Mine took just a little over two weeks from Oregon to LA, CA.

Indecline, how long did it take to get your camera fixed, I am planning on sending mine in tomorrow MI to NY for the exact same problem

I can happily report that I got my D800e back this Monday from Nikon in Califorina. They repaired the 10 pin without any question, I also asked them to check the left focus and the RO stated that they checked and adjusted the focus. All repairs under warranty. Of course I had to pay for shipping and insurance to Nikon. the bad news is they send the camera back without insurance. :(

This issue just rots my socks, to spend this kind of money on a camera and have it fail in less than a month, the worse part is Nikon won't issue a recall so at this time we are at their mercy at what cause they arrive at......warranty repair or......impact damage. I hear that they try for the impact damage first, unless you hold fast against that, the problem with that is, they hold all the cards. I posted on another forum last night and I was informed that if you are in Britain the retailer is obliged to replace the camera and they deal with Nikon unfortunately it is not the way here in the good ole USA, we have to deal with Nikon.

Unfortunately the 10-pin socket in my D800 broke down too, after one use. I hope it will get repaired under warranty.

Indecline said:
My 800e has a broken 10 pin socket just like the photo above.

Hello new to the forum joined to add to the list of unfortunate's who has purchased a D800E only to have the 10 pin socket come loose in the socket after (3) short weeks of ownership. I use(d) the remote quite a bit as I have been doing a lot of night shooting with all the Christmas lights and displays of late. I have contacted the retailer (Gary Camera of Merrillville IN) who has told me that I need to contact Nikon. These guys were great in the front end, but I am sure disappointed with them now, I don't know who to be more disappointed with, Nikon or Gary Camera! Anyway I am about to send my camera into Nikon for evaluation "as they put it" I hope that they replace it as opposed to fix it, as I don't think a camera this new should experience this kind of failure. I will let you all know how it goes in the future, I imagine 3-4 weeks.

In the meantime I will have to use my stand-by 700

Serial #3008459

Mark

I just got my D800e a week ago. Yesterday I took it out and used the 10-pin connector for the first time. Today I went to plug into it again and found it was broken just like the others talked about in this thread - pushed down and off center. I'm going to send it back to the retailer, but truthfully, I'm fearful the next one won't last any better. I will definitely be more careful with it and probably won't tighten the ring. Having a 10-pin on the front instead of a connection port inside the side flap door was a big part of my decision to get the D800 over the D600. What a big disappointment and such a sinking feeling to know my new baby is broken already.

Serial number: 3010xxx

Best lens nickname ever The "Bigma" haha just thought this should be added to this discussion^^ The 50-500mm F4-F6.3 might deserve some attention here.

I know the 70-300VR has outsold many modest price teles. Both the initial 80-400VR Nikkor and the 2006 revamp get lots of evaluations as slow. From what I hear a faster 80-400VR would sell really well. Maybe msmoto's and TaoTeJared's researched numbers show why Nikon has been very slow to re-release this lens in a faster version. Too bad from my standpoint as for DX Nikon DSLRs like a possible D7200 this would look perfect. This thread is a very good one and the data presented does tell us a lot. Thanks to NR for this kind of valued information. Maybe this long awaited lens to buy for ME to buy shows I'd better not hold my breath much longer.

Yes mine broke too. I have been using those connectors in my blimps for many years with film cameras, then a D2X, D300, D700 and now D800. Never any problem before in over ten years until now. It's in the shop, and i am using a loaner (not a D800.) a friend in England has reports of this occuring in the UK.

The problem with the connector is a design flaw that until this body didn't seem to matter, which makes me think they are getting the plugs from a new source. With most connectors, such as on a coax cable, the threads are on the socket element such that screwing on the plug draws the two together. On the ten pin, the threads are on the surrounding cavity; therefore the plug can be drawn into the cavity but if for any reason it is misaligned or there is an obstruction (bent pin, jammed pinhole) the plug exerts force on the inner piece and forces it to the point of failure. I can't tell you how ugly it felt to see green circuit board in the hole! My workaround will be to attach an MC-22A to the body and leave it on, then jump the other end of the cord to a new set of connectors in the blimp, so that I am not repeatedly challenging the fitting of the plug. Annoying! But I still love my Nikons.

