Nikon related news/links

  • S0me rumored Nikon D4 specs I received - no idea how reliable this info is:
- 15.7MP (more sensitive and with less noise than D3s)
- Up to 16fps with “double exposure”
- ISO 200-12800 (plus extended range)
- 61-point AF
- 1080p video at 30fps
- CLS control (although no flash is mentioned)

"The present invention relates to an external storage device that can read in and record image data stored in a camera, and to a camera that is connected to such an external storage device. An external storage device according to the present invention comprises: a read out unit that reads out management information in a camera, regarding an image file that is stored within the camera; an identification unit that identifies information on specifying device to which the image file was transmitted, based upon the management information read out by the read out unit; a selection unit that selects an image file to be received from the camera, on the basis of a result of identification by the identification unit; and a reception unit that receives the selected image file."

I am think something between the Epson P-3000 and the newly announced Canon wireless file transmitter (I did receive a rumor about a new "smart" Nikon grip).

  • Nikon service in Poland must be really bad, so bad that now there is a dedicated website created with the hope that something will change.
  • Multiple reports of a weird peeling of the thread inside of the new 70-200 f/2.8 VRII lens - see the full story here. Check yours!

This entry was posted in Nikon Patents, Weekly Nikon News Flash and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • longtimenikonshooter
  • longtimenikonshooter

    After a quick check of mine (US warranty version), it has the same issue but not as profound as the Chinese users documented. One thing I have found out is that the quality of Nikon pro gear has slipped gradually. I received a defective D3s that has serious banding in long exposures.

    • I got a D2x new and it failed within the first month….it refused to autofocus. It was replaced immediately by the company from which it was purchased, and the second body has performed without a single flaw for years. The fact of the matter is that it happens.

      Another anecdotal note: I have used Apple Computers for years. Every machine I’ve owned has needed repair, replacement, or both. Yet, Apple has the best track record in the industry for equipment quality and customer service. It just seems to be my luck. Does that mean I want to switch to PC? No way.

      I am not saying that all of these problems are acceptable, and that we should just roll over and take it. However, I expect any company will have challenges and problems they face after a product is released in the wild. I know Nikon cares about quality, and that they want to make the right decisions from the start as often as possible.

      Here’s to hoping this all gets sorted out, especially for those of you with the equipment that has the issues. I do know you’re facing a real dilemma, and empathize with your position.

      • FWIW most people I know who own Apple laptops have had hardware problems, usually with the display. But Apple finally has a decent OS–vastly superior to Windows if you don’t mind Steve Jobs dictating everything about how you must organise your life… You could try running MacOS on a ThinkPad?

        I haven’t been shooting SLRs long, but I’ve been impressed by Nikon’s lack of quality control. I had to return my first 50mm f/1.4 because the focus clutch was DOA, and I had to return 2 D40s before I got one without severe hot pixel problems. That’s 3 returns on 7 items (3 D40 kits and 4 lenses).

        I wonder how much money they save, and how much of the savings they pass along to their customers, by requiring the customer to do QA for them…

        • I’d be interested to compare industry numbers for Nikon vs. the competition. I know Apple has the lowest number of incidents in the industry, highest rated customer service, and highest level of customer satisfaction. Looking objectively, the problems I’ve experienced are by far not the norm.

          As for Nikon, again, I’d be interested to know if there are any industry statistics on equipment quality.

  • zzddrr

    Hmmm. That lens peeling issue looks pretty bad. 🙁

  • zzddrr

    Let’s see how long it will take for Nikon to acknowledge the issue. This is going to be a costly recall for them. Too bad.

    • longtimenikonshooter

      Perhaps Nikon used some cheap Chinese suppliers for parts. Too bad.

      • wtf

        that’s an unfair assumption you cheap sh….

        • longtimenikonshooter

          Nikon has used cheap Chinese suppliers and got burned before. For example, the original soft case shipped with Nikon 200-400mm f/4 can not sufficiently support the weight of the lens, and causes the lens to fall out the bottom. Very expensive damage indeed. I know this simply because I happened to receive the recall email from Nikon.

