Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF lens a clearance item?

J&R is listing the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS ED-IF lens as a "Clearance Item: Limited Availability":

This label was not there last week.

I will call J&R tomorrow and see if I can get some info. You can do the same thing and then we will compare notes:

J&R Item # NKN 70-200/2.8

Tel: 1-800-426-6027

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Pablov

    seems to be more expensive than at B&H, doesn’t it ?

  • Nikon Fan

    Not exactly a clearance price as the previous post stated.

    In addition, I was told by a Nikon Representative toward the end of last year that Nikon did not have any plans on revising this lens. This was based on the fact that it is one of their best sellers, it is currently AF-S and also VR. Maybe they will update it, but there seems to be quite a few other non AF-S lenses that require more of an update than this lens.

    I also heard a few weeks ago, from a Nikon Representative that they were going to be replacing their “D” type lenses with updates to “G” types. This would seem to fit with the updated AF-S 50mm F/1.4 lens. If this is correct, then this might put an update of the AF-S VR 70-200mm lens toward the bottom of the list for an update.

    But what do I know, I just try to pick-up bits an pieces of information as most others do. It certainly will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

    I am also very interested in hearing what J&R’s explanation is for their advertisement.

  • ken rocky

    Wow I am going to be disappointed if no new version of the lens come out soon .

    I have money now to burn on new lens and I might spend it with something else …

    • I am in the need of some lenses if you have money to throw around Mr. Ken R. ^_^

  • Kiki

    Although this lens is known to be sharp, it is also known to have vignetting problems as well as softness around the edges, particularly when used on FX (full frame) format cameras (D3, D700). This long-in-the-tooth lens is very much in need an update, IMHO.

    I’m ready for the new lens to come out!

    • Pablov


    • Mine works fine and brings home the bacon. I’m still using 12mp crop sensor cameras and I don’t feel anything is lacking at 2.8 wide open. Looks good on a d700 also. A d3x would push this lens even less than my cameras–at least in terms of sharpness.

      I got sharp shots hanging out of a plane at 200mph. VR works fine for me too.

      I haven’t heard any complaints from people that own one. Just whining from people that don’t.

      If anybody’s got a right to complain, it’s the Canon camp. Their 70-200/4s blow away their 2.8s. My experience shooting a former employer’s 70-200/2.8IS on his 1dsmkii made me appreciate my own equipment. Both in the handling and looking at the files.

      I’m glad Nikon is continuing to develop and innovate with their line. The unqualified whining from the customers, I can do without.

      Anybody got an image that illustrates why the 70-200VR sucks?

      • Nikon Fan

        I think that you are correct in most of your comments. I think what most are complaining about is that the lens does not perform as well on a FX body as it does on a DX body.

        Depending on what some people are using it on a FX body for may not provide them the exact results that they are looking for.

        For me as you, I love the lens on my DX body and will continue to use it when I switch to a FX body. I have also used it on a FX body and found no or minimal problems for me.

        As I was told by a Nikon Representative toward the end of last year that Nikon did not have any plans on revising this lens. This was based on the fact that it is one of their best sellers, it is currently AF-S and also VR. Maybe they will update it, but there seems to be quite a few other non AF-S lenses that require more of an update than this lens.

        • Yeah, I didn’t find any issues on FX either. Haven’t tried a D3x, only film and a D3. I got much better corner on mine than Ken Rockwell’s examples. His looks like VR was on on a tripod.

  • anon

    i wish they’d just replace it already with something that costs 3x as much but also fix all the minor problems with the current lens so that people will stop saying the 70-200 sux.

  • B3

    I could be wrong, but one reason I would imagine that Nikon might replace this lens soon from a financial standpoint is that I imagine a new version would sell very well. Out of all the pro lenses they could replace, including fast standard primes, I think this one could make them the most money because it is a staple for so many photographers and it is known to have some performance shortcomings.

  • Greg

    It could just be a limitation of the J&R website. This could just be their way of indicating the limited availability of the 70-200 until the new price regulations take effect. Just my $0.02

    • Ravell

      or is that $0.03 after the price adjustement? hehe

  • Anthony

    Who knows maybe they might replace the 70-200mm 2.8 with an updated 80-200 2.8 afs/g svm. now i think that would be a nice update on a clasic

    • Nikon Fan

      The AF 80-200mm F/2.8D would be a prime candidate for an update. This lens is not AF-S and it is the older “D” type lens.

      The AF-S VR 70-200mm F/2.8G would not be for the reasons I speculated above.

      This would then leave the 70-200mm with its soft corners being appropriate on DX cameras and the new 80-200mm on FX bodies. Just a guess at best!

  • Pablov

    to find out some weakness of this lens, just look at DPReview’s review

    It’s too expensive to have that “issues” in a FX camera, specially at today’s high resolution state (D3x and probably another one coming)

    • Nikon Fan

      I have seen that review and you are correct and that is why I think it will not be updated. It works fine on DX bodies and there would be no reason to update it for that. What I think would happen is either the 80-200mm would be updated for a FX body or a entirely new design for a FX body.

      The more I think about it, I would bet on a whole new design for FX bodies to go with the 14-24mm and the 24-70mm new designs.

