Damn this is an expensive hobby
Discussion
LongQ said:
M-J-B said:
M4FFU said:
£1000 for a few uses a year doesn't make much sense!
Makes perfect sense when you see the results 
The problem I have with renting for very occasional use is that one may simply not get the best out of the combination due to lack of familiarity. In fact if you read around the comments of some of the blogging Pro's and consider their words there may be very little chance of getting the best out of the kit.
Consider comments here from Canon 7D owners about needing to work with the body and lenses to get the expected results. (I use the 7D as a purely generic recent example - any body from any manufacturer when moving up the model ranges will present new challenges that will require complete familiarity if one is to gain the benefits associated with the cost.)
Likewise the best photos posted here are unlikely to be the result of someone using unfamilair kit on a weekend hire basis, tempting as that may be.
It's not just the kit - the PP skills and settings required start to be an ever more important part of the 'package' as one moves through the quality ranges.
Still, at least the rate of depreciation is probably no worse than owning car.
Agree with you re depreciation - in fact I bought my 70-200 2.8L for about £950 (new) and got cash back from Canon and I think I could probably make money on it if I sold it now!
M-J-B said:
LongQ said:
M-J-B said:
M4FFU said:
£1000 for a few uses a year doesn't make much sense!
Makes perfect sense when you see the results The problem I have with renting for very occasional use is that one may simply not get the best out of the combination due to lack of familiarity. In fact if you read around the comments of some of the blogging Pro's and consider their words there may be very little chance of getting the best out of the kit.
Consider comments here from Canon 7D owners about needing to work with the body and lenses to get the expected results. (I use the 7D as a purely generic recent example - any body from any manufacturer when moving up the model ranges will present new challenges that will require complete familiarity if one is to gain the benefits associated with the cost.)
Likewise the best photos posted here are unlikely to be the result of someone using unfamilair kit on a weekend hire basis, tempting as that may be.
It's not just the kit - the PP skills and settings required start to be an ever more important part of the 'package' as one moves through the quality ranges.
Still, at least the rate of depreciation is probably no worse than owning car.
Agree with you re depreciation - in fact I bought my 70-200 2.8L for about £950 (new) and got cash back from Canon and I think I could probably make money on it if I sold it now!
It was meant to be a fairly lighthearted reply (really a reply to the post you quoted!) but my train of thought ran away with me.
I think if you bought the 2.8L just before the prices went up due to the 'recession' you could well make money on it. Good move on your part - wish I had done the same.
Quinny said:
M-J-B said:
Agree with you re depreciation - in fact I bought my 70-200 2.8L for about £950 (new) and got cash back from Canon and I think I could probably make money on it if I sold it now!
Blimey, I hadn't realised they'd got so expensive.... Just checked, My 70-200 2.8L came in at £529... And it wasn't that long ago
Should have bought a dozen
Its been used about 5 time.......(hangs head in shame)
The IS is £1549 and the straight L is £999 currently on Camera Price Buster - I too should have bought several (I have the IS!)
I actually think that lenses are a bit of an investment. I've seen lenses go nowhere but upwards in the last year, so I dont really feel guilty when buying one as I know if I get little use of it, I'll sell it on again with little loss (Cheaper than renting one).
Lambochick, if your bank manager is getting a bit hot under the collar with you, I'll alleviate your pain and give you £2k for the lot
Lambochick, if your bank manager is getting a bit hot under the collar with you, I'll alleviate your pain and give you £2k for the lot
Rob13 said:
I actually think that lenses are a bit of an investment. I've seen lenses go nowhere but upwards in the last year, so I dont really feel guilty when buying one as I know if I get little use of it, I'll sell it on again with little loss (Cheaper than renting one).
Lambochick, if your bank manager is getting a bit hot under the collar with you, I'll alleviate your pain and give you £2k for the lot
I thought you said things were going nowhere but upwards. Lambochick, if your bank manager is getting a bit hot under the collar with you, I'll alleviate your pain and give you £2k for the lot
Lambochick said:
Rob13 said:
I actually think that lenses are a bit of an investment. I've seen lenses go nowhere but upwards in the last year, so I dont really feel guilty when buying one as I know if I get little use of it, I'll sell it on again with little loss (Cheaper than renting one).
Lambochick, if your bank manager is getting a bit hot under the collar with you, I'll alleviate your pain and give you £2k for the lot
I thought you said things were going nowhere but upwards. Lambochick, if your bank manager is getting a bit hot under the collar with you, I'll alleviate your pain and give you £2k for the lot
Mr E Driver said:
flat-planedCrank said:
I was sick of waiting for the 70-200 f2.8 market to sort itself out (Canon too expensive (£2k!?!)
I got my mine here a lot less than £2k
I just couldn't hand over that sort of money on an ebay sale - I tend to stick to the 'only bid what you can afford to lose' mantra.
Hopefully pick one up some time in the future though
Cheers.
I use Kerso a fair bit, found him via a photography forum. Brilliant service.
Next major purchase will be the 70-200 Mk II, I had a play with one the other day. Lovely kit.
I've got abit of a dilema going on.
I've got a 100-400L, I've also got the 70-200 F4 IS L.
Now, I reckon I'll get better results from the 70-200 Mk II IS and a converter. Plus it gives me 2.8 to shoot footy under floodlights where the F4 has issues. Plus, I can replace 2 lens with one.
By the time I've sold on both, there's the money - more or less - for the 70-200 2.8
Mind you, I'd love the 300mm 2.8 too, but that's another purchase altogether!
Next major purchase will be the 70-200 Mk II, I had a play with one the other day. Lovely kit.
I've got abit of a dilema going on.
I've got a 100-400L, I've also got the 70-200 F4 IS L.
Now, I reckon I'll get better results from the 70-200 Mk II IS and a converter. Plus it gives me 2.8 to shoot footy under floodlights where the F4 has issues. Plus, I can replace 2 lens with one.
By the time I've sold on both, there's the money - more or less - for the 70-200 2.8
Mind you, I'd love the 300mm 2.8 too, but that's another purchase altogether!
minky monkey said:
I've got abit of a dilema going on.
I've got a 100-400L, I've also got the 70-200 F4 IS L.
Now, I reckon I'll get better results from the 70-200 Mk II IS and a converter. Plus it gives me 2.8 to shoot footy under floodlights where the F4 has issues. Plus, I can replace 2 lens with one.
By the time I've sold on both, there's the money - more or less - for the 70-200 2.
This is getting pretty OT but...I've got a 100-400L, I've also got the 70-200 F4 IS L.
Now, I reckon I'll get better results from the 70-200 Mk II IS and a converter. Plus it gives me 2.8 to shoot footy under floodlights where the F4 has issues. Plus, I can replace 2 lens with one.
By the time I've sold on both, there's the money - more or less - for the 70-200 2.
I had similar plans for the 70-200 II with the 2x converter, but I tried it as a store and was a little peturbed with the results. The IQ seemed acceptible, but the AF (on my 30D) struggled on a slightly overcast day. It needed a 'helping hand' to focus initially- I thought there was an issue when I first tried it.
Slightly worried it was my camera body, I also tried a 100-400 - worked fine, didn't struggle at all in the conditions.
Now your milage may vary of course, it's possible the older AF system on my 30D would be out performed by a more modern body.
...but I came away with the impression that the 2x converter is a good compromise if you already had the 70-200, but if you wanted 400mm regularly then it wasn't a route I would target.
Oh, and it weighed a tonne
Cheers.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff