Segura, give me a break. Your recommendation this tread be closed by the admin because you consider this topic "economics" is flat out wrong. You have a right to post your comment, you can't accept that other person are NOT following your orders. You had your say, no need to repeat it till you get all angry about it. Persons have a reason to worry about spending $2,000+ dollars for an item and not having a warranty, especially if the items history is a total mystery. The price someone pays for a rather expensive camera body, be it used or new is based on that persons financial situation or outlook. Some person are looking for different view points only, NOT to be told flat out what to do. Seems you got chip on your shoulder about $. I could care what you think of this post, its meant to send you a message. I deleted some other comments directed at you but decided you would blow a fuse.

there is Broken D700 on UK eBay, No Guarantee, spares only. it is current £1000 can any one explain this

It did not look like anyone was disagreeing with you Segura it seems as though they were pointing out that your comment came across as snide. I think alot of people on these forums think that because they have information someone else might not know/thought of they have to be rude about how they respond. I for one appreciate the info and agree. It is basic econimics, if you have many people looking to buy a few things the price goes up. No need to belittle though.

"All your whining about why the camera is so expensive used must have failed simple logic and economics."

IndyGeoff said:
Segura - rofl whining ? shaking my head is more like it.

I was just curious why someone would pay nearly new prices for a camera body. I toss mine every 2 years and creep up the line each time. /shrugs

I thank those that gave answers to my question over smug comments.

That's what is paid because that is what it is. Look at lenses like the 14-24mm or the 24-70mm. You don't expect to pay 50% for a used one do you? Prices for those used are about 75% of new (used $1400, new $1800). Pro gear hold more of a value than amateur gear as well. Used D3's are getting to almost 50% of what they were new, and that is a 3 year old camera. Also the fact that there is a replacement model has lowered the used price.
You won't find a D700 for $1200 (50% off) until there is a replacement in the pipe.

And I am sure your smug comment reference was directed at me, but I think I have contributed plenty to help you understand why it is not as cheap as you want it to be.

If you want a used one, buy from a photographer you can ask questions and is trusted. Look on the Fred Miranda buy and sell boards if you want something good. I have seen D700's with less than 10,000 actuations go for $2000.

Drab said:
You make warranty claims on > 50% of your gear, shivaswrath?

You'd be surprised:
new d200-remap sensor because of hot ones
new 50 1.4g- afs failure 24 months later, replaced under warranty (b2 repair)
new d90-pixel remaps
if u bought a new d7000-u would've had a sensor remap

That doesn't include me sending in lenses annually for clean/checks which are usually covered under warranty (if concurrent to another problem)

I've purchased my d3, 85 1.4, and 20 2.8 used and praying nothing major comes up....

Segura - rofl whining ? shaking my head is more like it.

I was just curious why someone would pay nearly new prices for a camera body. I toss mine every 2 years and creep up the line each time. /shrugs

I thank those that gave answers to my question over smug comments.

IndyGeoff said:
I did not think the Nikon warranty transfers to the new buyer.
No sales tax from Amazon, or shipping usually. I,and I suspect most, do not report purchases from Amazon in order to pay sales tax.

Your first point is correct. As for the second part, Pierre was talking about in Canada. In Canada, Amazon and other online dealers must charge sales tax on all products, based on the Provincial and Federal rates, it's the law.

IndyGeoff said:
I am afraid of, a failed camera arriving from ebay... maybe many hot pixels...

I think I have more risk shipping my D700 through EBay and not receiving my money than you receiving a bad body as I understood that in case of a PayPal disputes, the buyer has more protection than the seller. But I could be wrong.

I have a few dirt spots showing on my picture and I find it easier to clean the pictures in Photoshop than cleaning the sensor (and for the smart boys here eager to slap some ignorant, note that I do know what needs to be known about sensor cleaning). As you may suspect, bad pixels is the least of my worries.

