Lusting 70-200 so bad but have Qs

[Hartawan]

Okay so I am ready to buy a 70-200 but I am stuck in making the decision. Heres why:

1. I found a used one for $1450 shipped. It is in mint condition but of course, no warranty.

2. A guy that I know can get me a new one at the camera store for $1650 no tax. But I can only get it starting September because that's when the store has the no sales tax sale.

3. I also have read the thread about rumors on revising the current 70-200 with a nano crystal coating of some sort? Should I just buy used now and sell it when it comes out then update myself?

So at the moment should I WAIT(omg) and spend $200 to get the warranty? Has there been problems with this lens that needs warranty work (such as motor)? Man aren't I so indecisive...


Other questions that I am wondering...
A. Since this is my first VR lens, does the VR drain a lot of battery? I shoot about 200-300 per session (with whatever im doing), will I need a second battery? By the way I have a D300 with a grip but 1 battery.

B. Do you switch VR on and off? Say off at daytime and on when in shade?

Help an indecisive man out :tongue:

 

[kirbdog]

I would not be afraid to purchase a used 70-200mm it is a very robust lens. Even having said that I purchased mine new for the piece of mind that comes with having warranty.
As for battery life the VR will use up your battery a bit quicker. But it depends more on your shooting style as the VR is only active when you half press the shutter button.
I generally leave VR on all the time, I only turn it off when I mount it on a tripod.

 

[CurtisBilly]

There is a rumor that Nikon may come out with a "N" revision of the 70-200. I think it is quite likely at Photokina in late September. If you don't *need* the lens, you might want to wait to consider all the options. That said, I guess the new one will sell for around $2000 for awhile.

 

[Hartawan]

Even having said that I purchased mine new for the piece of mind that comes with having warranty.

I am exactly in your position in this!

There is a rumor that Nikon may come out with a "N" revision of the 70-200. I think it is quite likely at Photokina in late September. If you don't *need* the lens, you might want to wait to consider all the options. That said, I guess the new one will sell for around $2000 for awhile.

Definately not getting it for 2k+ since the original problem was with FX format cameras not DX.

 

[catalyst]

Hey Tommy -

I can't help you decide, but I'll through in a few observations :wink:

I'd say that the security of getting a brand-new 70-200 that includes a 5 year yr Nikon warranty would be worth $200. Of course, I bought my copy used, here on the Café! It's one of only three used lenses that I own; I've yet to have a problem with any of them.

I doubt whether the (rumored) new upgraded version could possibly be a significant improvement over the current one. It is, deservedly, regarded as one of Nikon's finest, especially for DX bodies. Any new version will certainly have a higher price tag, though, accompanied by a vigorous marketing campaign.

The VR does use batteries quicker, yet even on my D200 (whose battery life is not as good as is your D300's), that's never been as issue, because . . .

I *always* carry an extra battery - and you should also :smile: Think of it as insurance - for that occasion when you come across the amazing shot at the end of a long day shooting . . . plus, it will last at least as long as your D300!

Good luck - I don't think you can make a bad choice here, although if it were me, I'd probably go with new if your budget can possibly allow it (and if your deal will be for a US model). September isn't that far away.

Whatever you decide - you'll love that lens.

Eric

 

[Hartawan]

^^
Getting new does feel good. I've read somewhere that someones VR motor died, I dont know how and I dont remember where I read it. If theres warranty, I am pretty sure they will replace it at no cost? But say the warranty was not there, would a motor replacement be more than...say $300?

Man I hate this.

 

[cleoent]

I've seen used ones in good shape go for 1350-1400 here on the cafe, so if you're patient you can save more money.

BUT, if you can afford the extra money, get the warrantied one. My 70-200 was sent to nikon today, i bought it used, it's not focusing properly, initial guestimates puts the repair at 275-375, and i've heard of the repairs going up north of 500 on some peoples.

yuck.

 

[Hartawan]

I've seen used ones in good shape go for 1350-1400 here on the cafe, so if you're patient you can save more money.

