Canon EF 300mm F/2.8 IS Value

[SPK64]

I have been using a Canon 70-200 f2.8 non-IS with and without a 1.4 TC for the last year for Soccer, basketball, Dance competitions Softball etc... I have been for the most part happy with the results. Now with my daughter moving up to larger soccer fields and I also will be covering the even larger soccer fields. I find my current lens limiting my shots or I have to crop heavily.
So I have been looking to possibly add a 300 f2.8 IS. I now have to convince my better half and myself that this would be a good "investment". I have been trying to research the value of the used lens market to see what this paticular lens is selling for. The reason being that if I pay $4k for a new lens and decide that it is no longer needed down the road what could I get back out of the lens. So my net cost is the difference which I need to apply to the value of the captured images during this time. My gut feel is that I could get 85-90% of the cost back assuming the lens is well maintaned. Couple years of use and 20,000 pictures later the $700 depreciation would be a good "investment".

You can check out some of my current images here.

Pictures (http://go.skactionpix.com)

Thanks,

[coreypolis]

its Canon's finest tele lens and one of teh best made to date. It holds its value VERY well, and the price of it went up $100 this past month.

Buying used is a even better investment, you lose the initial resale value loss.

Can't spring for 3500-4k? The Sigma 120-300 F/2.8 is a decent alternative, or the 300 f/4 IS from Canon if available light allows

[remixity]

I've seen them go for 3300-3600 used

[Tapeman]

Buy it, and plan on keeping it.

[Double Negative]

This is one of thoses lenses that you'll never regret owning.

[gasrocks]

Got my 300/2.8 L IS for $3400 mint used condition.

[StealthLude]

o wow, the 300mm 2.8 IS.

When someone says its the finest tele canon makes I would have to agree. I belive when paired with a 1 series camrea it has the fastest AF system in the world.

Using a 1.4x and 2x TC with this lens is also a no brainer, and the IQ is still there, and amazing.

Its my dream prime tele, even over the 400mm 2.8 lens.

Buy it, buy the TCs, and keep it. I dont think you can go wrong, and the value for what you get, expecially when used with TCs is a for sure thing.

I cant afford this lens yet, and am using its 300mm f/4 little brother. Which is excellent as well, for the money.

[Steve Beck]

I paid $3999.00 Plus shipping and three year Mack warranty think it came out to $42xx... Sold it 5 months later after advertising it for 2 months at $3500 ended up getting $3200 for it.

They hold their value fairly well. But look at recent trends on long primes people are advertising for weeks if not months and end up dropping it a lot or never selling them. It seems harder to get a long prime sold nowadays.

Never-the-less don't buy because it is an investment and you are planning on making most of your $ back, because you will loose about 20% off new price nomatter how new it is, that is just the way the market is now.

Now, the 300 is a awesome LENS! I just found mine to not have the reach I wanted and did not want to sacrifice speed/image quality to a 2x converter.

[4x4rock]

I would never be able to afford this lens, unless I change the number around a bit with my tax return ...hmmm there's an idea...:)

But do you consider any alternative, like the Sigma 120-300 and the f4 version as mentioned above? I have the f4 and it's great when there's light available and the Sigma is a gem and takes TC really well.

I'm thinking of renting the Sigma for a few days to check it out.

[morehtml]

You will get 85-90% of the then CURRENT price of the 300 2.8 if the market is like it is now. If Canon introduced a replacement for the 300 2.8 then the value could drop to 50% or so just guessing. The Canon 300 2.8 is 8 years old as of now (Introduced March 1999)

[Double Negative]

On lenses like the 300mm f/2.8L IS, they've already gone through their "refresh cycle" of sorts. The older versions didn't have IS (400mm f/2.8L II) or may have been a tad slower (e.g. 500mm f/4.5) or even both. I wouldn't expect an update on these refreshed lenses any time soon...

What else could they add to the current 300mm f/2.8L IS that would make it any better? Newer IS perhaps, but that's about it.

[SPK64]

This is some great feedback from all.

To sum it up.

1. The lens is one of the best in its class.

2. Selling at a later date may yield 50-85% of cost
- New versions may impact this
- IS version has been out for "x" number years so may not see any major changes.

3. Once I get it I may never want to sell it.


In response to some of the other suggestions.

Sigma 120-300 f2.8
- Yes I had considered this and still have it on my list for consideration.
- Lack of IS is what I am struggling with along with my 70-200 would overlap

Canon 300mm f/4
- Not fast enough. Been in enough low light situations to warrent taking this out of the mix.
- Add TC's and it gets worse


Since I really have not shot any sports with a prime I am going to have to see if I can change my ways.

Any comments on how the 300mm will handle a sport like soccer?

[Double Negative]

3. Once I get it I may never want to sell it.

My money's on #3. ;)

[coreypolis]

you'll net much better than 50-85% unless its abused and/or updated with a newer model (highly unlikely).

IS is great, but for sports you need a fast shutter speed, so camera shake isn't as big of a deal.

