Shipping back: 30.00

Of course, all has to be taxed yet. So I am looking @ 768 dollars to get this lens fixed. I can buy a new SIGMA lens 70-200 without the OS for 714.00. This makes me wonder .... what would YOU do?

[Matt K.]

did I mention I am royally pi55ed off?

[Bambi]

did I mention I am royally pi55ed off?

you didn't have to- it's self evident!:mad: I think that my tendency would be to buy a new lens because after it's fixed I wouldn't be sure how good it would be or how long it would last.

However, my 2 cents are worth less then even that because I don't know anything about lens repair.

I am sorry for your troubles though:sad:

[Matt K.]

you didn't have to- it's self evident!:mad: I think that my tendency would be to buy a new lens because after it's fixed I wouldn't be sure how good it would be or how long it would last.

However, my 2 cents are worth less then even that because I don't know anything about lens repair.

I am sorry for your troubles though:sad:

Thanks, Bambi. This lens has served me very well over a year or so; bought it used on eBay, and it was fine. I dropped it once a while back, but it stillperformed fine after that. Now this! I am not sure if it is worth it ... maybe I put it on eBay ... lol ... buyer beware

[JAS_Photo]

Sorry about your lens. :(

[mbrager]

Matt:
I would absolutely pay for the repair and laugh about it. It's a great lens that you use and love, and it's still cheaper to repair it than obtain a new lens. After which you will have a factory repaired lens with some warranty for the parts and labor. To me it's part of the cost of DSLR shooting. Mike

[Mad Aussie]

You need to factor in the quote cost too. Now that Nikon have looked at it I assume there is a cost to be paid that will come off the cost of the repair should you go ahead.

The next thing I'd look at is how old is this Nikkor lens? You said it was 2nd hand when you got it. I'd be weighing that up against the new Sigma.

Also, is 'OS' some sort of Image Stabilization or something you need? at 200mm image stabilization is a handy thing at times.

What guarantee do Nikon give with their repair? After a full service and repair like this do you get another 12 months warranty in writing from them?
If so I'd be going that way myself. It may come back better than ever before.
If not, I'd be weighing up the real difference in these lenses and choosing the one that, in the end, is the best quality lens.

[Matt K.]

Matt:
I would absolutely pay for the repair and laugh about it. It's a great lens that you use and love, and it's still cheaper to repair it than obtain a new lens. After which you will have a factory repaired lens with some warranty for the parts and labor. To me it's part of the cost of DSLR shooting. Mike

Advise well taken; however, I opted NOT to repair thelens. So if the autofocus does not work, and the vr does not work .. oh well, I will have to use a tripod and faster speed/higher ISO.

I just cannot see myself spending this money and having still a used piece of equipment. The Sigma 70-200 comes with a 7 year warranty ... but does not have the vibration reduction.

[Matt K.]

You need to factor in the quote cost too. Now that Nikon have looked at it I assume there is a cost to be paid that will come off the cost of the repair should you go ahead.

The next thing I'd look at is how old is this Nikkor lens? You said it was 2nd hand when you got it. I'd be weighing that up against the new Sigma.

Also, is 'OS' some sort of Image Stabilization or something you need? at 200mm image stabilization is a handy thing at times.

What guarantee do Nikon give with their repair? After a full service and repair like this do you get another 12 months warranty in writing from them?
If so I'd be going that way myself. It may come back better than ever before.
If not, I'd be weighing up the real difference in these lenses and choosing the one that, in the end, is the best quality lens.

MA: there is no cost for the quote, the only money I am out is shipping it to Vancouver and receiving it back.

I am not sure how old this lens is, but it is definetly not a spring chicken. I talked with the tech today and he advised me that the costs are what they are. So I am seriously looking to change to a Sigma, which, when bought, comes with a 7 year warranty. Nikon will not extend any warranty on the lens after it is fixed.

Yes, the lens may come back better than ever before, but I am really shell shocked here. I do not have that kind of money to through around. Took me a while to save up for a used one (never again will I do that). My idea is to get a Sigma 50-500 OS, which gets realtivly good reviews. I like wildlife photography, and the longer reach will come in handy. Of course, it does come with a cost, the lens is pretty well a 6.3. So bump the ISO and up the shutter speed ....

Just so very frustrating, the whole thing. I wished they had lost it ... LOL ... and then replaced the lost lens with a new one ... :p

[JAS_Photo]

If this is the lens you mean? - http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70200vr.htm - I might be tempted to fix it were I in your shoes. I was considering getting that lens (When I have enough money) The replacement lens the VRII that came out last year is about $2250. This lens, I just looked up on eBay and it is gong for about $1750.00.

[Matt K.]

If this is the lens you mean? - Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70200vr.htm) - I might be tempted to fix it were I in your shoes. I was considering getting that lens (When I have enough money) The replacement lens the VRII that came out last year is about $2250. This lens, I just looked up on eBay and it is gong for about $1750.00.

THAT be that lens, yes:wall-an:, JAS ... got it on eBay a year ago for 1550. Used. I know it is a good lens, from the glass point of view and all ... so add to the 1,550 the cost of shipping it to Nikon (100), plus the repair (768), then this lens is almost worth it's weight in gold. This would mean that I would have a 70-200 VR f2.8 with new VR system, cleaned and calibrated. Total cost: 2,418. And no warranty, no telling what will go wrong with it:fingerscr. If I were a photographer who makes a living with this lens, I would not even think twice. But I do not sell my images, my photography really is a hobby.

I dunno, I asked them to send it back to me. Right now I don't want to fix it:sad:, I want to spend my money on another lens; I really would like the 17-70 or 18-50, that is my priority at this time. Who knows, maybe I will have a windfall and find some money growing under a rock someplace, then I will fix it. :shrug:

[Greg_Nuspel]

Maybe I should trade you my old 80-200 f2.8 and then I'll get the repairs done.