Price check (Canon 5dm3)

S2kAtTracks wrote in post #18968877
It's listed for 1000. Was thinking of buying and reselling, but it does not seem worth the possible hassle. I see some with 60k clicks on the 900-1100 range, but to try and get more than that, may take a minute.

.
I think you are over-estimating the value of this camera model.

Just because you see people listing it for $900 to $1100 does not mean they are ever actually getting that much for it.

And condition does not have that much of an affect on price. . Just because it is 'new', with zero clicks on the shutter, does not mean that people will pay much more for it than they would for a well-used copy.

Personally, I think that you would have a lot of trouble getting even just your thousand dollars back. . $1000 for a brand new 5D3 is simply not a very good deal. . That is $1000 for something that almost nobody wants.

.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18968951
.
I think you are over-estimating the value of this camera model.

Just because you see people listing it for $900 to $1100 does not mean they are ever actually getting that much for it.

And condition does not have that much of an affect on price. . Just because it is 'new', with zero clicks on the shutter, does not mean that people will pay much more for it than they would for a well-used copy.

Personally, I think that you would have a lot of trouble getting even just your thousand dollars back. . $1000 for a brand new 5D3 is simply not a very good deal. . That is $1000 for something that almost nobody wants.

.

Correct, I'm not going to do it. Was using this thread as a way to see if it was worthwhile to do it. Definitely not now

CH_Devin wrote in post #18968874
$1000? That's crazy to spend on a piece of junk.

There's better cameras out there today, for sure. I outlined some of the complaints about it above. but if i had a budget of $5,000 to get ready for a wedding tomorrow I wouldn't hesitate to grab 2x 5d3's, a few good lenses, and some lighting. Most clients will be non the wiser.

Personally, I for sure wouldn't want it for a dedicated landscape trip today in 2019, and if I were a lazy 'natural light (people) photographer' then it would definitely show its limitations sooner or later.

CH_Devin wrote in post #18968874
$1000? That's crazy to spend on a piece of junk.

Why would you call it a 'piece of junk'?

Silver-Halide wrote in post #18969168
...if I were a lazy 'natural light (people) photographer' then it would definitely show its limitations sooner or later.

How do you mean, "Lazy"? I prefer shooting with natural light,
even when I'm stomping around dark and abandoned ruins. It makes me think more about
what I wish to capture, and forces me to consider the environment against results.

If you're referring strictly to portraiture, then I've missed your meaning, as I have never done portraiture
and do not wish to.

.

CH_Devin wrote in post #18968874
.
$1000? That's crazy to spend on a piece of junk.
.

.

SkedAddled wrote in post #18969182
.
Why would you call it a 'piece of junk'?
.

.
I also wondered why CH Devin said that. . It seems like an offensive, mean-spirited thing to say.

Didn't CH Devin see that the OP stated the 5D3 he was considering was in perfect, unused condition?


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18969205
Didn't CH Devin see that the OP stated the 5D3 he was considering was in perfect, unused condition?.

Perhaps, but likely not.

I'd suspect a 'gear snob' has chimed in, looking down a long nose at gear s/he deems
inferior, simply due to said person's financial ability to acquire such gear.

Remember, Tom, we see this sort of snobbery from time to time.
We must try to immunize ourselves from it, lest it turns us against each other.

I see anything aside from the most recent cameras, as junk. Defined as, any piece of camera gear that - if you buy now - will not get your money back.

As of right now, the best camera is the Sony A7R IV, for (at this year's black friday sale) $2450. A 63 MP 10 FPS camera with excellent autofocus.

$1000 for a 5D3 is 40% of the cost, for less than 10% of the capabilities. The 5D3 is trash. The 5D3 came out at the same time as the original 7D, which costs $200, for the same performance.

I need to make sure no one spends $1000 on something like that, much less invest $1000 in something that they think they'll make $100 from.

That said, I did use the 5D3 for a year or two in 2013. And, I did spend about $2000 at the time. It was the best full frame camera until the 1DX came out.

Silver-Halide wrote in post #18969168
$5,000 to get ready for a wedding tomorrow I wouldn't hesitate to grab 2x 5d3's, a few good lenses, and some lighting.

I would probably spend only $300 on renting two 5D3's and some lenses, assuming I'll make my money back on the job - instead of putting down $5000 for the whole thing.

Appreciate it guys.

I would never do the deal if 100 was on the line to make. More so wasn't sure if the demand was high for an unused (albeit older tech) camera. 300-500 I'd think about it.

But, I did pull trigger on the EOS R.