Even if you had 40 bad pixels, once masked, no one would be able to tell. Nikon may not replace your brand new camera over a few bad pixels neither as they apparently consider this a normal thing. Most likely, every sold camera on the market comes with masked-out pixels.

You guys just don't get it do you?

"New gets a warranty, used does not. For only a few hundred dollars why do people not just buy new?"
"For a piece of electronics like this, I find it hard to see it sustain such a high resale value"
" It would take at least 25% for me to buy used for a camera body. They are basically
disposable compared to nice glass"

All your whining about why the camera is so expensive used must have failed simple logic and economics.

High prices in a used market can be attributed to supply versus demand. There is not enough used D700 supply to make the price go down because the demand is high.

Reason 1) No easy upgrade path: People who bought a D700, can upgrade to a D3S, but that costs more than double the D700. So you won't have many upgrades.
Reason 2) The D700 replacement holdout. Yup, people have the D700 won't upgrade to a D3S because they know a D4 is immenent, and maybe a D800. These guys will wait until a new replacement camera comes out. When this happens, the used price will drop to $1400 range.
Reason 3) No downgrade path: Owners won't downgrade to DX because they are invested in glass.

There are probably many reasons more why people won't sell. For me, I don't want to spend over $3,000 more to upgrade when the D700 is perfect for what I need.

shiva takes the cake . . .

because those people are stupid - if you can't yield a 50% savings on buying new, you're pissing away money on warranty issues that could come up. . .
a D700 for $1200 makes sens (used). . .

Seriously $1200 used? That is what a D300S and a D7000 used go for. I doubt you will see this price for at least a year. Even if the D700 is replaced, I would keep my old one as a second body. It is worth more than $1200 to me. If you find one for $1200, it is a stolen body.

Finally another reason the prices are so high is this is made like a tank. I think all the FX bodies are made in Japan (higher quality) and the DX ones are made in Thailand. Same is true with the PRO lenses.
And . . .
This is not a cheap DX camera that some newbie used. The D700 is considered a PRO camera, so the used one you buy was used by someone who knows cameras, and how to take care of them. Buy a used D3000 and it may have been used by a teenager, or a granny . . . may not have been stored properly, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand

Admin - is there a reason to keep this thread open? It is more of an economics topic.

You make warranty claims on > 50% of your gear, shivaswrath?

Many forum members say go for the glass first but that doesn't answer the question... I have good fullframe glass (I exclusively shoot with it excluding my 10.5mm) but no body. While I go to ebay for deals, $100 off a body I could get New for a little more money,
also especially since you can get a D3 for $2500 on ebay now!

Defensive ? sorry if it came across that way. I was just curious as to why so many would pay so close to retail. 15-20% discount did not seem enough to me, in my financial situation, to go used over new.

I would be ready to purchase a new D700 except I am betting on more MP and video in the replacement and will be happy to wait until the middle/end of next year. My glass is good, not that kit stuff. If Nikon said no replacement in 2011 I would buy a new D700 tomorrow, unless there was one that hit the the magic number in my head on ebay on the day I was buying.

because those people are stupid - if you can't yield a 50% savings on buying new, you're pissing away money on warranty issues that could come up. . .

a D700 for $1200 makes sens (used). . .

Indy,

It sounds like you are scared about upgrading because of the cost. I would recommend you stick with whatever you have now. If you are this iffy because the price isn't low enough, wait until you need to get some real glass for the D700. Every time someone brings up a point about why it is the way it is and etc, you get all defensive.

My advice: Stay DX . . . you will be welcomed into the FX club when you are ready. That day is not today.

My real advice: Buy a good cheap used D700 and try it for yourself. Once you try it you will understand the cost difference and not compare them to other cameras the same way . . .

Pierre -
I did not think the Nikon warranty transfers to the new buyer.
No sales tax from Amazon, or shipping usually. I,and I suspect most, do not report purchases from Amazon in order to pay sales tax.
That is what I am afraid of, a failed camera arriving from ebay. The other side is, not a failure but maybe many hot pixels or some other irregularity that shows up frequently but not all the time.

