Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens

Started May 23, 2013 | Discussions
BackPacker1532
Forum MemberPosts: 84Gear list
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to sjprintz, May 25, 2013

"  When I use the 70-200mm VR + TC, I usually stop down to F2.8 as well."

How do you manage to "stop down" a f2.8 + tc to f2.8?

 BackPacker1532's gear list:BackPacker1532's gear list
Nikon D3 Leica S2
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
knightmelodic
Contributing MemberPosts: 653Gear list
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to BackPacker1532, May 25, 2013

BackPacker1532 wrote:

"  When I use the 70-200mm VR + TC, I usually stop down to F2.8 as well."

How do you manage to "stop down" a f2.8 + tc to f2.8?

that's exactly what I was going to ask. as I use 70-200 2.8 with x2 TC, I've seen no really noticeable loss in IQ. PP is easy if you want to clean it up. I also bump my in camera settings. anything that long needs at least a mono and LOTS of light.

maybe the sigma?

-- hide signature --

Just keep clicking, something will turn out fantastic.
Nikon D600, D7100, Canon (!) G15, Nikkor 35mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, 50mm f1.4, 70-200 f/2.8 VR II, 24-70 2.8; Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, 16-28 f/2.8

 knightmelodic's gear list:knightmelodic's gear list
Canon PowerShot G15 Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Photo Pete
Senior MemberPosts: 1,757
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to aldel, May 25, 2013

In the UK you would not be able to that.

Unless faulty or not fit for purpose then once purchased it is yours. Does the vendor now have to sell as pre-owned?

That is not true.

Goods bought over the internet in the UK may be returned within 7 days for a full refund even if not faulty. Online purchases are protected by a 7 day cooling off period by law... no matter what terms the company selling the goods tries to impose.
--
Have Fun
Photo Pete

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TOF guy
TOF guy MOD
Forum ProPosts: 10,732Gear list
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to bflood, May 25, 2013

Apparently some people "buy" big tvs just before the superbowl then find that they don't want it a few days just after the game.

The stores must still be able to make a profit from the real buyers or they would change their return policies. All in all attracting proppective buyers with a no question return policy may outweight the losses due to the returns from people who never wanted to buy in the first place.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

 TOF guy's gear list:TOF guy's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TOF guy
TOF guy MOD
Forum ProPosts: 10,732Gear list
Like?
"cheat" is a strong word
In reply to Pradipta Dutta, May 25, 2013

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Agreed.  There's something about buying a lens just to compare it and then returning it that's a bit sickening.  If you do this, don't brag about.  It's bad enough that you don't exercise enough research and analysis before ordering a lens and returning it fully functional.  That only raises the buying costs for the rest of us and exposes the lens to potential shipping & handling damage before a more forthright buyer gets the lens.

Yep, totally agree. Just because of those handful of cheaters, rest of the consumers pay the price.

Stores offer a money back warranty to attract consumers who are unusre about a purchase. They know exactly what they get into when they create these policies and they would change them if they were not coming ahead at the end of the day. Nothing wrong with that, they're working to make a profit. But to say that a person "cheats" if he takes advantage of terms is an exageratoin.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

 TOF guy's gear list:TOF guy's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TOF guy
TOF guy MOD
Forum ProPosts: 10,732Gear list
Like?
Re: What really is sickening is this logic.
In reply to paulski66, May 25, 2013

paulski66 wrote:

Rick Knepper wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Dear B&H, Adorama, Amazon et all. Please ignore this diatribe. Be apprised that I and many hundreds of thousands of other internet customers will never purchase merchandise at $1000+ that we can't look at and test first. You are in the mail order and Internet sales business so you surely understand the logistics of providing a brick and mortar-type experience from a remote location.

With me, same goes for clothing, cars, other electronics, well heck, even food. If I try a new cereal and it tastes like cr@p to me, it's going back for full refund. I'm not going to be General Mills' field guinea pig and pay to be one. You have enough suckers buying products sight unseen to make a handsome profit but I won't be one of those suckers.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. TJ said, "Every generation needs a new revolution".

But the lens was fine.

It was fine but did not live to expectations, which are to offer a clear advantage over the 70-200 + tc combo.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

 TOF guy's gear list:TOF guy's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Photo Pete
Senior MemberPosts: 1,757
Like?
Re: What really is sickening is this logic.
In reply to TOF guy, May 26, 2013

paulski66 wrote:

Rick Knepper wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Dear B&H, Adorama, Amazon et all. Please ignore this diatribe. Be apprised that I and many hundreds of thousands of other internet customers will never purchase merchandise at $1000+ that we can't look at and test first. You are in the mail order and Internet sales business so you surely understand the logistics of providing a brick and mortar-type experience from a remote location.

