So glass makes the photo and not the body. Glass holds it's value extremely well. That is eveident that used glass is only slightly cheaper than new. So is it workth it to save a few buck to buy used, or financialy more sound to go new and not get any problems?
New or used glass?
(31 posts) (11 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Skid said:
So glass makes the photo and not the body. Glass holds it's value extremely well. That is eveident that used glass is only slightly cheaper than new. So is it workth it to save a few buck to buy used, or financialy more sound to go new and not get any problems?Depends on your budget and piece of mind I guess. If you don't mind it used and you don't have enough to get it brand new then buy one used. I got my 18-200 used from Adorama and saved about $100. It came in like new condition and I haven't had any problems. I would however stay away from heavily used stuff unless the price is really right.
My 18-200 VR lens was used. My body and 18-55 lens are refurbished and they all work great. I paid less for the 2 lenses, D5000 body, camera bag, and memory card then it would have cost for the body and a brand new 18-200 lens with the rebates Nikon recently had.
Posted 3 years ago # -
skid - it depends, in some cases I'll go for used glass - especially the older lenses (5-10 years old) and off brands (Sigma, Tokina, Tamron), IMHO buying from second hand gives You more control on the quality issue, as You are not buying a cat in a bag - usually You can stress test the lens, not to mention that sometimes You can really get some great deals. Recently I got a Zeiss lens for app 25% less than market price.
tip: if You are afraid of ebay, go to used departments at BH or Adorama - they rating system is pretty consistent, so You can expect good quality productsPosted 3 years ago # -
Thanks guys! I was looking on craigs list for a new lens for my D700. Found a 85mm 1.4 for S750. Guy says it 5 years old. Has a 85mm changed alot in 5 years? Is that a decent price for a lens of that age? I'm not well versed in used lenses or equipment, as I have always bought new.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I'm lucky living nearby a huge camera district because we have numerous samples to try before buying. Normally I have no problem with buying used gear except it is possible to buy a damaged or a "poor sample". My camera district always has about 6 used 70-200mm VR I lenses to try or maybe 5 50mm 1.4 D lenses to try for example in any of the shops located along 4 blocks of camera shops. Buying on ebay is even more risky because really you have only a description and the seller's word to go on.
My entire collection right now is completely used although I have bought new products in the past. The last being a new tokina 11-16mm which I traded last November with cash for a used 14-24mm when I went to a FX body. My D700 is also used!^^
Posted 3 years ago # -
Kanuck-Thanks for the tips. Since you have a 700 as well, whats the best all around lens for this camera? Like I said I've been looking at the 85mm 1.4, but will entertain other ideas.I only have about a $1K to spend right now. Like to get another lens soon as the only other FX lens worth a S--T that I have is the 50mm 1.8. I do have a Quantaray 70-200mm 5.6 that is FX, but the lens is horrible.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Skid said:
Kanuck-Thanks for the tips. Since you have a 700 as well, whats the best all around lens for this camera? Like I said I've been looking at the 85mm 1.4, but will entertain other ideas.I only have about a $1K to spend right now. Like to get another lens soon as the only other FX lens worth a S--T that I have is the 50mm 1.8. I do have a Quantaray 70-200mm 5.6 that is FX, but the lens is horrible.24-70 2.8 maybe? It could be over your budget.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@ kanuck Can you get me one of those used 70-200 ? :-) wish we have good used camera stores in australia. They are so expensive used here. You can get grey stuff cheaper.
Posted 3 years ago # -
If I am buying a pro grade lens ($1000+) I'll buy new every time, for the warranty, more than anything else. For other stuff, I don't mind getting used.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Even the shop owners here in South Korea insist that for their hobby shooting, they only buy stuff second hand. I guess that means they get first dibs then. Two months ago my brother traded an older 21mm Zeiss distagon and his 5d for a used 5d mark II and he's been happy ever since. There is a lot of everything here especially 70-200mm VR I, 80-200 ED-D and 80-200 push pulls. Cheapest 70-200mm VR I went for $1100. Heartyfisher maybe a flight to South Korea for you? :)) The big district here is called Namdaemun and its in Seoul. Hongkong and Japan are great, but too expensive. London, and New York I find is 50/50 in terms of quality. Koreans love upgrading as soon as new items come out so its a smorgasbord for me especially on weekends it seems.
