I appreciate all of the messages of reassurance. None of them, however, eliminate the visible "wiggling" of the extending portion of the lens barrel or the visible squeak that the parts make when they move against each other or the mis-calibration of the zoom ring against its index mark. I am growing pretty convinced that it was probably mishandled or dropped somewhere in its life, then returned. We'll see. I was out and about yesterday, but will be calling Nikon Support on Monday to initiate a case. We'll see where it goes from there. The lens works fine right now to take photographs, but I have concerns that delayed damage to the VR system or the focusing system will develop later.
cjc2
Loc: Hellertown PA
To set the record straight: Sometimes Nikon lenses DO have firmware updates! Best of luck.
cjc2 wrote:
To set the record straight: Sometimes Nikon lenses DO have firmware updates! Best of luck.
Yes, but it's pretty rare. The insert in my order referred specifically to camera firmware.
47greyfox
Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range
In the Canon world, unless you have a thing for the “new” pretty (?) box, I can’t think of a single reason to buy new rather than refurb unless an unbelievable price, which includes a CanonUSA warranty becomes available.
revhen
Loc: By the beautiful Hudson
Too much "refurbished" is just a quick glance.
It’s critically important to learn WHO dId the refurbishment. If it wasn’t Nikon (in this case), avoid it
I have several refurb devices (cameras, computer, etc) and have carefully verified who did the work. Factory-refurb devices have all proved to be reliable. They also haVe original warranties
nytexano wrote:
It’s critically important to learn WHO dId the refurbishment. If it wasn’t Nikon (in this case), avoid it
I have several refurb devices (cameras, computer, etc) and have carefully verified who did the work. Factory-refurb devices have all proved to be reliable. They also haVe original warranties
all Nikon refurbished only have 90 days instead of the original 1 year warranty.
nytexano wrote:
It’s critically important to learn WHO dId the refurbishment. If it wasn’t Nikon (in this case), avoid it
I have several refurb devices (cameras, computer, etc) and have carefully verified who did the work. Factory-refurb devices have all proved to be reliable. They also haVe original warranties
The lens was purchased directly from NikonUSA during their refurbished sale in May, as stated in the initial post.
revhen wrote:
Too much "refurbished" is just a quick glance.
Depends on who is doing the refurbishing. A manufacturer, such as Nikon or Canon, will have a strict procedure, including a check list for each of their products. Their product, their reputation. They will do the job to high standards. Doesn't mean that an occasional flaw can't slip through, but, an independent shop is more likely to do a lower quality job.
Another good reason adding to why I dropped Nikon after preferring their hardware since the Nikon F
My factory refurb Olympus PEN-F and iMac came with the original warranty terms. They continue to operate flawlessly
As mentioned above, buying refurb from a major co (Canon, Nikon etc) is the way to go. Got a refurb 70-300 mk ll .
from Canon, worked fine, no problems, after a few months was changing a filter and saw what appeared to be some very small bubble in front glass, never noticed any imperfection in photos, but upon real close inpection found a few small spots in the phbeing a bit of a ots. Lower left corner, easy to remove in PP or when cropping, but being a bit of a fool I contacted Canon and returned it for a repair, Canon claimed nothing wrong and sent it back to me. Sent it back to them with them with few photos and indicated imprecection, also took shots of the lens showing the bubbles, then they sent me a brand new lens, Buy a refurb from one of the big guys, they stand behind products.
Good morning. I have mostly stepped away from UHH, but wanted to provide an update to this situation as promised. Because I had a trip scheduled in June, I decided to delay returning the lens for repair in favor of hanging on to it, testing it fairly thoroughly, and deciding what to do a little bit later. Since it duplicated another 24-120mm f/4 that I have owned for some time, this choice was one sacrificing a little bit of convenience, rather then significantly impacting my ability to do photography. Unfortunately, problems with the lens not only continued, but actually got worse, so I made the decision to send it to the Nikon Service Center.
Last Friday (7/8), I packed the lens for return (in the same packaging that it was shipped to me), generated an on-line service ticket, and shipped it off to Signal Hill, California via UPS 2nd Day Air. (I learned years ago while working for Airborne Express never to ship anything of value via ground express service. There are just too many opportunities for shipment to be lost, damaged, or stolen.) It was delivered yesterday (Monday) morning, and has already received initial evaluation by the service group. It has been accepted for repair under provisions of the warranty, and the initial estimate identifies the work to be done as "Major Repair Service." This designation generally indicates an expectation that partial or complete disassembly will be required to complete the repair.
It's still early in California, so I have not yet checked the status for an update this morning. I will provide one more update here if I do receive information around what was done for the repair, and a final closeout once I get the lens back and have a chance to check out their work.
cjc2
Loc: Hellertown PA
larryepage wrote:
Good morning. I have mostly stepped away from UHH, but wanted to provide an update to this situation as promised. Because I had a trip scheduled in June, I decided to delay returning the lens for repair in favor of hanging on to it, testing it fairly thoroughly, and deciding what to do a little bit later. Since it duplicated another 24-120mm f/4 that I have owned for some time, this choice was one sacrificing a little bit of convenience, rather then significantly impacting my ability to do photography. Unfortunately, problems with the lens not only continued, but actually got worse, so I made the decision to send it to the Nikon Service Center.
Last Friday (7/8), I packed the lens for return (in the same packaging that it was shipped to me), generated an on-line service ticket, and shipped it off to Signal Hill, California via UPS 2nd Day Air. (I learned years ago while working for Airborne Express never to ship anything of value via ground express service. There are just too many opportunities for shipment to be lost, damaged, or stolen.) It was delivered yesterday (Monday) morning, and has already received initial evaluation by the service group. It has been accepted for repair under provisions of the warranty, and the initial estimate identifies the work to be done as "Major Repair Service." This designation generally indicates an expectation that partial or complete disassembly will be required to complete the repair.
It's still early in California, so I have not yet checked the status for an update this morning. I will provide one more update here if I do receive information around what was done for the repair, and a final closeout once I get the lens back and have a chance to check out their work.
Good morning. I have mostly stepped away from UHH... (
show quote)
I've been a Nikon shooter since the 90s and an NPS member since 99. I have had many repairs done by Nikon NY and have never had an issue Nikon didn't resolve to my satisfaction. Best of luck in the future!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.