With me, same goes for clothing, cars, other electronics, well heck, even food. If I try a new cereal and it tastes like cr@p to me, it's going back for full refund. I'm not going to be General Mills' field guinea pig and pay to be one. You have enough suckers buying products sight unseen to make a handsome profit but I won't be one of those suckers.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. TJ said, "Every generation needs a new revolution".

But the lens was fine.

It was fine but did not live to expectations, which are to offer a clear advantage over the 70-200 + tc combo.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

Must have been unreasonably high expectations. IMO and experience this lens is clearly better than the 70-200 +TC combo!

Nothing wrong with returning to an internet supplier though. Internet only stores undercut the prices of bricks and mortar stores because they don't have the physical facility or staff to allow people to handle or try out what they are going to buy before placing the order. The cost of returns is offset against this.

Personally I always buy from and support my local camera store because of the service they provide. I would far sooner see people who buy off the internet using the internet seller's returns policy rather than have them abuse their local store by trying out lenses there first. The concept of 'try in your local store then buy cheap elsewhere on the internet' is something that really is abhorrent.
--
Have Fun
Photo Pete

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
clarnibass
Senior MemberPosts: 1,218
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to paulski66, May 26, 2013

paulski66 wrote:

I'm not sure how Nikon is supposed to keep costs down if people buy their products and, despite being satisfied with overall performance, return them for no good reason.

If this return policy creates more sales it might allow to have lower prices.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Brandon birder
Senior MemberPosts: 2,437
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to aldel, May 26, 2013

aldel wrote:

In the UK you would not be able to that.

Unless faulty or not fit for purpose then once purchased it is yours. Does the vendor now have to sell as pre-owned?

Not true.

Distance selling regulations apply here in UK. This means that most items including lenses if bought by phone or Internet allow a 7 day evaluation period for buyer to decide if wants it or not. Amazon certainly honour this. There is no requirement for item to be faulty. This is to offset the reduced cost to the seller and reduced facility to the buyer in not having a hands on shop. These regulations don't apply if bought in a shop.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rjjr
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,059
Like?
Really?
In reply to paulski66, May 26, 2013

paulski66 wrote:

I'm not sure how Nikon is supposed to keep costs down if people buy their products and, despite being satisfied with overall performance, return them for no good reason.

Not seeing any correlation there. The manufacturer already sold it to the retailer so they have their money.

If a product doesn't warrant it's expense, that's a perfectly good reason to return it.  In this case the buyer felt the slight increase in performance was not worth the cost.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pradipta Dutta
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,764Gear list
Like?
May be, I should've used the word "abuser" as opposed to "cheater"
In reply to TOF guy, May 26, 2013

TOF guy wrote:

Stores offer a money back warranty to attract consumers who are unusre about a purchase.

No. The purpose of money back warranty is not unsure purchases. But it is primarily to provide extras protection to the consumers for "buyer's satisfaction". Those who are buying the product and then returning it as the buyer's remorse kicks in is simply inappropriate and beats the original purpose of extra liberal return policy.

They know exactly what they get into when they create these policies and they would change them if they were not coming ahead at the end of the day. Nothing wrong with that, they're working to make a profit. But to say that a person "cheats" if he takes advantage of terms is an exageratoin.

I should have called "abuser" as opposed to "cheaters". But is still does not change point. These guys/gals are using the return policy in a wrong way that is leading to those extra cost being passed to other regular consumers who doing it the right way.

-- hide signature --

My Online Gallery - http://www.pbase.com/pradipta

 Pradipta Dutta's gear list:Pradipta Dutta's gear list
Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D800 Nikon D3200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rjjr
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,059
Like?
Re: May be, I should've used the word "abuser" as opposed to "cheater"
In reply to Pradipta Dutta, May 26, 2013

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Stores offer a money back warranty to attract consumers who are unusre about a purchase.

No. The purpose of money back warranty is not unsure purchases. But it is primarily to provide extras protection to the consumers for "buyer's satisfaction". Those who are buying the product and then returning it as the buyer's remorse kicks in is simply inappropriate and beats the original purpose of extra liberal return policy.

The customer was dissatisfied with the level of performance.  That is a perfectly legitimate reason for a return.

They know exactly what they get into when they create these policies and they would change them if they were not coming ahead at the end of the day. Nothing wrong with that, they're working to make a profit. But to say that a person "cheats" if he takes advantage of terms is an exageratoin.

I should have called "abuser" as opposed to "cheaters". But is still does not change point. These guys/gals are using the return policy in a wrong way that is leading to those extra cost being passed to other regular consumers who doing it the right way.

