Page 1 of 1

Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 6:24 pm
by Willy wombat
$2,535 AU with Australian waranty from reputable dealer here in Melb.
http://www.cameraaction.com.au/call1300 ... 59&dept=31

Im thinking about taking the plunge.

I was also reading a rumour that Nikon are thinking about releasing a new "N" series of this lens? Wasnt sure if this was credible though.

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 7:06 pm
by Glen
Steve it is $2,395 from ECS, I would say $140 extra may be worth it for the convenience of being able to take it to their counter if a problem. Also no postage and insurance costs.

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:46 pm
by aim54x
ECS does sound pretty good in comparison. After some reading, it appears that the N coating has the most effect on wide angle lenses so we may never get it on a telephoto. I cant remember where it was that I read that though.

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 09, 2009 10:46 pm
by tommyg
Have just bought one this week from Teds here in Adelaide for $2275.

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:46 am
by Willy wombat
aim54x wrote:ECS does sound pretty good in comparison. After some reading, it appears that the N coating has the most effect on wide angle lenses so we may never get it on a telephoto. I cant remember where it was that I read that though.


I have the 105mm VR macro with the N coating so they do some longer lenses too. It is a beautiful lens.

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:28 am
by rookie2
Hi Steve

I have the lens and love it..it will be a lifelong keeper.

Just an idea

I see tommyg got his from Ted's Adelaide at a good price. I bought the new 24 -70 2.8 while in melbourne for footy finals last year from Teds becaue they price matched other Teds' prices in Sydney and Adelaide.

similarly the Teds store in Syd matched a price for an online store and even with p/h came out a very good price on an MBD-10 and extra batteries for D700.

The D700 I got from Teds in here in SA (Marion) who price matched their counterparts in Sydnedy. Always good to get the body somewhere I can take it straight back to.

Marion Teds didnt have the grip or 24 -70 in stock when I was cashed up hence my multi state buy.)

In the end a few phone calls and bit of research saved me well over $400 on a D700, 24-70 grip and batteries. And all Aus stock and warrantied.

Just my 2C worth - its always worth asking (assumming they have them in stock)

good luck with the purchase - you wont regret it.

cheers
R2

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:37 am
by Willy wombat
tommyg wrote:Have just bought one this week from Teds here in Adelaide for $2275.


Hey Tommy - thats a great price. Did you do much haggling to get them that low or was that price advertised?

Thanks for the info. :D

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:32 am
by tommyg
Basically we went to a number of Adelaide stores (L&P Photographics, Camera House and Diamonds) first, and then took their price to Teds. Said we wanted to buy today if the price was right.

Teds was around $100 cheaper than the best price we got from the other 3.

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:23 pm
by Willy wombat
Thats good work Tom :bowdown: Perhaps they had some old stock from when the $AU was higher?

I got one today at lunch for $2450 after a little bit of cross store haggle. Amusingly the price on the box says $3645.00

:biglaugh:

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:44 pm
by Oz_Beachside
great news steve. now, if you read the instructions, it will say "do not use on fish" :twisted:

Re: Nikon 70-200mm f2.8G VR - Is this a good price?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 10:53 pm
by Willy wombat
Oz_Beachside wrote:great news steve. now, if you read the instructions, it will say "do not use on fish" :twisted:


Yes, definately an above the water lens Bruce. Perhaps its time to find something else to point the camera at for a little bit. :wink:

By the way - know any models who might be interested in an experimental TF* underwater shoot in the next few weeks(experimental in the sense that I have never done underwater glam stuff before....) Cant be any harder than shooting fish right?