I'm not sure where you are, but my local pro store rents both the IS and non IS 30 2.8L, and you might compare them. a used non IS could easily save you 1500, add a good monopod and you're set for sports

[weka2000]

Im not a pro. 2 weeks ago I brought a second hand 300F4, nice lens. Last friday I brought a brand new 300F2.8 IS. Why well it was an impulse buy. However I have read the reviews and I knew what could and couldnt be done with this lens.

Am I going to loose money if I sell it. Yes. Am I goint to sell it NO. This was a long term investment.

There were to many advantages over the Sigma 120-300. IS, weathersealing etc.

Pick up a 300F4 IS first. If you love it then use as trade for the F2.8 IS. You will loose less money that way. The F4 will give you an indication of the Prime how much you use it.

Did you look at the Sigma 300mm F2.8?

[gasrocks]

Yes, get a 300/4 L IS first, perhaps. Great lens and will give you some idea of how often you use 300 and IS. Also, it is great for macro. I did not sell mine yet though I also have the 2.8 IS version, for that reason.

[morehtml]

On lenses like the 300mm f/2.8L IS, they've already gone through their "refresh cycle" of sorts. The older versions didn't have IS (400mm f/2.8L II) or may have been a tad slower (e.g. 500mm f/4.5) or even both. I wouldn't expect an update on these refreshed lenses any time soon...

What else could they add to the current 300mm f/2.8L IS that would make it any better? Newer IS perhaps, but that's about it.

Glass doesn't go bad. In the past upgrades like lighter weight, better electronics to work with new features in cameras/flashes, new optic coatings, tech like IS have been reason for upgrades. There is no known way to know when Canon would consider changing these but it will eventually happen but could still be years off.

[joegolf68]

Divorce: Half of everything plus attorney fees.
Price of new lens... priceless. :)

[Steve Beck]

Some glass does when that fungus starts growing.

[S.Horton]

"....the images are once-in-a-lifetime and of infinite value to our family. The cost of the gear pales in comparison to our love for our children."

(let me know how it goes; I've been dying to try that one)

:rolleyes:

[S.Horton]

Divorce: Half of everything plus attorney fees.
Price of new lens... priceless. :)

LOL
LOL

Think of it this way, if you get a divorce, EVERYTHING was 50% off.

[weka2000]

"....the images are once-in-a-lifetime and of infinite value to our family. The cost of the gear pales in comparison to our love for our children."

(let me know how it goes; I've been dying to try that one)

:rolleyes:

That was the first photo I took after getting it for my wife "the kids"

[S.Horton]

....that's the exact reason I do spend unlimited amounts to get the shots of my son in sports now, when I can. Every moment is fleeting, and some here who have lost something know exactly what that means. Budget won't matter when the moment is gone.

[SPK64]

Well I have made the plunge and now own a 300.:D I took the advice and picked up a used lens from a POTN member. It was in mint shape and I was able to save some money.

Now I am wondering how most people transport this lens.
In the supplied hard case from Canon?
Lowepro Lens Case 5?
Other options?

[S.Horton]

Congrats!!!

Hey, I really, honestly wish I knew the answer to your question!!

[AcuraFan]

Well I have made the plunge and now own a 300.:D I took the advice and picked up a used lens from a POTN member. It was in mint shape and I was able to save some money.

Now I am wondering how most people transport this lens.
In the supplied hard case from Canon?
Lowepro Lens Case 5?
Other options?
it's truely one of the sharpest canon lenses. i bought mine used for a great deal, and after calibration, sharper then my 500 F4 new.

i shoot handheld with the 300 2.8 exclusively and transport it on a Kinesis bag.

[Tapeman]

Congrats. I carry mine in my Lowepro Nature Trekker AWII along with a bunch of other stuff.

[Cathpah]

i say go for it. there are somethings that the price is drastically outweighed by even just the excitement and anticipation of the product. I bet the first time you mount it to your lens and feel the weight will be worth $1000 bucks alone...then the first shot, another $1000...you're already up to 2K. That means the lens isn't so expensive after all.

I'm drooling just thinking about that lens.

[nitsch]

Congrats! It's a cracking lens. It's certainly not cheap but definately well worth every penny in terms of it's performance. I stuff mine in my Lowepro Mini Trekker, fits OK with hood reversed and body fitted.

[Photorebel]

This is one of thoses lenses that you'll never regret owning.

I wondered if I had gone crazy when I bought a 300 f/2.8 IS late last year.
After shooting some HS baseball and Little league games...I'm very impressed with this lens. The local sports editor is impressed with my photos. Yes a lens
can make a difference.
I had a 300 f/4...and it was superb..but it wouldn't shoot at 2.8. I can shoot
the 2.8 wide open and still get sharp photos!

This lens is expensive, but you won't regret buying it when you see the photos it produces.

[Andy_T]

If Canon introduced a replacement for the 300 2.8 then the value could drop to 50% or so just guessing.

Take a look at how the used prices of the 85/1.2 MKI developed after the MKII was introduced :rolleyes:

IMHO, they are now actually higher than the prices you could buy a new MKI lens for at the cheapest sellers when it was still in production ...

Best regards,
Andy