jimpitt

I purchased a package deal a few months ago a Nikon D500 and supposedly with a Nikkor 16-80 2.8 Zoom. The store "packaged" for the the 16-85 3.5 zoom because they were out of stock on the correct lens advertised by Nikon. They insisted the lens was just as good. Charged the same price. Are they correct, or just blowing me off.
I am not a professional photographer ... just like good stuff.
Appreciate any thoughts.

d3200prime

The Nikon 16-80 2.8 is a little over a thousand dollars. The Nikon 16-85 3.5-5.6 is a little under $700. You figure it out.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Not any chance. You were ripped off!

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

I'd send the package back. The major players would take it back as far as I know if you're within the return time constraints.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

What store? That slower lens is not just as good. Check reviews at, for example, DPReview and CameraDecision.com

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

The 16-85 is a good lens, but I wouldn't accept it in lieu of the 16-80.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I wouldn't say you were ripped off, short changed maybe but not ripped off. The 16-85 is just as sharp as the 16-80 and the build quality is the same. The 16-80 obviously is faster and it has newer better VR. The 16-80 is heavily discounted in the kit meaning you probably paid close to retail for the 16-85. Personally I'd take it back and tell them you want the correct lens for the kit.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

If those prices, as quoted earlier are correct, that's a $300 difference. You can buy a new DX 50mm f1.8 or DX 10-20mm for that amount of money. Either would fit your D500. You would have leftover money for another new DX lens.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Sorry, I didn't read carefully enough and missed that the transaction was a few months old.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Plain and Simple....Bait and Switch. Please let us know who the retailer was so none of us get caught up in this scam.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

You've been baited and switched. Check your S/N with Nikon, you probably have grey market product.

bpulv Loc: Buena Park, CA

You were screwed big time!!! Nikon's f2.8 series lenses are top of the line professional lenses. Disregarding the superior optics, professional series lenses are f2.8 at all apertures. The 16-85 f3.5 is a kit lens; a lower quality lens with plastic parts designed for consumer package deals and the maximum f-stop ranges from f5.6 to f3.5 according to setting. I.e., the kit lens are slower, lower quality and less versatile lens.

I would demand in writing that the seller make good on their advertisement and if they do not, I would file a small claims lawsuit under the statutes of fraud against them. If the seller does not exchange the lens before the court date, bring a copy of all documentation including a copy of any advertisement of the seller and print out the specification webpages you will find via the links below for both lenses to court. The main page for each lens shows the price along with detailed information that will establish that there is a significant difference between the two lenses.

My legal argument to the court would be that you "told" the salesperson that you were an amature and was relying on his representation as an expert when he told you that the f3.5 was superior to the f2.8 lens.

Note: I have had several experiences in small claims court, but I am not a legal professional.

f3.5 lens page:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-dx-nikkor-16-85mm-f3.5-5.6g-ed-vr.html

f2.8 lens page:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-dx-nikkor-16-80mm-f%252f2.8-4e-ed-vr.html

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

The 16-80mm f/2.8~4E is not a constant aperture lens.
Still, I agree the OP was screwed.
I have the 16-85 3.5~5.6 and think it's pretty good for a DX lens, but given the choice at the same price, the 16-80mm f/2.8~4E would be the one I would demand.
It has better VR and a full stop faster at maximum focal length.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I am not a legal professional, either, although I do have a law degree (JD). What you are suggesting is right on point. And that is, that the “victim”, here, “relied upon” the advice of the seller, who held themselves out as “experts”. It may not be “fraud”, exactly as fraud includes the element of “intent to defraud”, which may not be the case here. For there to be fraud, the seller had to have intentionally switched out the correct lens with the replacement lens — for whatever reason — figuring that the customer would not know or care. It’s a matter of whether or not there was “full disclosure”. If the seller said, “We don’t have the 16-80, but we have the 16-85, which will work just as well for you”, fine, no problem, but there should have been a price adjustment or some other similar compensation.

This was also a “contract”, of sorts. If “fraud” was involved, the aggrieved party has the right to rescind the contract. Return the product(s) and receive a full refund. If “fraud” was NOT the case, here, the seller should be given the opportunity to “cure”, or to make good on the “contract”.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I would be very happy with the 16-85, but I would expect a refund relative to the price difference of the two lenses.