Skid, the first lens I bought was the 28-80 G lens for $75 used. It was intended for use on Nikon's last SLR bodies back in 1999-2001. So it works great on FX and weighs 200 grams! NSX Type R good call on the 24-70 its the logical choice for full frame but even used it would be well out of a budget of 1 grand. Even here they are extremely popular and in high demand so they remain expensive unless they have been beat on. For a grand budget, how about some very nice Nikkor primes? You have the 50 1.8, there is the fairly wide and fun 20mm D type, 28 AIS, 35 AIs, 105 macro, the 28-80 G I mentioned, and a very useful and nice FX lens the 70-300mm VR as well. Some of these are manual, but focus quick in the case of the 28mm. Believe it or not $1000 is plenty to make oneself happy!^^
Posted 3 years ago # -
PB PM good point it wise to buy new for the warrenty on a $1000+ lens. My situation obviously enables me to purchase second hand more easily. I came to Seoul in 2001 to teach english and have stayed on since. In 2004 I got a big break when I submitted some photos for travel magazine and now I am able to teach part time and make a living as a photographer here. I have purchased numerous things second hand here since 2001 and never had a problem, in some cases even traded back the lens for something else. If you can swing it, bite the bullet and just save up and buy new, unless you see a great deal in a shop and you can try it on your body.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@kanuck : So you can get travel discounts too! lucky @#$%&@# ! Korea sounds like a great place to visit.. and shop for second hand gear. That 1100 70-200 sounds like a great deal. May have to pay you a visit someday! :-)
Posted 3 years ago # -
haha yes and according to Nikon rumors today, there might be a new line of F4 VR lenses from Nikon to compete against the F4 IS line Canon currently offers. This would create even more second hand 70-200mm VRs. I would seriously consider buying a F4 70-200 VR lens because the weight of the old pro 70-200 is an absolute killer I find...
Posted 3 years ago # -
I saw the canon 70-200 F4 in the shop the other day. Diminutive in comparison to the F2.8. Would be cool if nikon could get it into 52 mm filter !! but would be pretty happy with 67mm.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yes the weight factor alone would be really great. I'm sure it would be a 67mm thread, not the greatest size but then again it might be a 58mm like my 28-80 G lens or my Zeiss ZF lens. That would be nice so I don't have to buy more filters!^^ Heartyfisher, what are you using for a tele right now?
Posted 3 years ago # -
My FAv tele focal lengths is around 170 so I mainly use my 150 macro and crop a bit. I also have the 18-200 which is a fun lens. I also have a 1.4TC that I stick on my 150 macro for a bit longer reach. For long tele I have an old tamron 200-400 F5.6 which is actually quite good but not being VR sure needs a good tripod and technique which, I, most times find is too much trouble. Looking out for a long tele with good VR but no real hurry as I have what I need if I really need to go 400mm (I can even put the TC1.4 on that). May get the new 50-500 Sigma OS or the old 80-400VR some time if I can get a good deal some where.
What I am really keen on is a 67mm filter, 45-160 F2.8 VR DX from Nikon! :-) LOL
Posted 3 years ago # -
-
I like the DX format. I dont mind waiting one generation of releases for the Dx format to catch up to the next level. eg I would like the ISO of D700 but I believe that the next release of the D300 level will have at least D700 level ISO performance. but much more features ie I believe DX format to be much more Agile than the FX formats and therefore more fun. The P&S are the most agile as can be see by the tons of gadgets and features, eg Face recognition, HDR, Built in bracketing. Focus Bracketing to get the effect of large aperture of FX, video, etc etc etc. even with the current generation DSLR you can see that the D90/D300S is better than the D700 in some key features eg DR, Video, Dust removal, Dual Card slots, etc. and I can only see that the trend will continue. The only disadvantage the DX has against the FX is ISO performance within generations. But just wait 18 months or less and DX will at least catch up. I believe there is even the chance of DX sensors performing better than FX as new technologies can be introduced sooner and cheaper in the smaller format. But its probably marketing that will hold that back. Just see how far the P&S have come. They are at 10MP with BSI sensor with better ISO performance than the 10MP D200. and a ton more features. What is really stopping Nikon from having a BSI DX camera 6 months ago?