That's the chart - bit tricky since you have to add some of the runs together. It is interesting to see which lenses sell the most. You can also see and look at the past lens updates to see where the next couple will be. I couldn't find it off hand, but there is another chart that shows the per year. In the past, Nikon has upgraded lenses once they drop in sales drastically and after 5 years.

All of the expensive & Pro glass is lower - it's more expensive. About 188,000 over 12 years or almost 16,000 per year. In half that time the 70-300vr rack up over 886,000 or almost 148,000 per year - 9x more sold. That is what I was looking at. Hell the 14-24 has sold almost 180,000 in 5 years, and that costs more.

70-300/4.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR - 886,852
28-80/3.3-5.6 G - 1,711,736
55-200/4-5.6 G IF-ED VR - 2,783,212
18-55 is over 5 million!

@ TTJ

Some numbers to consider….

The first VR lens was the 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR edition 1 produced from Feb 2000-2005 and 116,402 were produced An update in 2006 and since 72,511 have been produced.

The latest version of the 200-400mm f/4 VRII has seen 4,508 produced since 2011.

And, the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII since July 09 has seen 238,047 produced.

The AF 35mm f/2 D has seen since 2006 a total of 107,146.

Here is the link, last updated 30 Nov 2012

http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html

msmoto said:
Nikon may have patented a 100mm - 500mm f/4-5.6 lens, but this has never been in production, thus no price. Years ago a 180mm-600mm f/8 zoom was sold, a slider type where the lens length was changed. Cost is unknown. A current 100-500mm f/4-5.6 would no doubt be in the $3,000-5,000 range. There is a very large difference in an f/4.5 and an f/4 lens.

Thus, I would suspect to keep the ability for a teleconverter, the 400mm end at f/5.6 is where it will be. Cost... my guess is about $2,200

Does Admin have a list or know how to compile one of all the patents for an "update" to it?

I would just like to see the list and I think everyone would be informed to see how long this has been going on. I remember seeing the sales/production numbers of all of Nikon's lenses and the 80-400mm actually was quite low - really low actually. One of those, "I would love to see it - but never end up buying one" lens.

I would think they would be focusing on a 24mm f2.8, 35mm f/2, 20mm f/2, replacements as well if not before. The primes outsold the 80-400vr by massive numbers. Could see a 70-300vr replacement as well - that is almost as old as the 80-400.

Dodging said:
I agree on the longer Tamrons - I just don't like them and the images look soft tom me. The Sigma 120-400 OS is not bad, but the 150-500 is better... Even better is the 50-500.

My biggest gripe with the 80-400 is the slow focus speed, but I'm sure the replacement will be faster...

Two questions remain though: When? How much?

I'd still go for the Sigma 120-300 though - it's a fantastic lens

of course I get recommended the $4,700 lens :P

I would much prefer a 200-400 f/5.6 or even better a 400 f/5.6 prime, but if it is faster focusing, sharper and VR III a 80-400 would still be wellcome...

Nikon may have patented a 100mm - 500mm f/4-5.6 lens, but this has never been in production, thus no price. Years ago a 180mm-600mm f/8 zoom was sold, a slider type where the lens length was changed. Cost is unknown. A current 100-500mm f/4-5.6 would no doubt be in the $3,000-5,000 range. There is a very large difference in an f/4.5 and an f/4 lens.

Thus, I would suspect to keep the ability for a teleconverter, the 400mm end at f/5.6 is where it will be. Cost... my guess is about $2,200

msmoto said:
My suspicion is the new lens would not go beyond 400mm. For, if it goes to 500mm, then the f/stop drops to 6.3 and no teleconverters can be used. A 500mm f/5.6 lens would be in the $3,000-4, 000 price range and I do not think Nikon needs this as it has the 200mm-400mm f/4.

And, the new third iteration of the VR is now out, so the probability of Nikon coming out with the new 80-400 replacement seems high. Maybe 100-400mm. Or even a 150mm-400mm. The idea of this lens, IMO is that it is portable like the current 80-400. And, holding the f/stop at 5.6 would allow the TC-14EII to be used so one can have 560mm at f/8.