Namecalling does nothing to validate your position.

There is no such thing as a "right" way.  If someone purchases something and they don't like it for whatever reason, there's absolutely nothing wrong with returning it in keeping with the return policy of the seller.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mlewan
Senior MemberPosts: 1,140Gear list
Like?
Re: Just returned my 80-400mm VR AF-S lens
In reply to sjprintz, May 26, 2013

Thanks for your feedback! I had been expecting something like that, and I am grateful for the confirmation.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulski66
Senior MemberPosts: 1,788Gear list
Like?
Re: Really?
In reply to rjjr, May 26, 2013

So your argument is that the retailer just eats the cost of the lens?

 paulski66's gear list:paulski66's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulski66
Senior MemberPosts: 1,788Gear list
Like?
Re: "cheat" is a strong word
In reply to TOF guy, May 26, 2013

TOF guy wrote:

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Agreed.  There's something about buying a lens just to compare it and then returning it that's a bit sickening.  If you do this, don't brag about.  It's bad enough that you don't exercise enough research and analysis before ordering a lens and returning it fully functional.  That only raises the buying costs for the rest of us and exposes the lens to potential shipping & handling damage before a more forthright buyer gets the lens.

Yep, totally agree. Just because of those handful of cheaters, rest of the consumers pay the price.

Stores offer a money back warranty to attract consumers who are unusre about a purchase. They know exactly what they get into when they create these policies and they would change them if they were not coming ahead at the end of the day. Nothing wrong with that, they're working to make a profit. But to say that a person "cheats" if he takes advantage of terms is an exageratoin.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

But, again, to complain about the high cost of gear at the same time one engages in this practice is mildly ironic, to say the least.

 paulski66's gear list:paulski66's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,245Gear list
Like?
Re: What really is sickening is this logic.
In reply to Photo Pete, May 26, 2013

Photo Pete wrote:

paulski66 wrote:

Rick Knepper wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Dear B&H, Adorama, Amazon et all. Please ignore this diatribe. Be apprised that I and many hundreds of thousands of other internet customers will never purchase merchandise at $1000+ that we can't look at and test first. You are in the mail order and Internet sales business so you surely understand the logistics of providing a brick and mortar-type experience from a remote location.

With me, same goes for clothing, cars, other electronics, well heck, even food. If I try a new cereal and it tastes like cr@p to me, it's going back for full refund. I'm not going to be General Mills' field guinea pig and pay to be one. You have enough suckers buying products sight unseen to make a handsome profit but I won't be one of those suckers.

-- hide signature --

Rick Knepper, photographer, non-professional, shooting for pleasure, check my profile for gear list and philosophy. TJ said, "Every generation needs a new revolution".

But the lens was fine.

It was fine but did not live to expectations, which are to offer a clear advantage over the 70-200 + tc combo.

-- hide signature --

Thierry - posted as regular forum member

Must have been unreasonably high expectations. IMO and experience this lens is clearly better than the 70-200 +TC combo!

Nothing wrong with returning to an internet supplier though. Internet only stores undercut the prices of bricks and mortar stores because they don't have the physical facility or staff to allow people to handle or try out what they are going to buy before placing the order. The cost of returns is offset against this.

Personally I always buy from and support my local camera store because of the service they provide. I would far sooner see people who buy off the internet using the internet seller's returns policy rather than have them abuse their local store by trying out lenses there first. The concept of 'try in your local store then buy cheap elsewhere on the internet' is something that really is abhorrent.
--
Have Fun
Photo Pete

Yes it is abhorrent, and yes the 80-400VR is far sharper than any lens at all with a t.c.  behind it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wireless
Regular MemberPosts: 456Gear list
Like?
Re: What really is sickening is this logic.
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, May 26, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Yes it is abhorrent, and yes the 80-400VR is far sharper than any lens at all with a t.c.  behind it.

Yes, but the thing is he didn't find that to be the case.  It surely should have been but...

I think his experience makes a good point about lenses.  Primes vs. good zooms vs. kit long zooms show a clear difference in a many situations and expecting otherwise is wishful thinking.  I've used and own f2.8 Nikon zooms and a prime and have used kit lenses.  There's a clear step up in quality for each level.

Those expensive f2.8 zooms that people rave about including me don't measure up to the primes nor do the kit lenses measure up the good zooms.  They just don't and don't expect them too.  You don't get something for nothing and 80-400 is not going to match the 70-200 IQ.  With the TC I would think they would be roughly equal.