          • GlobalGuy

            The 70-200 VR II that I received was very dirty inside and had to be sent back! This lens isn’t perfect. I don’t know why Nikon priced it as they did. At least $25 of the extra $500 should have gone to quality control of each and every lens. Yes, they do NOT make enough of these lenses for that to be a burden. And hiring an expert at $50 dollars per hour to check a lens for 15 minutes to half an hour per each is not a huge task. Nikon needs to get its quality control back up because these stories are making them sound more and more like Sigma every single year. Well meaning — but too many “OOPSIES”.

          • wtf


            so are you suggesting that Nikon is being cheap by using cheap suppliers?

            or are you implying Chinese products are of low quality?

            or better yet, do you mean cheap Chinese products are inferior to all cheap product from across the globe including the US?

            I think this issue is a simple slip-up by Nikon and original comment from you is either arrogant or ignorant. I say both.

            don’t blame a manufacturer of any country on a design flaw.

  • Gra

    15.7MP for D4??

    I bet by the time it comes to light it’ll be 157 MP lol

    • PHB

      Makes no sense to me. 15MP does not hit any particular output size threshold like 6MP and 10 MP did. Moving from 10MP to 12MP made good sense for marketing as it was twice as many pixels as the 6MP generation and a lot of folk wait to see MP double before they buy a new body.

      I can’t see many people trading up to have prints that are 10% longer on the diagonal. Moving to 18MP makes sense, moving to 24MP makes sense, staying at 12MP makes sense. But 15MP is really not enough extra to be interesting.

  • dude

    any idea what is “double exposure” ?

    • More rubbish from the DX-roadmap guy 😉

    • NikoDoby

      I’m thinking it works something like the new Sony point & shoots. They are capable of taking 6-10fps and then combining to form a single image. Perhaps something like that or auto HDR?

      • V

        Nikons already have the ability to put something like 6 frames into one exposure. It actually can produce some cool images.

    • Martin

      16 fps is actually very fast for a mirror. I suppose that the mirror flap once every two shoot in order to reduce mechanical constrains. 8 mirror actuation result in 16 fps.
      I am also curious about the max fps the shutter can stand; the slow motion video of the 11fps of a D3 was already pretty impressive!

      • Now *that* actually makes the most sense!

        • Maybe it’s true, but I think it’s about double exposure to enhance dynamic range – like in Fuji S5 pro but without any special sensor – just multiple shots with different EV.
          I hope it won’t happen, because I’m thinking about moving to canon.

      • Tim

        Thats quite en genius actually!!

  • I would hope the next round has more then 15.7 mp.

    • NikoDoby

      Yeah, especially if canon brings out a 32mp 1DsMk4.

      • Not me. Quality, not quantity. I don’t care if Canon announces 100mp tomorrow. Their 21mp 5dMk2 sucks, each and every over-rated pixel.

        And NikoDoby, you’re comparing two different beasts. The equivalent to Canons mythical, not-yet-announced, figment of someones imagination 1DsMk4 would be the D4x, not the D4. I only want as many additional megapixels as to still produce as good low light sensitivity (or greater) as the D3s.

        • Anonymous

          1Ds4 = D3(s)/D3x/D4(s,x..)

          Just because Nikon has a low MP and high MP body, doesnt mean they are different to compare. FF = FF. The 1D4 is like a D2x, but with a smaller crop factor. So what would you compare that to of Nikon?

          • WoutK89

            That was me saying it, this PC at school is spacing

          • bla

            Yes, they are different to compare.

            D3(s) = 1D mark III / IV
            D3x = 1Ds mark III / IV

            Different cameras, different target groups.

          • Historically, Nikon’s “x” models are the equivalent to Canon’s “s” models. So Bla has it exactly right:

            D3(s)/D4(s) = 1D mark III / IV
            D3x/D4x = 1Ds mark III / IV

            And just to reiterate, too many people put way too much stock in only one metric: number of pixels. A good clean 10mp camera can blow many 20-30mp chips out of the water, simply by using the proper combination of chip, processor, and file structure. I’ve seen cases like this plenty of times as digital has grown up.

            Frankly, Nikon could stay at 12mp/24mp for the next 5 years, and I wouldn’t bat an eye. Why? Because I know that along the way, they’re improving the QUALITY of those pixels, and in turn producing a modest 12/24mp chip that competes with the other guys’ 20-40mp chips. Sheer resolution is nothing without quality.

