Protecting lens investment for the future with body purchase.

I have a question. As we build up our lens collections, does it make any sort of sense to buy spare body as we go along in case canon decides to change their crop or ff mounts? Or even if they plan to change how newer bodies interact with older lenses. I ask because this can become an expensive game where all of a sudden, canon has the ability to make older lenses defunct at the drop of a dime. To put it in perspective, people are stil takin fine photos with 20d and 5d etc, so we know older bodies can still produce stunning photos. So my question, is does it make sense to buy a body and keep it tucked away, just in case? Or are there ways around this in the future so that your lens collection will always be usable? Im just throwing this out there because I'm not a millionaire, and would rather invest in a body now to protect and lens investment.

No, it doesnt make sense as bodies (even in storage) become obsolete and devalued. So while you hold it in storage your body could go from current market rate to nearly valueless without being used. Yes it would retain its ability to what it does now, but the money you spent would be lost in comparison with buying it later. Two other points, canon doesnt change mounts lightly, its been over 25 since the last change, and it was done only to accomodate autofocus. If they did change you would still have the ability to purchase any number of bodies for the old mounts. Its not like you cant have your pick of FD mount bodies today for a pittance.

In my opinion, you may want to get a second body for that purpose if you are using third-party lenses (and especially if you are really happy with a current model of camera). The reason I say that is simple. Some older third-party EF-mount lenses don't work with today's EOS cameras. The reason for that is that the third-party lens manufacturers have no access to Canon's design plan for their camera-lens communications. Everything they do is based on reverse-engineering of what is currently available on the market when they are designing a lens.

If all your EOS lenses (EF or EF-S mounts) are Canon lenses, you don't have as much to be concerned about. To the best of my knowledge, today's Canon EOS cameras can use all of the Canon lenses designed for the EOS family since the first EOS SLR. There may be an exception here and there because of the "M" camera and video cameras. Until Canon creates a new family of cameras with a related new family of lenses I suspect that today's EOS lenses will continue to work with newly released EOS cameras.

That is what I was thinking SkipD. It's not really about the value of the body decreasing over time for me, but the loss of being able to use any lenses.

Frodge wrote in post #16906268
That is what I was thinking SkipD. It's not really about the value of the body decreasing over time for me, but the loss of being able to use any lenses.

Yes, but what body would you buy now that you couldnt buy later at less cost? A 6D now is $1500 or so. In 3 years or so, the soonest a new mount would emerge (and I really doubt it will), that same camera could be had for half or less.

To answer your question..."no".
Not in my opinion. Not unless you just want another camera body in the closet .

Mike

Frodge wrote in post #16906168
I have a question. As we build up our lens collections, does it make any sort of sense to buy spare body as we go along in case canon decides to change their crop or ff mounts? Or even if they plan to change how newer bodies interact with older lenses. I ask because this can become an expensive game where all of a sudden, canon has the ability to make older lenses defunct at the drop of a dime. To put it in perspective, people are stil takin fine photos with 20d and 5d etc, so we know older bodies can still produce stunning photos. So my question, is does it make sense to buy a body and keep it tucked away, just in case? Or are there ways around this in the future so that your lens collection will always be usable? Im just throwing this out there because I'm not a millionaire, and would rather invest in a body now to protect and lens investment.

Makes no sense to me.

Most lenses can be adapted to something or another. And Canon isn't changing their mount any time soon. It is sometimes worrisome to think the EF mount could end up the way the FD mount did, but hopefully Canon learned something with that (which is why the FD market is full of near-free-lenses because you can hardly be bothered, incredible glass, but the adaptation is horrible compared to others). But I don't think that's going to happen again for a long, long time. Even then, by then, you'll have moved on most likely and not shooting with 20~30 year old equipment, right? So investing for the future isn't quite worth while.

I'm still using 30 year old Pentax lenses that never knew they'd be on a modern EOS Canon body.

By the time you need a new body, and they drop the EF line, you'll be able to buy a 5D3 for the same cost as the 5D classic right now. $600 or maybe less.

Don't "invest" in electronics.

If the EF line dies, there will still be a market for the glass. Sell it. You've gotten your 20-30 years out of it. It shouldn't be an issue to think it's still worth something by then.

Very best,

Makes no sense to me either.