As convenient as the zooms are I fairly often think about going back to primes.  This is not say the composition and using what you have won't yield great photos.  I recently won best in show in an amateur photography contest with a photo taken with the 24-70.  But I can clearly see that something more special, that snap, that comes with taking photos with my 50mm 1.8g.

I don't see anything wrong with returning it; it didn't live up to expectations.  It's a contract between the retailer and its customers.  They have a choice to offer that option or not.  And I bet the policy sells a lot more equipment that is costs them in returns.  It also allows and creates an alternate market for barely used/refurbs that also sells a lot of equipment even if at lower margins.

Anyone know if the "refurb" D800s have dropped below $2K yet?  L)

regards, David

(edited spelling)

 wireless's gear list:wireless's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pradipta Dutta
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,764Gear list
Like?
The right/proper way
In reply to rjjr, May 26, 2013

rjjr wrote:

Pradipta Dutta wrote:

TOF guy wrote:

Stores offer a money back warranty to attract consumers who are unusre about a purchase.

No. The purpose of money back warranty is not unsure purchases. But it is primarily to provide extras protection to the consumers for "buyer's satisfaction". Those who are buying the product and then returning it as the buyer's remorse kicks in is simply inappropriate and beats the original purpose of extra liberal return policy.

The customer was dissatisfied with the level of performance.  That is a perfectly legitimate reason for a return.

That is not correct. The OP himself said that the lens did perform better than his existing lens/TC combo. But he returned it because the price was too high. And he would've kept it if it was priced at $2K. Did he not know the price before buying?

They know exactly what they get into when they create these policies and they would change them if they were not coming ahead at the end of the day. Nothing wrong with that, they're working to make a profit. But to say that a person "cheats" if he takes advantage of terms is an exageratoin.

I should have called "abuser" as opposed to "cheaters". But is still does not change point. These guys/gals are using the return policy in a wrong way that is leading to those extra cost being passed to other regular consumers who doing it the right way.

Namecalling does nothing to validate your position.

There is no such thing as a "right" way.  If someone purchases something and they don't like it for whatever reason, there's absolutely nothing wrong with returning it in keeping with the return policy of the seller.

What many people do to determine whether or not a lens is right for them before buying is either read reviews from trusted experts or better yet, rent the lens out to give it a try themselves. What the OP did is a good example of impulse buy and reaction to buyer's remorse.

-- hide signature --

My Online Gallery - http://www.pbase.com/pradipta

 Pradipta Dutta's gear list:Pradipta Dutta's gear list
Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D800 Nikon D3200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,245Gear list
Like?
Re: What really is sickening is this logic.
In reply to wireless, May 27, 2013

wireless wrote:

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Yes it is abhorrent, and yes the 80-400VR is far sharper than any lens at all with a t.c.  behind it.

Yes, but the thing is he didn't find that to be the case.  It surely should have been but...

I think his experience makes a good point about lenses.  Primes vs. good zooms vs. kit long zooms show a clear difference in a many situations and expecting otherwise is wishful thinking.  I've used and own f2.8 Nikon zooms and a prime and have used kit lenses.  There's a clear step up in quality for each level.

Those expensive f2.8 zooms that people rave about including me don't measure up to the primes nor do the kit lenses measure up the good zooms.  They just don't and don't expect them too.  You don't get something for nothing and 80-400 is not going to match the 70-200 IQ.  With the TC I would think they would be roughly equal.

As convenient as the zooms are I fairly often think about going back to primes.  This is not say the composition and using what you have won't yield great photos.  I recently won best in show in an amateur photography contest with a photo taken with the 24-70.  But I can clearly see that something more special, that snap, that comes with taking photos with my 50mm 1.8g.

I don't see anything wrong with returning it; it didn't live up to expectations.  It's a contract between the retailer and its customers.  They have a choice to offer that option or not.  And I bet the policy sells a lot more equipment that is costs them in returns.  It also allows and creates an alternate market for barely used/refurbs that also sells a lot of equipment even if at lower margins.

Anyone know if the "refurb" D800s have dropped below $2K yet?  L)

regards, David

(edited spelling)

The 80-400VR at f 6.7 or smaller is as good as any of the 400, 500 or 600 primes on a D800e, except for aperture and longer focal length.  It's a great lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wireless
Regular MemberPosts: 456Gear list
Like?
Re: What really is sickening is this logic.
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, May 27, 2013

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

The 80-400VR at f 6.7 or smaller is as good as any of the 400, 500 or 600 primes on a D800e, except for aperture and longer focal length.  It's a great lens.

Reilly, one day I hope I get the opportunity to prove or disprove it. 

David

 wireless's gear list:wireless's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads