Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 16 Sep 2013 (Monday) 14:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Broke Lens; Insurance Paying Out; What to get?

 
Livinthalife
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,118 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Austin,TX
     
Sep 18, 2013 08:08 |  #16

FEChariot wrote in post #16306178 (external link)
So every 1.5 years, you need to drop a $900 lens or you are behind.

:lol:
That's the thing about insurance...it's a gamble!


-Andy-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
YashicaFX2
Goldmember
1,003 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
Location: A quiet place in the country.
     
Sep 18, 2013 08:16 |  #17
bannedPermanent ban

FEChariot wrote in post #16306178 (external link)
So every 1.5 years, you need to drop a $900 lens or you are behind.

Two things. The $49/month covers EVERYTHING HE OWNS, not just the camera stuff. Peace of mind is what insurance is all about, not ROI. From that standpoint all insurance is a waste of money.

My insurance company (no names, but the initials are A.L.L.S.T.A.T.E) will write me a rider to cover all my camera gear. New retail the total value comes to about $8,000. The policy is about $20 a month. I passed. $20/month = $240/ year. I have already gone 4 years without the extra insurance. I have already saved $960. Add my $500 deductible to that. I could go out today, drop my 60D and 15-85 in the lake and break even replacing it out of pocket. Plus I will never have to fill out a bunch of paperwork just to get my own money back. Add to that mess the fact that if I have a camera claim, I lose my "no claim deductible reduction", which could potentially cost me $500 on any future homeowner's claim.

I figure insurance companies are pretty smart. They will never write a policy they expect to lose money on. As there are only two parties to the insurance equation, that only leaves you to lose. Save the insurance premiums for stuff you can't afford to lose: house, car, spouse, or perhaps income producing photo equipment.


Dedicated APS-c shooter. Gripped 60D, 60 2.8, 10-22, 15-85, Σ70-200 OS and a big white something or other! Plus a 5D w/28-75.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xinvisionx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,970 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4205
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Mesa, AZ
     
Sep 18, 2013 10:38 |  #18

It's about peace of mind. If my bag were to be stolen, is be out several thousands of dollars. Same if the bag fell into a lake. You never know. So $50 a month for renters insurance bundled with camera coverage, well worth it for me.


My name is James ~ Gear ~ Facebook Fan Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elleana
Member
155 posts
Joined Sep 2013
     
Sep 19, 2013 00:16 |  #19

xinvisionx wrote in post #16306135 (external link)
That's what I ended up doing last night. Ordered the 17-40 refurbished from Canon for $614 out the door.

Huh, so you're ahead about 300 bucks?


6D | EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART | EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xinvisionx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,970 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4205
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Mesa, AZ
     
Sep 19, 2013 08:11 |  #20

Yes


My name is James ~ Gear ~ Facebook Fan Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Methodical
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,835 posts
Gallery: 235 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3544
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Where ever I lay my hat is my home
     
Sep 19, 2013 08:34 |  #21

YashicaFX2 wrote in post #16306209 (external link)
Two things. The $49/month covers EVERYTHING HE OWNS, not just the camera stuff. Peace of mind is what insurance is all about, not ROI. From that standpoint all insurance is a waste of money.

My insurance company (no names, but the initials are A.L.L.S.T.A.T.E) will write me a rider to cover all my camera gear. New retail the total value comes to about $8,000. The policy is about $20 a month. I passed. $20/month = $240/ year. I have already gone 4 years without the extra insurance. I have already saved $960. Add my $500 deductible to that. I could go out today, drop my 60D and 15-85 in the lake and break even replacing it out of pocket. Plus I will never have to fill out a bunch of paperwork just to get my own money back. Add to that mess the fact that if I have a camera claim, I lose my "no claim deductible reduction", which could potentially cost me $500 on any future homeowner's claim.

I figure insurance companies are pretty smart. They will never write a policy they expect to lose money on. As there are only two parties to the insurance equation, that only leaves you to lose. Save the insurance premiums for stuff you can't afford to lose: house, car, spouse, or perhaps income producing photo equipment.

Wow, that's high. The trick is to get a separate personal article policy (not a rider). This type of policy has no deductible and since it's not tied to any of your other policy, it won't affect them when you file a claim. So check with your insurance company to see if you can get a separate personal article policy (they may use a different name).

I pay just over $400 per year (business policy) for all my gear listed, plus it covers all my computer related gear and it has a $1M dollar liability coverage (shoot sports). Now, before going with this policy, I had a non-business personal article policy and I only paid about $200 or so per year for the same gear and there's no deductible. I think it was about $1.20 per $100.

Insurance is about peace of mind, which it gives me. So if I am shooting that high school game and the running back falls over me or my gear and decides to sue - PEACE OF MIND. If I go into the woods and that bear destroys my gear - PEACE OF MIND. If someone decides to rob me of my 1d4 and 500 - REALLY CHEAP PEACE OF MIND. Everything's a gamble, but at $200-400 a year, it's a cheap gamble. So talk to your insurance agents - riders tend to be more expensive than stand alone.

Just One Man's Opinion


Gear
MethodicalImages (external link)
Flickr (external link)
"Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,091 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2791
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 19, 2013 11:13 as a reply to  @ Livinthalife's post |  #22

I want the insurance for one thing. My bag getting stolen.

I cannot replace all of it at once. But I can cover 2-400 a year for a piece of mind.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
YashicaFX2
Goldmember
1,003 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
Location: A quiet place in the country.
     
Sep 19, 2013 13:07 |  #23
bannedPermanent ban

Talley wrote in post #16309146 (external link)
I want the insurance for one thing. My bag getting stolen.

I cannot replace all of it at once. But I can cover 2-400 a year for a piece of mind.