Hasn't Nikon patented 2 designs for the 100-500 4-5.6? I think that if it comes in around 2-2.5K US and it has very good performance at 500 people will pay for it. Although seeing the 70-200 f4 VR makes me think that even if this lens gets replaced it wont be cheap.

My suspicion is the new lens would not go beyond 400mm. For, if it goes to 500mm, then the f/stop drops to 6.3 and no teleconverters can be used. A 500mm f/5.6 lens would be in the $3,000-4, 000 price range and I do not think Nikon needs this as it has the 200mm-400mm f/4.

And, the new third iteration of the VR is now out, so the probability of Nikon coming out with the new 80-400 replacement seems high. Maybe 100-400mm. Or even a 150mm-400mm. The idea of this lens, IMO is that it is portable like the current 80-400. And, holding the f/stop at 5.6 would allow the TC-14EII to be used so one can have 560mm at f/8.

aquarian_light said:
Is there anything in this zoom range (i.e. max zoom circa 400) in anything NOT nikon thats worth getting? Tamron.... Sigma... anything else thats a good replacement for this mystical nikkor 80-400 update? Sigma is dodgy... seems to be lots of lemons from what I've read, and every Tamron I've had my hands on just... feels.... cheap.

Say maybe the Sigma 120-400... any word on that? orrrr the 150-500?

I have the Sigma 120-400OS. Sample variation is very wide though. Got mine 2nd hand. The 1st owner said that he went through 5 copies to get a good one. Nice lens if you do get a good one though. Very heavy( as heavy as a 70-200 VR). Some reviewers say that it is almost as sharp as the 100-400L. You can take a look at my Flikr for examples. I saw someone at F1 in Singapore this year with a D3s and a 120-300. Asked him why he didnt just get a 300/2.8 VR and he told me that he preferred the zoom since, 1) He wanted the zoom for those 'what if' shots 2) According to him the focus speed and sharpness on a good copy is very close to a 300/2.8 VR2( he went through 2 copies before settling on this one mind you). He also said that the 120-300 OS takes TC's relatively well 3) it weighs roughly the same as a 300.2.8 VR. If i were to take one lens to a safari it would be the 120-300 on a D400

aquarian_light said:
Is there anything in this zoom range (i.e. max zoom circa 400) in anything NOT nikon thats worth getting? Tamron.... Sigma... anything else thats a good replacement for this mystical nikkor 80-400 update? Sigma is dodgy... seems to be lots of lemons from what I've read, and every Tamron I've had my hands on just... feels.... cheap.

Say maybe the Sigma 120-400... any word on that? orrrr the 150-500?

I agree on the longer Tamrons - I just don't like them and the images look soft tom me. The Sigma 120-400 OS is not bad, but the 150-500 is better... Even better is the 50-500.

My biggest gripe with the 80-400 is the slow focus speed, but I'm sure the replacement will be faster...

Two questions remain though: When? How much?

I'd still go for the Sigma 120-300 though - it's a fantastic lens

looon said:
Finally some real hope for this lens. I got the impression from the article that he's expecting it in 2013. Hope it has a focus limiter, and if it comes in the form of 100-400 that would be even better.

I have seen articles like that for 5 years now. I think I have seen somewhere around 6 different patents from Nikon for a lens in this range (70-500) and none have ever came to fruition. I know I'm not holding my breath.

Dodging said:
Get a Sigma 120-300 f2.8... Now there's a good replacement lol

Is there anything in this zoom range (i.e. max zoom circa 400) in anything NOT nikon thats worth getting? Tamron.... Sigma... anything else thats a good replacement for this mystical nikkor 80-400 update? Sigma is dodgy... seems to be lots of lemons from what I've read, and every Tamron I've had my hands on just... feels.... cheap.

Say maybe the Sigma 120-400... any word on that? orrrr the 150-500?

This is one of the most awaited Nikkor Lens EVER!

Finally some real hope for this lens. I got the impression from the article that he's expecting it in 2013. Hope it has a focus limiter, and if it comes in the form of 100-400 that would be even better.

Get a Sigma 120-300 f2.8... Now there's a good replacement lol