            I can confidently say that a clean D700 shot will rival or best a clean 5dMk2 shot most days of the week—at half the resolution. Not to mention the sudden onset of buyers remorse you’ll get after you buy the 5dMk2 then realize how much of a plastic toy it is after holding a D700.

        • Jay

          yup the 5d2 sucks, thats why it sold in the top 20 of most sold cameras in 2009 ROFL.

          • Jay, I’d love to see your list. Link, please?

          • Jay


            I can give you the bcn japan ranking page as well, but I doubt you speak nihongo lol.

          • Jay

            screw it here is the japan page


          • In Japan. Not the US.

            And thank you, I don’t speak Japanese. 🙂

          • Jay

            actually the first link is wrong the second is correct that is total dslr sales for all japanese companies.

          • Jay

            btw I find your opinions pretty baseless, why stick to one brand? Why not enjoy every brand ? Why limit yourself to just one company? I dont get people like you……

          • “why stick to one brand? Why not enjoy every brand ? Why limit yourself to just one company? I dont get people like you……”

            A) It’s dollars and *sense*, for me. I don’t have endless income to buy the best of multiple brands, and I want the best of whatever I get.

            B) I choose to be very brand loyal. I like to reward companies with my financial vote, and therefore try my best to choose a company that warrants that choice. I realize that in choosing any brand there will be problems inherent with the choice. There will be sacrifices. There always is. As they say, the grass is always greener….I chose Nikon Digital at a time that I was looking to upgrade from the incredible Kodak DCS760. The Kodak was the most filmic DSLR on the market up to that point, and I felt Nikon had really stepped up to the plate with a solid contender (for the first time) with the D2x. It was a great camera, and produced the organic look and feel I was hoping for.

            C) I try to avoid hype. Canon is a hype machine. That bugs me. Does it mean they produce crappy cameras? No. But Do they stand up to the hype? Equally, no. I believe people are seeing through that hype more now than ever.

            I have always told folks (who ask my opinion on which brand to buy) that I hate Canon. I hate Canon personally. I shoot Nikon personally. But they’re both great systems, and they compete head to head, which I also tell folks that ask. I hate the gloopy look of the images. I hate the desaturated crap that comes out of their raw files. I hate the sloppy, heavy-handed noise reduction on high ISO, and banding in shadows on low ISO images. I think Canon skin tones make people look plasticky, and their FF sensors are known to blur the outside 30% or so of the frame. Canon has more dollars, so they spend more money glossing over these issues and hyping up the benefits.

            Even so, I’ve seen some work from Canon shooters that makes me envious. I’ve even seen photog’s that create images consistently with Canon gear that looks very appealing to me. But by and large, I can spot Canon images from a mile away, and they just don’t sit well with me. Every time I use Canon gear (of which I’ve done often) I’m constantly disappointed.

            Now, why would I pick up tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear when my experience is such?

          • Jay

            “I have always told folks (who ask my opinion on which brand to buy) that I hate Canon. I hate Canon personally. I shoot Nikon personally. But they’re both great systems, and they compete head to head, which I also tell folks that ask. I hate the gloopy look of the images. I hate the desaturated crap that comes out of their raw files. I hate the sloppy, heavy-handed noise reduction on high ISO, and banding in shadows on low ISO images. I think Canon skin tones make people look plasticky, and their FF sensors are known to blur the outside 30% or so of the frame. Canon has more dollars, so they spend more money glossing over these issues and hyping up the benefits.”