Opps sorry about the rant.. lol .. is that what you were asking me?
Posted 3 years ago # -
heartyfisher said:
The only disadvantage the DX has against the FX is ISO performance within generations. But just wait 18 months or less and DX will at least catch up.18 months? DX has been around for over 10 years and it has yet to "catch up" to FX image quality! And how is DX smaller and more agile than a 35mm camera? It sounds more like you are describing an EVIL type of camera like the Panasonic GH-1.
You must have been really angry when Nikon announced the D3 was moving up to full frame hearty :^(
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yeah I don't get the 18 months bit. The current 12MP sensor has been around since the D300 came out, more than 18 months ago, and seen little improvement in high ISO.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yes they are having trouble matching the ISO performance in DX compared to the FX sensor. I couldn't handy the noise of my D300 anymore. Serioulsy I kept asking myself is it me? These images are soft! Cable release, tripod, MUP, I tried everything. Heavy course grain in the darks in RAW with no saturation or vivid mode used. I was using like 60% in Noise ninja just to get back to basics! With the D700 its no problem at all. Heartyfisher that 18-200mm VR is a wonderful lens, if it were FX I'd be in 7th heaven. I miss it..
Posted 3 years ago # -
@ kanuck : You can use the 18-200 on your D700 :-) Just think of it as a 6MP DX camera.(seriously 5MP is quite usable)
Re: the 18 months time frame. Maybe I a bit optimistic about that, but I think the DX form at is being held back by the "powers that be" because they dont want the DX format to be better than their flagship FX cameras.(the GFC may also have played a part).
Have you seen the ISO 6400 and ISO 3200 from the BSI P&S ? They are almost as good as the APS-C sensors, but in the tiny P&S sensor. I would say it sure beats the D200 at ISO1600. http://www.pbase.com/middlehill/image/123498555. so If you can get a BSI P&S sensor why not a BSI APS-C sensor? Second generation BSI sensors have already been announced. I am hopeful that the expected nikon announcement will be a BSI DX sensor! And dont forget that in the pipeline is the Quantum Dot Technology which is due at the end of the year on a P&S near you! That will more than double again ISO sensitivity(about 4X theoretically). so expect high end P&S to outperform your D3 ISO and rival the D3S by the middle of next year.
Posted 3 years ago # -
What's GFC and BSI? Do you mean a back illuminated sensor? I have one of those cameras and image quality is better than previous point & shoots but I wouldn't say it matches what comes out of a D700.
Why would they hold back DX if it's "better" than FX like you say? There are waay more FX lens owners than DX. So if they wanted to make DX "better" then that would certainly get everyone to "upgrade" their old Nikon glass to "better" DX lenses. But it's been 10 years and that never happened. The opposite happened and "everyone" praised the performance of FX as soon as it was introduced.
Posted 3 years ago # -
As much as I like DX, hearty, I don't think your roadmap is realistic. I think that quantum dot idea is a pipe dream, hyped up to draw in investment. The biggest obstacle would be interface with readout electronics, but that's not to mention that I doubt they'll be able to get absorption like they're claiming. BSI is promising, but like Niko said it's not a silver bullet. We're already close to the physical detection limits with the D3s—you can't absorb photons that don't exist!
Posted 3 years ago # -
@ Jonnyapple- You may well be right on all points. But if you look at nikon's patent on the 3 refracted sensor under one micro lens. You can see that there is still room there. you basically have 4 times the area for each colour pixel. A fine harvest of photons to be gathers in that size.
Even if Quantum Dot is not real Black silicon sure is. and who know what else some innovative scientist is thinking up right this moment !! :-) sigh.. am I too much of an optimist?
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
