Nikon refurbished lens 70-200 2.8 VRII - how old should it be ?

[Roljac]

Hello,

Just bought a Nikon refurbished lens 70-200 F2.8 VRII. Seems in good shape except for a few nicks, and a little pc of dust inside. You also can see that the filter thread has been used quite a bit. Pictures are ok.

Nevertheless I was surprised to see that serial number was pretty old (20088588). That is probably a 2010 model, so close to 4 years old. Is that your experience with refurbished ? I thought you would get much more recent lenses when you buy refurbished. I guess it is the luck of the draw. I was just wondering what is your experience (and or if I should return mine)

Thanks for sharing your experience.

Regards

Yves

 

[holyindian]

How much did you spend for it?

 

[WindwardHaole]

I too am a bit surprised as to the age of the lens and cosmetic condition. A bit of dust is not unexpected but obviously worn filter threads and some nicks is not something I have experienced from "Refurbished by Nikon" products from Adorama, BHPhoto, Cameta or K.E.H. I guess the age of the lens is what really jumps out at me. My assumption is that "Refurbished by Nikon" products include no longer manufactured models, unsold, returned-unused items, and store or sales demos. I guess "returned-unused" is the grayest area. Are you positive that the lens is actually a "Refurbished by Nikon" product and not actually done through the seller? I would certainly give some thought to exchanging the lens. Aloha.

 

[ofior]

I bought myine refurbished from Nikon, and it looked lile new.

I also bought a Nikon Refurb D7000 some time back from Cameta, and it showed the typical "sheen" on the cowl edges that you get from sliding in and out of a bag, and a little wear on grip. But i would not call any of it excessive.

Both products work flawlesslythe

So, some will look really good, some will show wear. A dust spec in the lens would not concern me, but I do wonder about the threads.

Ozzie

 

[A n d y]

Refurbished products should look like brand new. You shouldn't be able to tell them apart from a new product. I've never bought Nikon refurbished (but ~3 Sigma ref) and they were like new. If you bought it on ebay or a non-official seller than he/she probably scammed you and I'd return it.

 

[Leonard Shepherd]

(and or if I should return mine)

Longer comment without knowing where you bought it or how much you paid there is no precise answer.

This lens is a long way from "pristine". I agree 2010 manufacture is about right.

Refurbished lenses are usually close to pristine and less than 6 months old.

 

[Roljac]

Thanks for your reply. I think you arrive at the same conclusion.

Bought the lens refurbished from an major official Nikon dealer (I checked them online and they had good review). I paid 1,948$ for it. it came in a carton box (brown shipping box - double box) with sticker on it that it has been refurbished by Nikon. Inside there is a Nikon paper. There is a sticker on the box with the lens serial number. seems legit but again I don't know for sure I never bought refurb from Nikon before)

As far as the lens, while it is in good condition, it is by no means like new. What worries me is that it is already 4 years old. Much more chances something happened in 4 years than 6 month. warranty is 3 months, one repair and all my savings are gone. I tested the autofocus and it is backfocusing quite significantly (-15 doesn't fully correct it) at 70 to 100 mm. At 200 it is ok.

Given all that, I think I will send it back and pay $450 more to get a new one with 5 years warranty. I guess I didn't think this one through Thanks again for your help

REgards

Yves

 

[holyindian]

Thats a lot of money for a lens of your condition.

Roberts camera has a new lens for less than what you paid for.

I brought the latest January build brand new for 1750 from an authorized canadian dealer.. with 5 years nikon warranty (canada), 1 year intl. warranty. No taxes paid. got the lens in 2 days from canada. best part is.. i paid 65 for insurance for 5 years with adorama.

 

[Roljac]

That is where i got the refurbished from. a new one is 2396 which is in the end a better deal i agree with the warranty

yves

 

[IainD]

I am surprised at the price. My 70-200 is 4 years old, and has been used a lot, and been dropped in the mud in Alaska while I was stalking grizzly bears. No cosmetic blemishes at all.

Still, I guess the appearance is not the most important thing. If it works well...

But still seems expensive.

IainD

 

[virtualkyr]

I got myself a refurbished 70-200 VR2 a couple months ago from Adorama for $1,899.

It looks brand new. There is not a single piece of evidence that would indicate it was refurbished.

I think you got took... somewhat.

 

[abcdefghijklmnop]

I believe one of the sources for refurbished items is Nikon NPS loaner program. Which would seem to explain how Nikon Store had a number of 500mm D AFS lenses for sale about 6 months ago.

 

[paulski66]

Every Nikon refurb I've ever bought has been in like-new condition. There was absolutely no way to tell the lens (r camera body, for that matter) from a brand-new version.

I would definitely send it back.

 

[holyindian]

i suggest do exactly what i did, its the best option out there, you can save 600 dollars on a brand new genuine nikon authorized lens.

get it from canada, ask them to ship it to the US. for around 1800 you can get a brand new with 5 yrs canadian and 1 year int warranty imported from canada to the US. add a new leaf warranty from adorama and you are set for 10 years.

 

[calson]

I would rather take my chances with a used and lightly used lens than a refurbished one. There is a 5 year warranty on Nikon lenses so the average age of a one sent in could be up to 4 years. The warranty from Nikon is only 90 days on a refurbished lens which is also extremely short.

Dust inside is unacceptable. Refurbished should mean cleaned as well and dust inside means the tech was sloppy. I would definitely send the lens back to Nikon.

 

[Roljac]

Thanks Calson, all

Thanks for helping with your experience. I sent the lens back so now I need to figure out what I do next. Although I feel I might be the exception, It will make me think twice before buying refurbished again.

Yves.

 

[holyindian]

have a look here.

Loading…

www.photoprice.ca

this is what i did.