            Interesting, because i feel my nikons produce more unsaturated raws than my canons, also seems to me you like desaturated pics…. Also what is this gloopy image you speak of I dont understand this technical term? Nikons were known to be noise machines (ahem d200, d2x) til they upped their game fortunately with the d300,d3. The 5d2 does have banding unfortunately but you really need to push the dr of the file to see it and pixel peep @100% so I am doubting you know the problem in full. None of the other cameras produced this phenomenon. Skin tones look plasticky… I think this is more of a post process than sooc. It seems to me you just read about the faults of cameras instead of actually using them. Your comments prove it and such. Well off to enjoy both my nikon and canons……

          • Jay

            d3/d200 banding
            ruddy orange skin tones

            5dmkii landscape.. doesnt look gloopy to me lol.
            your above pics are from a 5d original lol. judging from the canon example it looks like the used the 17-40L which is known to be soft in the corners, and its seems that it was a windy day judging from the blur the trees are creating on the left side. Still dont understand this gloopy. I will however concede that nikon has improved the noise when they introduced the d3/d300 but anything before that was crap. Dude your really grabbing at straws man. I use both systems and I think your just justifying your purchases lol.

          • Jay—We can go on all day. Of course you can find a few anecdotal examples of someone screwing up with a Nikon, as well as situations where there are real issues. But a night scene shot at an ISO nobody knows, with an exposure bias which nobody knows is not proof of anything. The D200 has banding at night in the pitch black. Cool.

            The Canons have banding and noise at ISO 100 with proper exposure in dark mid tones. That’s a real world issue, discovered on a real world shoot.

            As for the D3 example, you clearly need to understand indoor lighting. The magenta/green color shifts are due to the exposure time being faster than the frequency of the light as it cycles through the color spectrum. This would happen on any camera, film or digital, given the proper exposure combination. This is not banding. This is not noise. This is a conflict with indoor lighting, as is to be expected.


          • Oh, and here’s a link to “all crap” produced with a pre D300/D3 camera (D2x):


          • Jay

            Lol I we have a thread on potn that would prove you wrong on the banding issue… which btw canon fixed on the early 5d’s. There are plenty of shots proving you wrong, also your banding expamples provide me no proof of proper exposure or manipulation in cs4 so your point thrown right in your face.
            The nikon skin look primary complaint is a orange hue bias and canons is plasticky as some of you like to refer to it, pick your poison. The D3 is known to band as well and theres proof of it on flikr,dpreview, just cus you deny doesnt mean it doesnt exist. The theme I am pushing to you is you are biased and as such will nit pick anything canon does but save nikon from any mistakes. Both companies cameras have known flaws, if you cant produce a good picture from either of them than thats your problem I guess. I find it tacky when people brand bash over stupid things and spread rumors… and for what ? Its all quite pointless really.

          • Dude. Listen. Apples and oranges. High ISO banding in the middle of nowhere is quite a bit different than ISO 100 banding in a controlled lighting scenario. Get real.

            And seriously: learn what banding is. The examples of “D3 banding” you linked to are. not. banding. period. Duh.

  • jay

    This is totally unreal. Just checked my new 70-200/2.8 and the inside threads are broken everywhere!!! NOW WHAT???!!!! I can’t believe this. I bought mine from Amazon.

    • jay

      Okay, I just checked, Amazon allows to return defective products. Anyone has prior experience with Amazon returning lenses? Thanks!

      • longtimenikonshooter

        amazon allows return within the first 30 days of ownership. you need to get into your account and under the purchase there should be a return link if you’re still within 30-day window.

      • jon what longtime said..outside 30-day then you gotta contact nikon directly for defective products.

    • That’s too bad 🙁 Bad Nikon!

      But is the lens still working fine? What purpose do the rings serve?

      • NikoDoby

        Jay why not send it to Nikon and have it fixed/replaced?

        • jay

          I checked under Amazon, it allows me to return before end of January. I think i will get a replacement first, if it has the same problem, I will ask for a refund. I am not going to try my luck with the repairs.

      • jay

        These are not some minor defects. The broken threads everywhere is very unsightly. i have no idea what they are for, but it doesn’t look good for Nikon.

      • alex

        they only reflect light, it’s not a thread with moving parts on it

  • Geoff

    CLS control with no flash? Wouldnt RF control be nice? When I suggested this several months ago I was ridiculed. I know it remains unlikely, but it sure would be nice.

    • Anonymous

      Nikon has a patent involving synchonrization of flashes using common RF protocols

      this patent was originally reported here at NR

      it would not surprise me at all if this leads to advanced wireless lighting becoming RF and built into the D4 and D400

    • LGo

      The lack of a CLS in Nikon’s D3/D3s is the reason why I opted for a D700. Using an SU-800 or an SB-800/SB-900 as Master CLS Control Unit is much too cumbersome.
      If Nikon finally incorporates CLS in the D4, then I will buy the D4.

      I hope that Nikon also adds an infrared wireless shutter release in the D4. Nikon is able to do this with less-expensive camera models and I often wonder why Nikon opted to delete this from the higher end models. Installing a remote shutter release in the current pro and semi-pro bodies Nikon bodies takes too much time and quite difficult when done in dark or dimly-lit situations. Ideally, the infrared ports for this will be located both in the front and in the rear of the camera body, allowing wireless remote shutter release from both front and rear.

      • WoutK89

        “infrared wireless shutter release”
        with a receiver also in the back, why would you make a IR-remote only usable from the front, that doesn’t work when you have a cam on a tripod and want to shoot birds from inside your home for instance.

        • WoutK89

          Just wondering why Nikon chose this for the lower end bodies 😉

        • bla

          Yes, shooting behind a window with a very long birding lens with flash.
          Any other unlikely scenarions?

          Unlike IR sensors, RF is not direction-sensitive, by the way, and hence would make a better choice.

          • WoutK89

            Are you reading, if so, you will get that the camera is outside, not inside, and who uses flash on birds anyway? They are away for a good few minutes if you do. And you say long lens? Thats where the tripod and remote come into play, you dont need a long lens if you can use a camera remotely. So not so unlikely now?

      • V

        I use an SU-800 commander even on bodies with a built in flash — why? well because you have the controls to the lighitng output in an easy to use comander instead of going through the menus.

  • Neil

    A number of people think that it is a casting issue for the part and it isn’t threaded but is an internal baffle regarding the new 70-200.

    • longtimenikonshooter

      Nikon’s Service Center in Canton, China documented the issues here:

      Translation: there is presence of tiny particles inside the lens barrel when it’s zoomed to 200mm in the second group of lenses. customer requests inspections.

    • jay

      it doesn’t matter if it’s threaded or not, it definitely shouldn’t look like it is. I will post a photo tomorrow (take a micro shot in day light)

  • Kiratipong

    Not only in Poland
    I think may be Niks Thailand was very bad too
    (Actually we don’t have Nikon service in Thailand)

  • krish

    i check mine.. and i’ll be damn it got the same problem
    i already pass the 30 days time range… what should i do… >___<

  • LGo

    I have thoroughly checked my Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II and see no problem with the thread at all zoom settings.

  • longtimenikonshooter

    My copy not only has damaged thread but also small particles/debris are visible at the edges of the inner tube. Users in China reported all their copies have problems, even unsold ones at stores also display the same issues. I doubt exchange it will solve the problems.

    Alternatively, I can send it to Nikon but I don’t know whether they will be able to get good parts on time for repairs. Because the defect issue seems like a worldwide scale. Big time.

    I just returned a defective D3s two weeks ago, and now I need to return this long-anticipated lens. Don’t even want to mention replacement of 200-400mm f/4 due to defective soft case last year. What the ^%&$ is going on with your quality, Nikon? This is totally unacceptable, period!

    • Ubiquitous

      Do not forget the D5000 recall. Ouch!

  • Mark

    For $2300 I expect only the best quality. If Nikon’s going to charge top dollar, I expect nothing less. I’m glade I didn’t pull the trigger on this one.. Yet

    • longtimenikonshooter

      it’s not $2300 rather $2400.

    • bla

      Manufactering mistakes are made everywhere, regardless of the price of a products. If you expect a 100% certified error-free product, $2400 will not nearly be enough. So think again.

  • jon

    FYI, for those bought anything from bhphoto, they extend RMA request for exchange/refund until jan 18 2010 for item purchased from nov 15 to dec 24. 15-day RMA request does not apply for purchases made within this window.

    but, there is no guarantee the replacement 70-200 vr 2 will be any different this time around (maybe months from now). and no guarantee that 70-200 vr2 will still be $2400 months from now either. trend is exact same nikon pro lenses are getting more expensive than cheaper.

  • HAHA. That pixel flash trigger—the information listed on the ebay page inspires a ton of confidence. For example:

    2. This is electronic products accessories; some of the environment causes may affect the working. However this is hardly ever to get this situation, don’t worry!

