All I can say is this. I bought my 18-200 VR soon after they came out (I was on a wait list) from my local Authorized Nikon Dealer. There was no extra charge for the 5 year warranty, and after more than 4 years of use, I just had to send it back for repair... You decide.

Thanks Guys, very useful!

I had the aperture blades wiggle loose - or maybe I dropped my bag :) about 4 years into owning a lens and sent it in not knowing for sure if it would cost me or not - Nikon fixed it, cleaned it, put a new zoom grip on it and all for free! Like others said, it is not much unless you have to use it. When you do though, Nikon is great.

I would never pay extra for a warranty unless you are traveling, put it through hard use, or are around water where you do expect it to get wet.

Drab, The first link you posted is from 2006. The second link shows a person (from 2009) that was happy and those from 2005-2007 that were not.

It seems that your links prove more that this is worth it than not.

For 40$ I would do it looking at the 2 links you provided. /shrugs

*edit - I carry idiot insurance on all my gear, so if I drop it or it is stolen I am covered, yet for 40$ I would still get it as another layer of protection.

I have about 40 years experience with SLR cameras. Never had a problems with a lens that required it being returned under warranty. That said, I agree with aslightdelay that I'd rather have a longer warranty than not, but I'm not going to pay extra for the warranty.

IndyGeoff said:
for about 40$ for a 3 year mack warranty (for a lens between 1k and 2k$) .. i would go for it

Have you actually used a Mack warranty?
http://photo.net/filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00JKJu

http://www.amazon.com/3-Year-Service-Plan-Digital-Cameras/product-reviews/B0009YDNGA/ref=cm_cr_dp_synop?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#R11VE6UMICZ2LI

Google around.
Their cred is 50% at best, and that means worthless. I am not going to pay someone to possibly, maybe, if they feel like it, fix my equipment.

The whole point of a warranty is financial insurance and piece of mind. Even if they fixed your problem 66% of the time, it's worthless.

If your "insurance" itself needs insurance coverage, you need a better policy.

for about 40$ for a 3 year mack warranty (for a lens between 1k and 2k$) .. i would go for it

Don't forget to see if your credit card has some added benefits such as extended warranties. I used my AMEX and got an extra year. I think other cards have something similar. Check it out.

Canon or Nikon,, either one will do just fine.

It's insignificant 'til you need it. Speaking strictly for myself, I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Hi, I am new to the forum, although long time lurker
I am moving away from Sony DSLR and looking into Nikon or Canon. I have been reading a lot about the two, but this is not my question.

I am wondering what the 5 year warranty of Nikon lenses worth it. Most other (including Canon) only come with 1 year warranty. Is that significant? How often you end up with manufacturing or material defects after the first year? (accidents and other use/abuse are naturally not covered) If one wants to purchase additional 4 years on another lens only with 1 year warranty, how much would that be?

Any opinions and suggestions would be greatly appreciated