1) If I was to sell you my 7 months old D700, you would still have 17 months of warrantee left on it.
2) You would be saving the sales tax, which in Canada is about 12.5% (and soon 14.5) so your question is more like 'why pay $2000 for a $2643 D700'.
3) Like with any electronic, if it has to fail, it usually fails in the first few weeks or months.
4) A D700 is rated at 150,000 actuations and most likely last much longer. Event if your 'used' had 10,000 clicks, it would still be kind of 'new'. Passed the 150,000, a fairly cheap service on it would get you going for another 150k clicks.

I do still agree that some bidders are crazy on ebay. Before the D7000 came out I watched the D90 auctions on ebay and frequently the used ones would sell for more on ebay than what one would pay for a new one in a shop(which I'm glad I did). While I've never had a problem I do go to ebay for fantastic deals like my "UGLY" D200 which I won for practically nothing (like $500ish)

Also keep in mind that everyone is aware that an update seems possible, so spending $2400 now, or $2000 (more like $1900), knowing that it can be sold for almost what they paid is important.

I have a trip coming up and I want to bring a second D700 body, so I plan on picking one up used, use it for 2 weeks, then selling it. I should be able to recover almost 100% of what I paid. Renting a D700 from borrowlenses.com for 2 weeks is $450, not including shipping. What would you do? Buy a new one for $2400, and sell it when you are done for $1900 taking a $500 loss?

You need to split the secondhand market, on one hand you've got ebay with the risks involved (is it a stolen item, is it as lightly used as described, is it fully working etc), then you've got used items from a reputable retailer which normally come with some sort of warranty.
aetas is right about buyers on ebay, they often don't research what they're buying and pay silly prices...why people pay certain prices on ebay is something I don't understand, I sold a used item on ebay and the final bid was higher than buying the item new...I think some just get caught up in the bidding process.

who buys a S/H D700 someone who has only got $2000 not $2349

I think sometimes people just want to see what they can get someone to pay. The d700 has been holding its value and prob will till something new replaces or covers it. For example i just saw a 17-35 2.8 sold used for 1700 when you can buy it new now at b&h for 1699.99 Maybe cheaper elsewhere. If someone is going to pay that money then as a seller your going to put the price there. I see your point though. Mostly due to the fact that I am looking for the same camera.

The D700 is still an amazing camera without many direct competitors. So it still can command a premium even when it is being sold used. While they are more available than some of Nikon's newest offerings, it may be that someone who needs one "today" might purchase a used version from a local seller that they can get their hands on immediatelly. Lots of reasons that that price might be a good one for someone.

Segura - It would take at least 25% for me to buy used for a camera body. They are basically disposable compared to nice glass. For a sweet piece of glass that I am likely to keep through several bodies I can see it holding the price.

broxi - I can see that. I guess I was looking at it as someone that was not reaching financially to buy the camera. I'd not reach, though I might look.

timmy - I have sufficient investments that $350 is hardly worth worrying about. For me, yes the $350 to get a warranty is worth it compared to the risk from some anonymous person off ebay claiming all is ok with the camera.

Not to get on a political soap box, but consider placing that extra couple hundred dollars in long term investments so you can retire with dignity and not be dependent upon the government for basic needs. Another way to look at it is the warranty worth $350 -- are you willing to pay $350 more for something just to have a warranty? A favorite quote talking about warranties "If you cannot afford to replace the item you cannot afford the item to begin with." I'd be talking to the seller and be gettin' me a deal. Used gear = higher net worth. Which has apparently become a crime in the U.S.

Because some people are on a tighter budget, the $349 saving can buy a 50mm f1.8 or a 35mm f2 ...with so many people buying the latest new camera many secondhand items have been very lightly used.