    3. This component can’t be strong vibration, or may lead to product failure.

    Or the most comforting:
    5. The batteries should not install anti-polarity otherwise the batteries may leak corrosive liquids, heat or explosion.

    Mostly I just think the translations are super funny.

    Seriously, though…seems like the company is a group of Chinese knock off artists. Which is fine, and I’m not judging. But for me and my equipment, I think I’ll trust it to the more respectable PocketWizard or some such.

    I wonder if PocketWizard has any issues like maybe “the batteries may leak corrosive liquids, heat or explosion.” That’s weird.

    • WoutK89

      They say that could happen when you place the batteries reversed (+ to – and – to +)

      • Sorry, must not have made it clear I was mostly being sarcastic. Just found it funny how much confidence I gained after reading the product details on their ebay page. 🙂

  • Ed

    So is the Nikon 70-200mm original (the one that just got replaced with VRII) still of high quality?

    I am kinda on budget……… I thought about the new 70-200mm VRII but it looks like the defects are rampant………… maybe I’ll wait til all recalls have been made?

    • bla

      Shooting DX or FX camera?
      DX, get the old one. FX, get a new one.

      • My 2¢: if you can hold out for the 70-200 VRII, then I highly recommend it. There are some clear indicators online that the new lens is significantly sharper, and it has better VR, if you use it much (I don’t). I owned the original 70-200, and I regretfully must say that it was not up to par with the prior 80-200 2.8 legacy which it succeeded. It was not a sharp lens, and bad enough that I was in a small way grateful when it was stolen, forcing me to go back to my 80-200 2.8 two-touch.

        I’m looking forward to getting the new VRII version once they get this issue sorted out. If you care about sharpness (on DX OR FX), then I wouldn’t touch the first 70-200. It’s beautiful, but it doesn’t perform as would be expected IMO.

      • Alternatively, you could always get the older 80-200 2.8 for about a grand. No VR, and body only focus drive, but it should be a solid lens for years, and it won’t lose a ton of value.

        • Matt

          I use the 80-200 2.8 frequently, and can’t recommend it enough. Wonderful, solid build that actually helps stabilize the camera in your hands, and really rich, sharp images. I’ve tried the 70-200 vrii and actually prefer the older lens for its build quality. VR isn’t amazing enough that it makes a difference for me.

          • The 80-200 is probably the lens I’ve used most in my photography, ever. It’s a solid lens, and definitely of the finest optical quality. I was happy to see the new 70-200 vrII step up to the plate and mirror that heritage. I know this pitting issue isn’t the best option for the owners of this lens, but it seems like a minor quality issue which can be addressed, one which leaves the lens performance unmarred.

  • Ray

    Mine shows the same defects. The thread is scattered everywhere. Not sure whether this is serious or not. Bought a bit over a month ago (The Netherlands).

  • Anonymous

    My 70-200 vr2 has some very minor pitting, nowhere near as bad as the photo on the front page. No debris and works beautifully so i am not overly concerned though it is a bit of a let down that this has happened.

  • mine 70-200 VR2 is fine even though was a lot abused over winter. Anyway sad to hear that, that will be costly for them 🙁

  • CS

    Where is this new 70-200mm VR2 made? I was planning to get one today! My old 70-200mm VR1 is starting to make large clinking noises when i use the VR. Darn! What to do!

  • alex

    if Polish Nikon service is bad i really don’t know, but wait to see Nikon Romania in action… any little check/repair takes 1 month except sensor cleaning which takes 1-2 days.

  • tim

    I have a a question for all the 70-200 VRII users. Dont mean to be offensive, i just wish to know.

    How are the pictures with the lens? How is the operation? Does VR work?

    Is a cosmetic (if everything works ok) thing really that important?

    My lenses usually look horrible in a year or two of use, but work.. that seem the most important thing to me, that’s why this interests me.

  • Pechspilz

    Here’s another photo that shows a damaged thread in the 70-200 VR II:

  • Ray


    That all looks ok. The lens is great!

    The question is what can you expect of a 2300Euro lens? The next question is whether this problem will aggravate over time; eg. the metal loosing particles over time damaging the inside of the lens.

