It would be great if someone could elaborate on the details of the "rubber band
solution" approach. I tried to guess the missing parts myself and it didn't seem
to work very well. Firstly, what exactly are you using as a solvent? I used
gasoline, since this is the first thing that comes to mind when one needs to
dissolve rubber. The solution turned out as a sticky goo (BTW, isn't that how
rubber glue is normally made?), but I assumed that this is the whole point. The
second question is about where exactly I'm supposed to apply it. I put some on
the exterior surface of the lens barrel. And then some on the inner tube, and
also applied a relatively even layer of the solution to the front element. Now
it indeed feels like the lens is at least partially cured of the creep problem
(hooray!). But since I used the solution in three different places at once, I
don't know which one actually worked. (Stupid. Should've tried them one after
another.) Unfortunately, it comes with a couple of more-or-less serious
disadvantages. For example, it's been more then a week, but the solution on the
outer barrel is still very tacky. It collects dust, dead insects and sometimes
picks up much heavier objects. Yesterday it took me more than 15 minutes to pull
the lens out of my photo bag. (The fun thing to do is to slam it into a wall -
it sticks and then slowly creeps down to the floor.) Also, because of the goo
one the front element the image quality suffered. It is not really that
noticeable, since it was a Nikkor to begin with and they all perform as if they
have goo on the front element out of the box, but I know it is there and it kind
of bugs me. It would be great if someone would tell me what I did wrong, if
anything. Thanx.

Thanks for the reply.  Since my post, I did a bit of additional research on
the subject.  In addition to the rubber band solution, I read about another
solution to the problem using tape.  I gave this a try, and it seems to have
solved the problem without a couple of the negative issues associated with
the rubber band solution.  The tape solution goes like this:

1.  Extend the lens to maximum zoom.

2.  Using common household electrician's black tape, cut a length just under
1 1/4".

3.  Attach the strip of tape longitudinally (front to back) on the outside
of the inner-most lens barrel (farthest away from the camera body).  I
attached mine to the top of the lens

4.  I also ran an identical strip 180 degrees around the barrel on the
bottom side, just for symmetry, which may or may not be necessary.

This solution seems to have effectively stopped the zoom creep, without
having any noticeable effect of the zoom action of the lens.  The tape
appears to provide just enough friction to stop the creep, but not enough to
impair manual zooming.  It offers several benefits over the rubber band
solution, at about the same cost (next to nothing).  First, it is virtually
cosmetically invisible, (black on black). Second, there is nothing to get
between your fingers and the lens, so it is functionally invisible as well.
Third, it does not cover either the zoom or focusing numbers on the lens.  I
will be monitoring the black tape for signs of wear.  If anyone sees any
pitfalls with this solution, I would be happy to hear them.

Well, maybe if you feel you really must have f/2.8 at all times. I don't.
I've often used 300mm lenses (or zooms at 300mm) wide open at f/5.5 or f/5.6
hand held on 35s and had no problem -- and much of that was back in the day,
with relatively slow films. Admittedly I only used such lenses in good
light, but I never really saw that as a serious limitation. Most of those
subjects would not have been worth taking pictures of in poor light anyway.

But you always insist DX lenses are "crap." Most of my Nikon lenses *are* DX
since it's only in the last year or so I switched to Nikon dSLRs. And I'm
delighted with them, so I'm afraid I have to take your "poor build quality"
with a grain of salt.

I don't understand that at all. How can it have the FoV of a 135mm lens when
zoomed to 200mm?

Since I don't have the lens yet I can't comment on the "dreaded lens creep."
If it creeps it creeps, but I've had that on one or two other long zooms and
while I'd agree it can be mildly annoying I never found it a disastrous
fault. Someone said his creeps only if it's partly zoomed to begin with,
which is not how I'd ordinarily carry the lens on a camera. Well, we'll see.

That's good news. At least I presume it is; Camera World and Ritz are
essentially the same company so I'd guess CW gets 'em out just about as
fast.

Neil

Rockwell has a vested interest? That is a claim that borders on defamation.
Whatever you may think of Rockwell, he does not appear to be in the pay of
Nikon or anyone else.

I also see no difference in FOV between the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR at 200mm and
the 18-200mm VR lens, so where are you getting this 135mm stuff? The specs
for both lenses on a DSLR are 8 degrees at 200mm. Or do I have a vested
interest, too?

I'm having trouble understanding this statement.