BUT, if you can afford the extra money, get the warrantied one. My 70-200 was sent to nikon today, i bought it used, it's not focusing properly, initial guestimates puts the repair at 275-375, and i've heard of the repairs going up north of 500 on some peoples.

yuck.

Oh geez. Thanks for your input, that totally put me on course to getting a new one. By the way, do you have to send in your camera body along with the lens to get it fixed?

 

[catalyst]

^^
Getting new does feel good. I've read somewhere that someones VR motor died, I dont know how and I dont remember where I read it. If theres warranty, I am pretty sure they will replace it at no cost? But say the warranty was not there, would a motor replacement be more than...say $300?

Man I hate this.

Tommy -

Do a search here for words such as "AFS motor repair cost", and you'll come up with something like this:

https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/search.php?searchid=1832797

After wading through everything, you'd find a Nikon repair cost for an AFS motor on a 300 f/4 that came to $241. Not certain whether that would translate exactly into a similar repair on the 70-200, though.

Under warranty, the cost would be $0.

And, no - you'd not need to send in the camera body when sending in a lens for repair.

Eric

 

[Hartawan]

Cool thanks for the info!

 

[drjiveturkey]

If you're worried about warranty then get it new. BUT get it now if it's available at your friend's shop unless he can hold it for you. The 70-200 has a notorious reputation of being out of stock all the time.

 

[GeneC]

Without a doubt, I would say new! Not in all cases but with AFS and VR, $200 for 5 years is a small price to pay IMO.

 

[fks]

my 70-200VR had the AF-S motor and VR components replaced after four years. it's one of the more complex lenses, and i would definitely recommend buying new for the warranty.

there will be a replacement for the 70-200VR, given nikon's history on the 80-200 f/2.8. as to when that'll happen...

buy what you need, not what you want :wink:

ricky

 

[Hartawan]

Okay thanks for all the input guys, I think I am going to wait and get myself a new one.

By the way fks, how much did that repair cost you if you dont mind me asking.

 

[hornagain]

I'm sorta in the same dilemna.

If I am going to buy used I will buy it in the weeks following the new 70-200 'N' announcement as the 'must have' crowd dumps theirs. The prices seem to always drop for about 4-6 weeks then rebounds a bit when that supply dries up.

If I am going to buy new I will also try to get the 'old' one around the time of a 'new' announcement when Nikon, hopefully, has a rebate and I can find one in stock.

 

[Max]

As someone who has a bunch of these lenses, I thought I would weigh in. They are built really well and hold up to renter abuse, negligence,etc. We haven't had to send 1 in yet for maintenance (vs 3-4 of Canon 70-200 2.8 IS that we had to send in). Thus, I wouldn't be afraid to buy used.

Max

 

[Baywing]

Based on my experience with my 70-200VR, get the new one with the warranty. These lenses have alot inside to go wrong, not the simple optics of the AIS lenses or the simple mechanics of the AF-D's. My copy has been in for repair 4 times so far, and though the repairs are all n/c, I'm still ticked off that I've paid over $150 in shipping fees to send it back. As for waiting for a possible new design, you could still be waiting for it this time next year and even if they do come out with a new version, why would the one you have take any less great photos? My 80-200AFS version is just as good as it was before the 70-200VR came out and in some ways, is better.

 

[Hartawan]

I'm sorta in the same dilemna.

If I am going to buy used I will buy it in the weeks following the new 70-200 'N' announcement as the 'must have' crowd dumps theirs. The prices seem to always drop for about 4-6 weeks then rebounds a bit when that supply dries up.

If I am going to buy new I will also try to get the 'old' one around the time of a 'new' announcement when Nikon, hopefully, has a rebate and I can find one in stock.

Yeah that's what I was thinking but we dont know when the 'new' one is going to come out.

 

[thrdprophet]

Okay thanks for all the input guys, I think I am going to wait and get myself a new one.

By the way fks, how much did that repair cost you if you dont mind me asking.

If I had to pay for repairs for a lens that had warranty, I'll just buy a used lens for cheaper....

 

[fks]

it was covered under warranty, so there was no price.

By the way fks, how much did that repair cost you if you dont mind me asking.