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 07 Jan 2014 (Tuesday) 18:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

So Much For L Lens Values

 
bps
Cream of the Crop
7,607 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Mar 2007
Location: California
     
Jan 10, 2014 10:16 |  #46

mgk2 wrote in post #16592557 (external link)
Some people just can't swallow the fact that their L has dropped significantly due to some excellent 3rd party lenses and pretend that they don't care ;)

No pretending here as I could honestly care less. I love my 35L and use it to create images. Images give me enjoyment, not the current used market value. I am also not bothered in the slightest that Sigma has produced a lens that is comparable or perhaps even surpasses the 35L in quality. It just means that there is another great lens out there that can used to create beautiful images, which is great. It's a win-win as far as I'm concerned.

I honestly don't care if my 35L is worth $1K or $500, I just enjoy using it to create photographs.

Bryan


My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Jerobean
Senior Member
785 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2008
     
Jan 10, 2014 10:25 |  #47

bps wrote in post #16593931 (external link)
No pretending here as I could honestly care less. I love my 35L and use it to create images. Images give me enjoyment, not the current used market value. I am also not bothered in the slightest that Sigma has produced a lens that is comparable or perhaps even surpasses the 35L in quality. It just means that there is another great lens out there that can used to create beautiful images, which is great. It's a win-win as far as I'm concerned.

I honestly don't care if my 35L is worth $1K or $500, I just enjoy using it to create photographs.

Bryan

i like your attitude about it. that's how we should all feel when there are viable options.

sorry, but I must, you mean to say "i couldn't care less" if you can care less, you care some :P


_______________
6d, 24-105L, Tak SMC 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bps
Cream of the Crop
7,607 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Mar 2007
Location: California
     
Jan 10, 2014 12:43 |  #48

Jerobean wrote in post #16593951 (external link)
sorry, but I must, you mean to say "i couldn't care less" if you can care less, you care some :P

:lol: Good point! :lol:

Bryan


My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PoEarth
Member
Avatar
81 posts
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Disneyland , California
     
Jan 10, 2014 13:12 |  #49

bps wrote in post #16593931 (external link)
No pretending here as I could honestly care less. I love my 35L and use it to create images. Images give me enjoyment, not the current used market value. I am also not bothered in the slightest that Sigma has produced a lens that is comparable or perhaps even surpasses the 35L in quality. It just means that there is another great lens out there that can used to create beautiful images, which is great. It's a win-win as far as I'm concerned.

I honestly don't care if my 35L is worth $1K or $500, I just enjoy using it to create photographs.

Bryan

Just got my new Canon 35L for the New Year 2014 to start a New Life in Art!::lol:


Canon 6D. Fuji X100. iPhoneX. Canon 50 f/1.4, 28 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8. Canon 14L f/2.8 II, 35L f/1.4, Canon 50L f/1.2, 100L f/2.8 IS Macro, 135L f/2, 16-35L f/2.8 II, 24-70L I(sold) & II f/2.8 ...
Gitzo GT2531EX-Arca Swiss Monoball p0, GT1542T-G1177M, GM2561T-G1077M. Canon 430 EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
545iBMW
Senior Member
Avatar
473 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2008
     
Jan 10, 2014 13:31 |  #50

To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
w0m
Goldmember
1,110 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2011
     
Jan 10, 2014 13:38 |  #51

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

Generic question that every person would answer differently. I'm sure there are some that would use lack of resale value as justification to switch to more third party lenses or more lower end.

Mac resale value is higher higher than PC; yet PCs still sell. I think base question is over blowing the importance of the resale value for many people.


[6D]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bps
Cream of the Crop
7,607 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Mar 2007
Location: California
     
Jan 10, 2014 14:26 |  #52

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

Very good question, but I find it hard to compare because we would be in an entirely different market scenario. For lenses to lose that much value, it would mean that new lenses with outstanding qualities far and above the previous design would have to be released every year or two. And honestly, that's just not something that's going to happen. To a degree, it happens with camera bodies, but not so much for lenses. (For example, in 5 years, I'm pretty sure a well taken care of 5D Mark III will only be worth $500.)

I just find it hard to imagine a scenario you're describing and I think photography as a whole would have a different landscape then it does today.

Bryan


My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cubdriver
Goldmember
Avatar
1,797 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 357
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Litchfield Co, CT
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:14 |  #53

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

Sure - but *maybe* I'd buy it used at 3 years old. It's a moot point to me - I've never sold a lens. Once I buy it, I hang on to it even if it only comes out once a year. I'd rather have it and not need it than the other way 'round. I don't buy them to resell, I buy them to keep.

-Pat


Smugmug site: http://pmanning.smugmu​g.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PoEarth
Member
Avatar
81 posts
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Disneyland , California
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:14 |  #54

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

I don't have the correct answer for that!:rolleyes:
All I do is to buy a 35L, a 135L , a 16-35 L and a 24-70 L II :oops: for the FUN of Art!:lol:
Resale?:rolleyes: I don't even think of selling when buying !
I'm not worry about dying when living as well 'bw!