      • Pablov

        but the 14-24 and 24-70 are known to be very good, it doesn’t happen the same with the 70-200 🙁

        (I’m talking about using them in FX bodies)

    • What weaknesses? Can somebody show me an image that’s ruined by this lenses “weaknesses”?

      DPreview does indeed post some poor numbers for the lens. And then goes on to post some images that look quite good as samples.

      Which do you trust?

  • Pablov

    Canon’s version of this particular range (70-200) seems to be the best so far

    • CV

      For Fullframe, but the Nikon is better on crop sensors.

      • Pablov

        sorry I didn’t specify that, I only refer to FX,

    • Didn’t looks so hot when I tried it a couple years ago. Have they updated it in the past two years?

  • ken rocky

    For DX its been good enough so since D3X/D3 & D700 are, its about time Nikon wakes up and bring out the one for full frame.

    • Nikkorian

      For DX there’s a perfect alternative though, anyway. Without VR, but with fast & furious ultrasonic ring type AF: The 50-150 2.8 by Sigma.

  • Will

    There have been rumors of a replacement for this for a while. Given what everyone is saying about the FX issues they will probably update for spring.

  • steve

    After using the 24-70, 14-24 and 70-200 on the D3x, I can tell you that Nikon needs to update the 70-200. It’s just not as good as the other two, and it’s as likely to be in a pros bag as either of the other two.

    • Perfect someone who’s used it! Can you post some full sized examples?

  • Will

    Just checked out the page, it is no longer listed as clearance. I think we got in a big hoopla about nothing


    It’s just a trick to get people to buy the lens and to make them think they got a good deal. That’s why they have that crazy high price and show a discount price, so to pull in the suckers thinking they got a super deal. Amazon also does this. This is why I stick with B&H. They just give you the price and for go the games.

  • $1800 is a clearnace price? Who are they kidding? It’s gone up to $1,615.95 on amazon at $1620 at B&H.

  • Sony

    Why would you want this lens? I just bought a Zeiss 70 – 200 to go with my Sony A900 which blows the D3x away and is a quarter of the price. Who cares about VR or VR II or VR IV Delta 496i Supercharged Kompressor Anti-Vibration Sonar – I have inbuilt full frame image stabilization – the experts – many of them on this forum said they would never be able to do that but alas – SONY DID!!!!!!!

    They said Sony wouldn’t make it in the DSLR market – now watch them eat up Canon and Nikon in one gulp… creating the new giant NINONY. CAN’T WAIT – WHAT WILL ROCKWELL WRITE ABOUT THEN????

    • Andrew

      Rockwell can get much better pictures than your Super Sony with his D40 and his kit lens, and it cost a lot less than your Sony too.

      • Sony

        Darn – you’re RIGHT! Still, glad to be away from the Nikon v Canon obsessives – its really liberating to wander around with neither of those brands and have someone sauntering up with the other telling you why Nikon is better than Canon and vice versa!

    • Nikon Fan

      Congradulations on your Sony purchases. I personally have no negative comments about any other manufacturer.

      People make choices based on personal choices. Regardless what drives that decision it is ultimately theirs to make.

      I am happy that there are many choices for people to have and are able to satisfy their on goals.

      All that being said, I think we should all continue to purchase as we choose, take pictures and enjoy the moment.

      LIfe is not forever!

      • Sony

        Yes it is, I just checked with JC!

    • Greg Tommers

      Sony DSLRs are a joke. I feel sorry for people who buy them. They clearly don’t know any better.

      • Nikonuser

        I wouldnt say Sony DSLR are a joke, the build factor is not up to par as with Nikon and Canon Pro bodies but their prime lense use Zeiss optics and you cant go wrong there.

        As for differences in Sony/Canon/Nikon its up to the end user and how they feel with the equipment.

        And getting back on topic with this posting, I have taken shots with the 70-200mm VR with a D3/D3x and D700 and have no issues with softness at the corners. Maybe its just my composition but I love this lens and the sharp images it produces at even the widest aperture.

        Nikon has for the most part, globally increased the prices of their imaging equipment up to 20% as of Feb 1st. Some stores are still offering their pre- Feb 1st prices on stock purchased before this.

    • Got some examples?

  • Max Archer

    I really hope they’re not replacing the 70-200VR – I just bought mine in November!

    I haven’t encountered the softness quite yet, since I’m working with a D2X, I hope it won’t be too bad once I go over to the D3…

  • the price of this lens was $1599 last week – I guess they also could not wait until Feb 1st.

  • stephen

    I just picked one up from J&R for $1599. It’s a great lens. The time to buy is when you’ll use it.

  • btbam

    hey, where did the smileys come from?

  • Daf

    I’ve been keeping an eye on this one as others.
    I have the (old) Sigma equivalent and could REALLY do with VR in low-light conditions where flash isn’t suitable.
    Having read about the FX/FF corner sharpness issues I thought I’d wait a little – been waiting a year now ;o) But when there are Lens rumors – this is often one of them.

    For those wanting demonstration of this so called corner-sharpness issue, Mr Rockwell provides:

  • Kiki

    According to the linked Web site that Daf referred to, the 70-200 appears to be the poorest performer?

  • Back to top