Given the probability that Canon will release a new mount soon (very low) against the probability that electronics will depreciate (almost completely guaranteed), you are better off just saving your money.

Even if you take a look at FD equipment, if you want to buy an FD camera and lens, they are still all over the market and MUCH MUCH cheaper than they were 10 years ago. I actually just bought a mint condition FD lens for $18 last week and saw an AE-1 Program going for $30. It's not like the mount will change and all of a sudden you have no way of finding a replacement.

No, I don't think that is necessary. It's not like there's a limited supply of EF mount bodies on the world.

Cant see any reason.
1. If Canon changed the mainstream mount, they risk a huge number of customers moving to Nikon or even Sony especially now with the massive advantage the Sony sensors have. So for the next 3 years I would say it was zero chance. Hell look how long its taken them to update the 100-400 L series!
Replace the entire range - no way!
Also i suspect Canons wealth of Lenses keeps it a market leader. lose that they risk everything!
2. If one can buy a 5D3 for £2,400 today, then if the EF mount became obsolete, the new price would drop to say £1,000 or even £500.
( If I was just about to buy a 5D3 and discovered Canon were discontinuing the EF lens mount - i would totally discount the whole idea. Maybe if they produced a "converter", that all independent reviews said had zero effect on image quality, maybe I would go for one at say £500. Any more and I would prefer to invest that in the new technology; as it would have to have some truly amazing benefits, for Canon to switch )

3. I see the point regarding 3rd Party lenses. But if I was that worried, I feel it would be wiser to invest my money in converting them all to Canon lenses

i can't see Canon changing the mount anytime soon and as far as I know there is zero reason for them to consider doing so. If they did it would cost them dearly as I imagine it would give a lot of people that little extra push to jump on board with some of the new systems around today.

Don't even worry about this dude. The EF mount was very well designed in 1987, and they really placed a lot of safeguards in the mount design so they wouldn't have to change it for an extremely long time. So far, their design still has spare electrical connectors and does not have a problem with current or voltage between the lens and camera body. It's survived the implementation of IS, several ETTL iterations, and most recently power focus. You have nothing to be concerned about.

Well, I was there when the change from FD to EF happened.

Don't forget that the transition from FD to EF was a change in paradigm. They went from a mechanical mount, where the aperture information and actuation were done with levers and springs, to electronics.

They could have made the EF mount a hybrid, rather a dual function (mechanical and electronic/mechanical)​, but they decided to go for a clean design. I don't think they did it arbitrarily and without thinking. If I am not mistaken, FD mount cameras were produced for a while (1992) before moving solely to EOS models. The EF mount was introduced in 1987.

Therefore, the two mounts were co-existent for 5 years. Plenty of time to buy the latest model...

MakisM1 wrote in post #16908318
Well, I was there when the change from FD to EF happened.

Don't forget that the transition from FD to EF was a change in paradigm. They went from a mechanical mount, where the aperture information and actuation were done with levers and springs, to electronics.

They could have made the EF mount a hybrid, rather a dual function (mechanical and electronic/mechanical)​, but they decided to go for a clean design. I don't think they did it arbitrarily and without thinking. If I am not mistaken, FD mount cameras were produced for a while (1992) before moving solely to EOS models. The EF mount was introduced in 1987.

Therefore, the two mounts were co-existent for 5 years. Plenty of time to buy the latest model...

Exactly. It was a very clean design with a lot of thought put into what possible new technologies were on the horizon in R&D in the late 1980s. In the end, a modern lens is a bunch of glass with a few motors and microchips. You need electrical vias to power those motors and communicate with those motors. Will some new technology supersede electronics one day? Maybe, but it's VERY far out in research and not something we're going to see as long as it matters to today's equipment.

I say buy the second camera anyway because it's good to always have a backup. And when you're out shooting, you can use the second camera to hold a second lens so you don't have to swap lenses as much. I own 3 camera bodies, and it's very convenient. Not for the same reason you're thinking, but I think you'll enjoy having a second body.

If you do buy a second body, don't store it away and not use it. Cameras tend to develop faults left sitting unused - things like electromagnets that go sticky, cams that jam, lubricant migrating where it shouldn't, etc. SLRs are electromechanical devices and need to be "exercised".