It can be in some cases, but when it's a lens I can sell for $600 more in a couple of hours work, it's just crazy with a company like them. How much do you value your time that you'd consider throwing away $600 tax free for that?
Any chance the local story was Henry's? They had it for $2000 Canadian brand new less then a year ago. It's insane how expensive some of this stuff has become since our dollar dropped. I was looking at the 105 Micro last year for $900, now it's on sale for $1100.
I have to agree with you about that. The 2.8 is nice occasionally, but for the most part, I don't see much benefit over the 18-200mm (with both lenses on a DX body). To read the reviews, the super zoom is horrible quality, should only be used as a paperweight, etc. And the 70-200 is one of the best lenses Nikon has ever made. Yet in practice it's hard to tell which lens too the picture most of the time. I use the super zoom 90% of the time and when I do buy a full frame, I think my first lens will be the 28-300.
Still, I bought the lens after a frustrating experience at the zoo where the 2 extra stops would have made a world of difference and the shallow dof wouldn't have hurt. So it has it's place, it's just not the magic that most reviews and forum whores seem to think it is.