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 6D. Fuji X100. iPhoneX. Canon 50 f/1.4, 28 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8. Canon 14L f/2.8 II, 35L f/1.4, Canon 50L f/1.2, 100L f/2.8 IS Macro, 135L f/2, 16-35L f/2.8 II, 24-70L I(sold) & II f/2.8 ...
Gitzo GT2531EX-Arca Swiss Monoball p0, GT1542T-G1177M, GM2561T-G1077M. Canon 430 EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
madhatter04
Goldmember
1,930 posts
Likes: 51
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Southern California
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:21 |  #55

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

I don't own any L's but I think one would have to assume that in this scenario, performance would also have to nose-dive after 3 years. A lens will still perform the same if taken care of well and kept in working order. PCs become obsolete, software keeps getting more powerful, and there are a hundred issues. That being said, I personally purchase lenses for their utility, not to consider their value and resale value later.


Designer // Art Director // Photographer
www.alexanderfitch.com (external link) | AlexFitchPhoto on Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
545iBMW
Senior Member
Avatar
473 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2008
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:25 |  #56

w0m wrote in post #16594496 (external link)
Generic question that every person would answer differently. I'm sure there are some that would use lack of resale value as justification to switch to more third party lenses or more lower end.

Mac resale value is higher higher than PC; yet PCs still sell. I think base question is over blowing the importance of the resale value for many people.

I'm an Apple engineer and I use Macs both at work and at home. Macs do not hold their price like lenses (lenses, L lens in particular hold their value around 80%, Macs, probably half). Most household would only buy between 1-2, maybe 3 Macs...most serious photo gear head who frequents this forum owns at least half a dozen or more.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mgk2
Member
167 posts
Joined Oct 2012
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:25 |  #57
bannedPermanent ban

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

That would definitely affect my purchase decision.

One of the reason why so many opt for L is good glass (especially being 1st party) holds its value well. I personally aim to buy the best glass I can afford as I treat the time of owning them 'renting'.

Now if you tell me they worth nothing after 3 years I would go with the 'best bang of buck' route, meaning 3rd party most likely.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
545iBMW
Senior Member
Avatar
473 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2008
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:40 |  #58

bps wrote in post #16594606 (external link)
Very good question, but I find it hard to compare because we would be in an entirely different market scenario. For lenses to lose that much value, it would mean that new lenses with outstanding qualities far and above the previous design would have to be released every year or two. And honestly, that's just not something that's going to happen. To a degree, it happens with camera bodies, but not so much for lenses. (For example, in 5 years, I'm pretty sure a well taken care of 5D Mark III will only be worth $500.)

I just find it hard to imagine a scenario you're describing and I think photography as a whole would have a different landscape then it does today.

Bryan


My point here is, I don't think people will spend 10s of thousands of dollars on camera equipment if the resale value sucks. So I don't believe when peeps say - I don't care about resale value. The one big reason most of us (I'm talking about non-pro like me who makes no money from photography) get to keep our expensive L lenses is because of good resale value.

I estimate my gear between $40-50K (more or less). I know bodies don't hold their value and I accept that fact. But I would never buy and keep more than half a dozen L lenses at a time if it depreciated like crazy - so yeah, I do care about resale value. And I believe majority of the non-pros here do too. (And I'm posting this with due respect to everyone).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drive_75
Senior Member
748 posts
Joined Apr 2006
Location: California
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:43 |  #59

545iBMW wrote in post #16594479 (external link)
To those who say they don't care about resale value and owns a few L lenses, my question is, would you still buy an L lens if it depreciated like a PC which basically doesn't have any value after 3 or so years?

I think for most, yes. Just like PC if we need one, we'd buy one. Your only other choice is not to shoot dslr If you decide not to buy because the value depreciate. People still buy dslr even though they only worth 10% of the original value after 7-8 years.

Like I said I didn't buy my lenses as an investment.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
w0m
Goldmember
1,110 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2011
     
Jan 10, 2014 15:49 |  #60

545iBMW wrote in post #16594764 (external link)
I'm an Apple engineer and I use Macs both at work and at home. Macs do not hold their price like lenses (lenses, L lens in particular hold their value around 80%, Macs, probably half). Most household would only buy between 1-2, maybe 3 Macs...most serious photo gear head who frequents this forum owns at least half a dozen or more.

I think I worded my comparison poorly; it's off the the base assumption that L's resale value would follow that of PCs. My comparison is that if such a scenario were to happen; Canon would be the, 'Apple'. In 3 years; the Mac will have 50% it's value. A comparable Dell? 20% if that. If Lenses depreciated like computers; Canon would hold 50% value; where most Sigmas would hold 20%.

I then brought it back that I think it's a bit of a leading question; similar to, asking 'All 24-105L owners! Any problems?' and using the results as 'evidence' that the 24-105L is a poor/crap lens.


[6D]

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

11,541 views & 0 likes for this thread
So Much For L Lens Values
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 Overdoer
843 guests, 190 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.