Talley,

I am guessing your gear cost you $4,000 to $5,000. You pay $400 per year for 10 years then lose your bag, you paid to replace it all anyway. What do you get out of the insurance at that point? If you are going to have to pay for it out of pocket anyway, just wait until you bag gets stolen, then go buy new stuff. No claim forms, no agents, no premiums, no deductible, no hassle. In the long run, that is cheaper. If it weren't, insurance companies would go out of business.


Dedicated APS-c shooter. Gripped 60D, 60 2.8, 10-22, 15-85, Σ70-200 OS and a big white something or other! Plus a 5D w/28-75.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xinvisionx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,970 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4205
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Mesa, AZ
     
Sep 19, 2013 14:40 |  #24

You get piece of mind.

There is no way I would be able to instantly replace my gear without insurance all at once. I accumulate gear over time. Watching for deals and purchasing when I can afford it. Could I end up paying more for insurance without incidence? Sure. But that's a small price to pay when I get piece of mind and knowing I'm covered.

I dropped my 17-40L last Saturday night and I had the money from my insurance company in my account by Tuesday. No hassle. Straight forward.

My new lens has been shipped and I'm enjoying not having to come up with the funds myself to replace.


My name is James ~ Gear ~ Facebook Fan Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fernando
Goldmember
Avatar
1,628 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Round Rock, TX
     
Sep 19, 2013 14:53 |  #25

YashicaFX2 wrote in post #16309410 (external link)
Talley,

I am guessing your gear cost you $4,000 to $5,000. You pay $400 per year for 10 years then lose your bag, you paid to replace it all anyway. What do you get out of the insurance at that point? If you are going to have to pay for it out of pocket anyway, just wait until you bag gets stolen, then go buy new stuff. No claim forms, no agents, no premiums, no deductible, no hassle. In the long run, that is cheaper. If it weren't, insurance companies would go out of business.

I feel you're channeling my dad...

Do you self indemnify for your homeowners or auto insurance? What about health insurance? I'm guessing no even though it is technically an option for many people. Technically because while banks and several states allow for it most people can't swing it in a lump sum.

Your method only makes sense if people are putting that $400 away each year and the loss happens at the end of that time. For most people they can swing the $30/month but there is no way they could swing $5k all at once if a loss occurred

I have an Inland Marine Policy on my camera equipment and my wife's jewelry. Paying $240/year for about $23K. (Yes, I do agree that the OP is paying WAY too much for his insurance. At $600/yr he's getting robbed) We could lose and replace all that at once and replace it in cash but when compared with other expenses, it makes sense.


Fuji convert - Ping me if you have any Fuji gear or legacy glass you're moving.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xinvisionx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,970 posts
Gallery: 43 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4205
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Mesa, AZ
     
Sep 19, 2013 17:59 |  #26

Fernando. Keep in mind $50 a month is not just my camera equipment. It's my renters insurance with my camera added on for additional coverage.


My name is James ~ Gear ~ Facebook Fan Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elleana
Member
155 posts
Joined Sep 2013
     
Sep 19, 2013 20:07 |  #27

This is the age old debate on insurance.. People are just going to have different views on it. Risk averse people are how insurance companies make money.


6D | EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART | EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Sep 19, 2013 20:56 |  #28
bannedPermanent ban

elleana wrote in post #16310287 (external link)
This is the age old debate on insurance.. People are just going to have different views on it. Risk averse people are how insurance companies make money.

Yes, but then you hear the stories of homes that burn down with no insurance and a collection is set up to help the family.

Lots of people have that "it won't happen to me attitude" and get burned in the end.

Here in Canada, we pay a lot of taxes to cover our medical. I'm ok with that as I know I won't have to mortgage the house if my family needs medical care. But, I must say I'll be the happiest fellow around if I pay into the medical system for 50 years and not once do I have to draw on it.:)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fernando
Goldmember
Avatar
1,628 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Round Rock, TX
     
Sep 19, 2013 22:38 |  #29

xinvisionx wrote in post #16310057 (external link)
Fernando. Keep in mind $50 a month is not just my camera equipment. It's my renters insurance with my camera added on for additional coverage.

Aware. My Inland Marine, with a completely separate company than my autos/homeowners/umbre​lla, so no "bundling" discounts, is about $20/mo, but that's for a lot more coverage than you have. When last paying renter's I was paying $15/mo for $30K coverage. Allowing for inflation and recent losses by insurers, renters should be no more than about $15/mo for $15K in many areas.

$50/mo for your level of coverage, without knowing specifics sounds high. Unless you have stuff on your app that impacts your rate (claims, high crime location, credit score) it's time to shop that coverage.


Fuji convert - Ping me if you have any Fuji gear or legacy glass you're moving.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Methodical
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,835 posts
Gallery: 235 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3544
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Where ever I lay my hat is my home
     
Sep 20, 2013 10:29 |  #30

I agree that we all have difference in opinions when it comes to insurance, but when I started investing heavily into my equipment, it became very clear that I needed to insure said equipment. Once I found out it covers everthing except normal wear and tear, it was a no brainer for me for such a small amount and in my case I get a million dollar liability on top of it, too. Here's the kicker, you can insure it for more than it costs if you want.

Now, if you ask me about extended warranties, I will argue to the end that that's a bunch of crap for suckers and that it's better and cheaper to just insure it.

Here's a good thread on this very subject

Tip: Always know what your policy allows, don't allow, covers and don't cover. Do not and I repeat do not rely on what the Agent says.


Gear
MethodicalImages (external link)
Flickr (external link)
"Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,103 views & 0 likes for this thread
Broke Lens; Insurance Paying Out; What to get?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jeffing
702 guests, 276 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.