    I am allright with abusing and wearing out a lens myself, even though my equipment tends to last a long time. I expect equipment I buy new to at least start undamaged.

    At this level I expect a lens to be delivered in perfect shape. Not damaged goods.

    • tim

      Thanks Ray, that makes sense yes!

  • Segura

    I have the same pitting (to a lesser extent) in my lens and some small particles too. USA Serial Number 200094xx. Will have to check the box for manufacture date, but received it November 2009. Glad I registered it for the 5 Year Nikon USA Warranty, instead of just leaving the warranty registration blank like most fools.
    Since I am out of my return period, and I suspect Nikon is just starting to be aware of this, I will hold off and see what resolutions they offer later and send it in when I can be without this beauty for a few weeks. I will update this post later tonight with some pictures of mine.

  • Dweeb

    Admin – the 70-200 issue should be broken into it’s own thread.

    So anyone expect a statement in 3 weeks from Nikon saying something like “cosmetic flaw that won’t affect the functionality of the lense”? It’s hard to believe some bonehead actually assembled a lense using a part that exhibit such flaws, and another one approved it. I wouldn’t expect this on a hundred buck lense. I’m sure we haven’t heard the last of this one.

    • Dweeb

      This is the lense that had it’s price jacked up several hundred dollars isn’t it? Makes a good companion to concerns over the PC-E design issues.

      • Dweeb: what’s wrong with the PC-E lenses? I’ve used the 85mm extensively, and it performs marvelously. One of the best lenses I’ve ever used.

        • alex

          leave him alone, the usual troll around here

        • Dweeb

          Ron, have a look at Digilloyd “Follow-up on Nikon PC-E build quality” or “Nikon PC-E severe build quality problem.” The nasty stuff has now been moved to the subscription area. I admit I don’t own the new 24 but the show sample I looked at didn’t impress in the least for $2000 plus. The Canon 17 did impress though, not that I’ll be switching my system just for that one. No one is faulting the optics, I’m just relaying what I have read. BTW I’ve had several pieces of Nikon equipment into service R&R the past several years, not one problem suggested to be of my doing.

    • you are 100% right, to be honest I did not expect this to be so wide-spread, I just posted a separate thread

  • BEN

    W T !@#$ i thought Nikon pro lenses are only made in Japan ? If so, how the F did this not get caught by Nikon’s quality control .

    Jheez, Nikon calls it a Pro lens with a Pro price ? Does Nikon still know what Pro means ? I guess to Nikon, Pro now means Profit .

    I bet Canon is laughing at Nikon now and their marketing will surely use this against Nikon.

    I am a Nikon fan . So sad to see a top $ lense have this kind of quality issue. This should never happen. No excuses Nikon !

    • Dweeb

      “I guess to Nikon, Pro now means Profit .” LOL Nothing a bit more advertising spending can’t fix.

    • Adam

      yeah, its very sad to see this and not to mention that there is a price increase with this new lens.

    • Right—and Canon doesn’t have their own issues with multi-year flagship focus issues. The lens works. It performs as advertised. They have an issue of paint peeling or something inside, (which is no doubt a problem), but I’d say this is far from a disaster. Convenient, no. But not a disaster.

  • Henk

    Yep, at first I didn’t think I had it, but when I checked again – looking deep down into the barrel with the lens zoomed to 200mm – I can clearly see lots of paint peeling of the thread. Bought mine in the Netherlands. I’m tempted to bring it back, but I’ll wait for Nikon to officially respond. This is the very last time that I ever bought something from Nikon the moment it comes out.

  • N People

    I have the same problem but is not as bad as those pictures posted here.
    I bought mine from Henry’s of Canada with the serial # 200018XX back in November. Hardly use it . I looked into it and saw tiny metal particle hanging from the thread. I moved the zoom ring back and forth and tiny particle is gone. Went back to Henry’s and show them the problem and of course they are not aware of it. I asked to see one of their new in the box 70-200 on the shelf with serial # 20008XXX and guess what? It has the same problem already.
    I called Nikon Canada this morning in Toronto and they said they never heard about this problem.

  • Back to top