Buyer's Remorse: Ever backed out of a deal?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

Buyer's Remorse: Ever backed out of a deal?

(39 posts) (13 voices)

Started 3 years ago by nikyvee
Latest reply from alphanikonrex
Related Topics:
1. Buyers Remorse Or Positive Reinforcement?

Tags:

Bigma

12 Next »

nikyvee

senior member
Joined: Aug '09
Posts: 83
offline

Ok, I just had a bad attack of buyer's remorse; lost lots of sleep two nights ago.
I had purchased a Bigma lens 50-500mm for $620 cash from a private party. It was not the new version, but the not so old lens. It was/is in perfect shape. Why did I back out?

I got home and my wife asked me if I was really going to carry that things around all day? I knew, going in, that I wouldn't, but her question did make me rethink what I was doing. AND, this is the main reason, it doesn't have any kind of image stabilization. I really wanted IS, and lighter would be nice. The seller, graciously, allowed me to return the lens; I did give him $40 for his trouble to sweeten the deal for him. I feel better and am now looking for a better lens for me: with IS and lighter. So what lens?

But for this thread: Has any one else backed out of a deal? How did that go?

NIck V

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Yes, at a carnival I "bought", or rather got swindled for, a stuffed animal my wife really wanted. It cost me about $60USD! The actual price couldn't have been more than $5USD!!! But it made her happy.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

I wouldn't feel guilty about it, Nick. He'll probably be better off for it when he finally does sell it.

I've heard of deals like that, Niko. ;-)
I think the satisfaction was in watching you get the stuffed animal and not the animal itself. Do you think there's a hunter-gatherer connection there?

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Hey nikyvee I think you started a new "scam" where you pay the seller to take an item you paid for back, lol.

jonnyapple said:
Do you think there's a hunter-gatherer connection there?

I wasn't going to be denied! That stuffed monkey was going to be mine! Beer bottle ring toss be damned!

Posted 3 years ago #
warprints

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 769
offline

Nick - I don't think you're going to find an IS lens in the long tele range for anywhere near under $1000.

To answer the original question - buyers remorse? Nah.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Okay, not really long and I haven't actually tried it, but $607 shipped and it has stabilization:
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-28-300mm-Vibration-Compensation-Aspherical/dp/B000V6ON8I/

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

And what is your goal really? There is no 50-500 VR lens on the market for just 700$ so you have to think smaller, but how smaller are you willing to go?
70-300 is VR II and is excellent in 70-200 range, useful but not amazing above 200 and it is around 700$, catchy?

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

It's VR, not VR II, but I think you're right that it's a better option than the Tamron I mentioned, mb. It's also less than $600.

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

The 80-400 also has VR, though it lags in technology, and is more expensive.

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

jonnyapple said:
It's VR, not VR II, but I think you're right that it's a better option than the Tamron I mentioned, mb. It's also less than $600.

VR II offers the equivalent stability of a shutter speed that is 4 stops faster (as determined by Nikon performance test). Normal Mode counters hand-held vibration and Active Mode reduces mechanically-induced vibrations.
http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/products/product_details.page?ParamValue=NIKKOR%20Lenses&Subnav1Param=Auto%20Focus%20Lenses&Subnav2Param=FX&Subnav3Param=Zoom&RunQuery=l4&ID=869

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

If you want cheap, long range and light weight than a super zoom point & shoot is the only option. I love my Sony H series cameras. I took the HX5 with me on vacation and left my DSLR gear at home. Yeah image quality isn't the same but for fun vacation pictures it's perfect.

Posted 3 years ago #
ShadeofBlue

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 158
offline

There definitely are IS options for 500mm below insane prices. Maybe not for $600, but Sigma has a 150-500 OS lens. New it's a bit over $1000, but if you look around for a deal, I'm sure you can find one for considerably less. It seems like everyone in this thread is trying to give you remorse for your buyer's remorse!

As for myself, I've had cases where I wished I hadn't bought something. Fortunately, it's usually just $30 video games that turn out to be mediocre. Although, every time I make a big purchase I seem to go from really excited to really worried for a while. Actually, I just bought the same lens you are talking about for $600, but I'm keeping it. The difference is that I think I really will lug it around, and the lack of OS is okay by me after I tested it out. Everyone looks for different things.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

That seems contradictory, mb. I think the VR of VR II is usually in gold lettering on the lens, and on the 70-300 it's in red (the VR I lettering). Also, why does the 70-200 have VR II next to it in the product list while the 70-300 only says VR? I admit I'm confused, but I could have sworn the 70-300 is not VR II.

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

Here's what you have to keep in mind:

The "II" doesn't indicated VRII, it indicates the second version of a lens. It just happens to follow the VR. Remember the Nikon NIKKOR AF-S 18-55mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 IF-ED II.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

But it does say VR II on that link mb posted, alpha.

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

Ooops—my bad—sorry. Then it's just Nikon being inconsistent I guess.

Posted 3 years ago #
aesnakes

preferred member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 138
offline

Yeah I think for most tele lenses you really get what you pay for. I heard the 50-500 "Bigma" was a great lens for that reach / price but for me it has no "OS" which at 500mm you definitely need I bought the 150-500 HSM OS lens and with the HSM in it focuses really fast and the OS is pretty good too for shooting handheld. Its really a loud lens which is weird, but for $1300 the speed focusing, OS, and distance are worth it.

Have you tried handheld at 500mm yet?

Posted 3 years ago #
mb

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,160
offline

jonnyapple said:
But it does say VR II on that link mb posted, alpha.

Not that is mater much though 70-300 is the first Nikon lens featuring VR II, second is 16-85 if I am not mistaken ...

Posted 3 years ago #
ShadeofBlue

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 158
offline

I've used my Bigma at 500mm handheld. If I concentrate, I can get a reasonable keeper rate down to about 1/300th, but I have to go to more like 1/600th to be really consistent. I did know that it would be a "good light only" lens when I bought it, though.

Posted 3 years ago #
aesnakes

preferred member
Joined: Dec '09
Posts: 138
offline

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

The latest 70-300 VR has VRII and is a quite good lens. The AF is adequate and the speed is just acceptable, but at f8 I find the image quality excellent. It's also small, light, uses 67mm filters and might meet your needs. I've been very happy with mine.

Posted 3 years ago #
ShadeofBlue

preferred member
Joined: Sep '09
Posts: 158
offline

ted2001 said:
The latest 70-300 VR has VRII and is a quite good lens. The AF is adequate and the speed is just acceptable, but at f8 I find the image quality excellent. It's also small, light, uses 67mm filters and might meet your needs. I've been very happy with mine.

I agree that this lens is very good, and you can usually find it used for $400-$450. I have one that I bought before I bought the Bigma, and I'm not selling it since it's so much lighter and has VR, so can be used in situations the Bigma can't. That being said, there's obviously a big difference between 300mm and 500mm, although that will probably not really come into play unless you are shooting small wildlife, like birds. 300mm on DX is quite a lot of reach, after all.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

aesnakes said:
...
Have you tried handheld at 500mm yet?

yes, and in bright light it's possible with this lens - although You need a big body with grip, it's much easier for me to handhold it on d200 than on d90. if You add monopod to it, it's really a nice combination for it's price.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

ted2001 said:
The latest 70-300 VR has VRII and is a quite good lens. The AF is adequate and the speed is just acceptable, but at f8 I find the image quality excellent. It's also small, light, uses 67mm filters and might meet your needs. I've been very happy with mine.

for me this lens was great up to 200 and around 300 it was too soft.

ShadeofBlue said:
...That being said, there's obviously a big difference between 300mm and 500mm, although that will probably not really come into play unless you are shooting small wildlife, like birds. 300mm on DX is quite a lot of reach, after all.

try shooting any wildlife with 500mm and 300mm, and You will see that small birds are not the only need for long telephotos

Posted 3 years ago #
nikyvee

senior member
Joined: Aug '09
Posts: 83
offline

Good info re tele lenses, and I obviously need the info. Not many guys are fessing up about having serious "buyer's remorse" to the point of returning the lens/camera/whatever.
I guess it is just me.

I know when I have made a really satisfactory purchase. I fall a sleep with sugar plums in my head and sleep through the night. A sleepless night, after a big purchase, and I know I am real second thoughts. That being said, I don't often return things because of my remorse.

Most expensive thing that I returned was a used VW many years ago. I bought it at an auto auction in LA via a local San Diego dealer. I drove it home to SD and called the dealer and returned the vehicle in the same day. He charged me $100 to return it, but I was really glad that I did return it. It just wasn't the car for me, but it took that 90 mile drive to figure that out.

Nick V

Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12 Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

Buyer's Remorse: Ever backed out of a deal?

Reply »