CH_Devin wrote in post #18969235
I see anything aside from the most recent cameras, as junk. Defined as, any piece of camera gear that - if you buy now - will not get your money back.

I doubt most people expect to get their costs returned when they're done with their digital gear,
as we're all fairly aware of declining values within the technology spectrum.

I will offer, however, that had you been as descriptive in your first post to this thread
as you had been in your follow-up, you likely would not have garnered the criticism you received.
A simple statement such as yours without explanation appears quite harsh,
while the explanations you offered afterwards were far more fitting
in supporting your comment.

It's not so much WHAT is said, but HOW it's said, which can make a difference.

CH_Devin wrote in post #18969235
I see anything aside from the most recent cameras, as junk. Defined as, any piece of camera gear that - if you buy now - will not get your money back.

As of right now, the best camera is the Sony A7R IV, for (at this year's black friday sale) $2450. A 63 MP 10 FPS camera with excellent autofocus.

$1000 for a 5D3 is 40% of the cost, for less than 10% of the capabilities. The 5D3 is trash. The 5D3 came out at the same time as the original 7D, which costs $200, for the same performance.

I need to make sure no one spends $1000 on something like that, much less invest $1000 in something that they think they'll make $100 from.

That said, I did use the 5D3 for a year or two in 2013. And, I did spend about $2000 at the time. It was the best full frame camera until the 1DX came out.

I would probably spend only $300 on renting two 5D3's and some lenses, assuming I'll make my money back on the job - instead of putting down $5000 for the whole thing.

I have captured a lot of wonderful photographs with that trash. It's still capable of capturing those same photos -- cameras don't stop performing just because something newer hits the market.

Scott M wrote in post #18973708
I have captured a lot of wonderful photographs with that trash. It's still capable of capturing those same photos -- cameras don't stop performing just because something newer hits the market.

True, you can use it if something else hits the market. But, you can use that same $1000 to buy something twice the camera..

CH_Devin wrote in post #18973717
True, you can use it if something else hits the market. But, you can use that same $1000 to buy something twice the camera..

And why are you crapping on Canon so heavily?

Granted, you like Sony and it does well for you, but does your experience so strongly negate
results and experiences of everyone else in the world?

Sorry, but I'm calling bullschtein now.
You've got a setup which works well for you, and that's great for you, but you're also
actively lobbying against some of the finest products to ever have come from another
brand's stable of gear, which makes you look like a fanboi hired by a vendor.

You're welcome to tout your own choice of gear all you wish, but you may do well
to keep in mind that this fine forum has not been established as a venue for
trashing others for their choice of gear.

CH_Devin wrote in post #18973717
True, you can use it if something else hits the market. But, you can use that same $1000 to buy something twice the camera..

Or, I can save my money and continue to use the same 5D3 that I have owned for the past 7 or so years and still get some excellent images.

That's pretty good for trash.

SkedAddled wrote in post #18973746
And why are you crapping on Canon so heavily?

Granted, you like Sony and it does well for you, but does your experience so strongly negate
results and experiences of everyone else in the world?

Sorry, but I'm calling bullschtein now.
You've got a setup which works well for you, and that's great for you, but you're also
actively lobbying against some of the finest products to ever have come from another
brand's stable of gear, which makes you look like a fanboi hired by a vendor.

You're welcome to tout your own choice of gear all you wish, but you may do well
to keep in mind that this fine forum has not been established as a venue for
trashing others for their choice of gear.

I don't own a Sony camera. But , that doesn't take away the appreciation that I have for a good product.

I'm heavily invested in the Canon system, and I plan to get the 1DX III when it comes out.

I'm just stating the fact that the 5D3 is not worth a $1000 purchase.

The 1DX can be bought for $1200. The 5D4 is $1600 used.

The 7D II is $600.

The EOS R is the same price.

I don't know why you're defending the 5D3 so hard, but it's irresponsible to tell someone that it's okay to buy that today.

Also, why is it okay to call me names when all I did was give my opinion on a camera? I am not a "fanboi" or associated with any vendor. Why is it so hard to see that there are better cameras out right now than the 5D3 for the same price?

CH_Devin wrote in post #18973902
...
I'm just stating the fact that the 5D3 is not worth a $1000 purchase.

...

I don't know why you're defending the 5D3 so hard, but it's irresponsible to tell someone that it's okay to buy that today.

What you actually said was the 5D3 is a "piece of junk".

Why is it irresponsible to recommend the 5D3 today?

As for folks "defending" the 5D3, perhaps like me, they're simply wondering why you hold such a strangely hostile attitude towards a perfectly functional camera that many photogs have used to produce amazing images?