Nikon 70-200 vr II - quality control issue?

[PedroS]

 
Mine has the same problem
200059**

[kendonguyen]

Watch out for a lot of Sepuku in next few months , enough to open a distributor in Hell

[Tosh]

My copy has a bit of it.   Serial No. US200009##.

[TapRackBang]

I'm still within the return window for Amazon.  If you were me, would you return it?

[sako]

I'm still within the return window for Amazon.  If you were me, would you return it?

Personally, no if you're happy with it's performance.

[PedroS]

I'm still within the return window for Amazon.  If you were me, would you return it?

Not me.
I'm very happy with the lens. It's a really step forward regarding the VR1.
Problem is we look inside, but if it was "out of sight" it would be "out of mind", if you know what I mean.

[nfoto]

I thought photographers were supposed to look though their lenses to find the subjects, instead of looking into the lens for a subject???

[Snicker]

According to Nikon Nordic, this should in no way happen to the lens, and they asked me to deliver it to their service facility to change affected parts and cleaning. They gave a big apology for their slip-up in the QA process and all the inconvenience this had on me as a customer.

Seems like this has been discussed pre latest findings revealed on different web-sites lately.

[LSE]

I think it is good to keep an eye on how things develop since some people have claimed (without producing proof) that they have loose particles between elements and things gettings stuck on elements. It could simply be trollers, or it could be real.

[Snicker]

The optical performance will not be affected by this issue, but for my lens I can clearly see loose particles between the elements inside; not a big concern for me - Nikon  clearly is informed and updated and will correct this for customers that want this to be corrected.

[LSE]

The optical performance will not be affected by this issue, but for my lens I can clearly see loose particles between the elements inside; not a big concern for me - Nikon  clearly is informed and updated and will correct this for customers that want this to be corrected.

good too hear. It's how it sould be. Bad PR is often more costly to fix than the cost of taking care of your customers.

[ilkka_nissila]

I thought photographers were supposed to look though their lenses to find the subjects, instead of looking into the lens for a subject???

I couldn't agree more. I find the new 70-200 to be an extremely useful instrument for picture-taking; haven't been as happy about any lens in the past.

No, I won't look inside. And even if I did, and saw something, I wouldn't care. Any anomaly is probably a part of the recipe. 

[bobfriedman]

i think there is nothing wrong with expecting appropriate quality control based on cost... manufacturing defects are not part of the recipe.... sorry.

[ilkka_nissila]

i think there is nothing wrong with expecting appropriate quality control based on cost... manufacturing defects are not part of the recipe.... sorry.

The quality control what you get is what is possible at this price point. Better quality control => higher costs => more expensive lens. If you think this lens is expensive, take a look at what a Leica 70-180mm f/2.8 telezoom, with manual focus only and of course, no VR cost. The adjust expectations accordingly for the Nikkor that costs less than half of it and includes VR + autofocus.  Quality can't be made of thin air. Nikon aims to make lenses that are cost-efficient for the typical real-life pro applications, not a perfect lens. IMO the 70-200 Mk II is a bargain because of the optical quality and functionality that is provided, whether there are cosmetic defects inside or not. The high volume of interest in this lens must contribute in making this possible.

[cayzi]

This is official statement from Nikon Germany:


Yes, we know this picture!
 
That is no “mistake” of the lens – It comes from the “production” – and have no influence of the optical system of the lens!!
Soon we get (hopefully) a official statement from Nikon Tokio!
 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
With kind regards

[aprofmom]

Hi

I am new to having such a wonderful, albeit. expensive camera equipment.  This was my first splurge.  I am not loosing sleep over this issue.  However, if I should contact Nikon, I would like to do so.  Can anyone tell me what are the best steps for proceding with this?  I am in San Diego, CA.  I don't know if that determines who is contacted.  So, do I contact Adorama, from whom I purchased it?  It is out of the "return window" so I am not sure this would help.  Or right to Nikon?

Thank you from a very new person to this field.

Audrey

[cayzi]

Hi

I am new to having such a wonderful, albeit. expensive camera equipment.  This was my first splurge.  I am not loosing sleep over this issue.  However, if I should contact Nikon, I would like to do so.  Can anyone tell me what are the best steps for proceding with this?  I am in San Diego, CA.  I don't know if that determines who is contacted.  So, do I contact Adorama, from whom I purchased it?  It is out of the "return window" so I am not sure this would help.  Or right to Nikon?

Thank you from a very new person to this field.

Audrey

See my previos post.

It is not an issue. Nikon official statement will follow soon.

Regards

[LSE]

Hi

I am new to having such a wonderful, albeit. expensive camera equipment.  This was my first splurge.  I am not loosing sleep over this issue.  However, if I should contact Nikon, I would like to do so.  Can anyone tell me what are the best steps for proceding with this?  I am in San Diego, CA.  I don't know if that determines who is contacted.  So, do I contact Adorama, from whom I purchased it?  It is out of the "return window" so I am not sure this would help.  Or right to Nikon?

Thank you from a very new person to this field.

Audrey

check the nikon support service website for the united states and find out which location is designated to your area. I don't know that you'll get much of an answer from them until an official statement is made by their PR department since they must do as HQ tells them to do (for good or ill). should a "fix" be provided under warranty, you should follow their instructions. 

[Snicker]

New information received by mail from Nikon Norway (google translate, from Norwegian):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are no error or defect in your lens.

What you see inside the lens from the front are not threads, but a flange that prevents light reflection inside the lens. In the flange there are some very small holes, closest to the "pores" that occurs natulig during a casting process because of the fine print of the foam used in molding the forms. This does not affect the lens performance in any way. There is nothing to peel off from these small holes. They also look bigger than they really are, due to the magnification of the front lens element.

Nikon will publish an official response during this week as soon as it is available from Nikon centrally. :-)

With Best regards / Kind Regards,

Vegar Berg
Product specialist
Nikon Norway

[Snicker]

The optical performance will not be affected by this issue, but for my lens I can clearly see loose particles between the elements inside; not a big concern for me - Nikon  clearly is informed and updated and will correct this for customers that want this to be corrected.

This was clearly an optical illusion, rechecked; and nothing was loose inside

Edit:
By publishing the mail from Nikon I kind of unintentionally made it "official", hope Nikon can forgive me