Am I making a mistake?

TJays wrote in post #16352389
you say your not shooting much now, then sell the Nikon D800 keep your Canon EOS M. With a 6D will you suddenly have time to use it to warrant the cost of a 6D camera & good glass ? I guess it comes down to the 10K worth of equipment new is what dollar value used ?

I can't imagine that the equipment he has will have lost a lot of value. He should get a fair amount of his money back.

just a sidenote, using Nikon, Canon and downgrade in the same sentence in the Canon forum is asking for a public hanging

but as someone posted earlier just keep what you have.

It seems we have some potential "Hoarders" show candidates here on the boards!

So when do those of you that say "keep all those things you have money wrapped up in, even though you don't use it, and you need money for a big event" decide when its time to sell off stuff?

When they aren't worthy much?

Perhaps when the manufacturer announces a new successor to either the camera or lenses or both?

When you have to do something when you move under medicare/medicaid, and you can have no assets or they get seized?

Perhaps when there is a fire or natural disaster that destroys everything only to find out you don't have enough personal effects insurance?

I don't get the "I don't use expensive stuff I own, but I will keep it around as a depreciating asset anyways" mentality. Not that it is a wrong decision, just curious what goes into that decision?

My equipment will basically have lost no value as I bought all but the body used, and for good deals. I have decided to keep it though and just sell a few lenses that I don't use. Thank you all for your opinions and thoughts on the matter.

Judging by how quickly you went through a number of camera's I would say stay with what you have and just shoot more and enjoy.

freitz wrote in post #16352217
I agree with this user. Why keep something that isn't being used. You could use funds elsewhere.

This is why America is a debtors nation. Senseless. You don't magically start using a 6d more instead of a Nikon because it is a different name brand. I'm not trying to start trouble, but I'd have to say that sometimes the advice given should be take n with a grain of salt. It's easy for others to spend your money. What you have now is more than adequate, and trading down is never usually a good idea IMHO. You'll have sellers remorse, I'm guilty of it myself.

Generally, it isn't frugal to keep swapping systems.

Frodge wrote in post #16352885
This is why America is a debtors nation. Senseless. You don't magically start using a 6d more instead of a Nikon because it is a different name brand. I'm not trying to start trouble, but I'd have to say that sometimes the advice given should be take n with a grain of salt. It's easy for others to spend your money. What you have now is more than adequate, and trading down is never usually a good idea IMHO. You'll have sellers remorse, I'm guilty of it myself.

You and others are really missing the point.

Facts:
- OP has a system in place today that could produce something nearly close to 10K in liquid asset if sold
- OP would like to still do photography, but obviously as a hobby
- OP is not using said equipment now
- OP needs cash for a big event
- This is a hobby

I find it ironic that you would like to jab the American financial outlook, however, your suggestion is contrary and actually helps create issues. People buy things all the time and don't really do anything with them, and then because they don't have the money at other times in their lives, they go into debt for those necessities. Also remember that not all debt is bad debt.

The financially sensible thing to do is to liquidate what you don't use to raise the funds, and if you want to stay in the hobby long-term, then take a portion of the proceeds to buy a good sensible system.

If you have $10k in the kit, that means at least $7k in lenses. That might be a good place to lean down.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16353027
You and others are really missing the point.

Facts:
- OP has a system in place today that could produce something nearly close to 10K in liquid asset if sold
- OP would like to still do photography, but obviously as a hobby
- OP is not using said equipment now
- OP needs cash for a big event
- This is a hobby

I find it ironic that you would like to jab the American financial outlook, however, your suggestion is contrary and actually helps create issues. People buy things all the time and don't really do anything with them, and then because they don't have the money at other times in their lives, they go into debt for those necessities. Also remember that not all debt is bad debt.

The financially sensible thing to do is to liquidate what you don't use to raise the funds, and if you want to stay in the hobby long-term, then take a portion of the proceeds to buy a good sensible system.

The "financially sensible" thing to do to begin with would have been not to buy the Nikon system, or the three other systems before that. I'm not missing any point.

I don't need the money to make my wedding happen, or for anything else. I don't spend money on things I can't afford. I just hate having money tied up in something that isn't being used. Like TeamSpeed said, what is the point in letting it depreciate when I could basically get my money back now?

whmeltonjr wrote in post #16353106
I don't need the money to make my wedding happen, or for anything else. I don't spend money on things I can't afford. I just hate having money tied up in something that isn't being used. Like TeamSpeed said, what is the point in letting it depreciate when I could basically get my money back now?

That works too. I'm of a different mindset in that I don't buy things that I really don't need, and I'm not cheap. Whatever you think is best for you financially. I think if you don't need the money, you should keep your good kit. You'll regret it down the road. I cycle about 40-50 miles (6) times a week. I just sold one of my newer bikes that was only about a year old, I used part of the money for a 60d. I didn't need to sell the bike for the 60d but figured why not after the fact. I have a little sellers remorse in the fact that it would be nice to have that cannondale around even if it freed some money up.

Frodge wrote in post #16352885
This is why America is a debtors nation. Senseless. You don't magically start using a 6d more instead of a Nikon because it is a different name brand. I'm not trying to start trouble, but I'd have to say that sometimes the advice given should be take n with a grain of salt. It's easy for others to spend your money. What you have now is more than adequate, and trading down is never usually a good idea IMHO. You'll have sellers remorse, I'm guilty of it myself.

You should probably re-read the OP post before you start making accusations. The OP has a large event coming up and would like extra money...selling for a cheaper system will supply the additional income he needs.

I agree he should have never bought the system in the first place, but that is not our choice now is it?. I am extremely disappointed in your ability to judge "Americans" on their own personal choices for spending their money. As well as using my post as a starting point for your pointless rant. I would keep your personal financial advise to yourself as well as your personal political feelings.

To the OP. If your not using it, it will depreciate in value over time just like all things. Selling will give you some money but buying into another system that you are not going to use will put you in the same situation in a couple of months when you stop using it. If you are just going to do the same thing you are with the 800D in 4 months I would keep it. If you would like extra cash sell it. Good Luck

freitz wrote in post #16353161
You should probably re-read the OP post before you start making accusations. The OP has a large event coming up and would like extra money...selling for a cheaper system will supply the additional income he needs.

I agree he should have never bought the system in the first place, but that is not our choice now is it?. I am extremely disappointed in your ability to judge "Americans" on their own personal choices for spending their money. As well as using my post as a starting point for your pointless rant. I would keep your personal financial advise to yourself as well as your personal political feelings.

To the OP. If your not using it, it will depreciate in value over time just like all things. Selling will give you some money but buying into another system that you are not going to use will put you in the same situation in a couple of months when you stop using it. If you are just going to do the same thing you are with the 800D in 4 months I would keep it. If you would like extra cash sell it. Good Luck

Your should reread the op's last post. He says he doesn't need money for the wedding or for anything else.

Frodge wrote in post #16353041
The "financially sensible" thing to do to begin with would have been not to buy the Nikon system, or the three other systems before that. I'm not missing any point.

That's like saying that the financially sensible thing to do would have been to buy 1,000 shares of apple stock in 2003.