Residual Value -which brand holds it's value best?

Which brand of dslr do you think retains the most of it's value after 2 years?

  • Canon

    Votes: 27 35.5%

  • Nikon

    Votes: 39 51.3%

  • Olympus

    Votes: 2 2.6%

  • Pentax

    Votes: 4 5.3%

  • Samsung

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Sony

    Votes: 3 3.9%
  • Total voters
    76
Flash In The Pan

Flash In The Pan

Suspended / Banned
Messages
27,793
Edit My Images
Yes
Just curious what everyone thinks, which brand of dslr do you think retains the most of it's original purchase price when it comes time to sell?

To set a timeframe let's say after 2 years....
 
Depends at what price you purchase it no?

A 1D MkIV at the moment is expensive to buy new, in 6 months time it will be a fair bit less, at least 1k... loosing the extra 1k from now will obviously be worse than the guy who waited :D

But anyway, my suggestion would be something right from the top end, as the pro end of the market whilst they loose a lot of pound notes, percentage wise they are better than an entry level consumer body.
 
desantnik said:
Depends at what price you purchase it no?
Click to expand...

I just mean in general, averaged out over the range. Both low and high end bodies will lose money over a couple of years, the amounts of money involved will obviously be different, I'm just curious as to which brand overall people perceive as holding their value best.
 
I would think that Canon and Nikon hold their values the best as they are the most popular and have the larger amount of lenses, accessories etc. It will be more difficult to sell on the other brands above because of this perception.
 
Why isn't Zenit (pinnacle of advanced Soviet teknology) on the list? :D

Oh and two years from now or two years from two years ago? :D
 
Surely this poll is a "What camera make do you own and make yourself feel better about owning it by voting for it?" poll.

Sorry, I don't see the point. They are like shampoo adverts that say "78% of women thought their hair looked glossier after using this product"
 
Having owned both Canon and Nikon, I'm convinced Nikon holds its value more than any other brand.
 
AndyElliott said:
Surely this poll is a "What camera make do you own and make yourself feel better about owning it by voting for it?" poll.

Sorry, I don't see the point. They are like shampoo adverts that say "78% of women thought their hair looked glossier after using this product"
Click to expand...

:thumbs:

Unless someone has looked at residual value closely personal opinion is really not worht much at all, if I were to answer it would be Canon not becasue I know anything about residuals but because I own one :)

I work ni the motor trade where prices of like for like cars haven't changed in 20-30years but noone today can still accurately guess what the price of a car will be in a couple of years time, I'm guessing camera's are exactly the same...

More popular brands/models should in theory hold their value better but at the same time I'm guessing more of them get sold so supply will also be higher knocking the value down a tad!
 
still waiting on my Ideal dslr but this is a stop gap and a blinder it is!

bought a sony alpha 200 last xmas £239 inc delivered from amazon, AND got £30 english beer tokens back from sony UK, so cost me £209

sells roundabout £250 now bargain!
but technology is weekly a 5Mp is now 25Mp wassit gonna be in say 5 years 200Mp so my or your 10Mp is a door stop (but loved?)

just an aside

my leica 3's cost me £30 and £18 <a weeks wage then! in 1965 and '73>

now 10X cost?

so

anyone want a polaroid camera?

pablo :bonk:
 
ryanyboy said:
Having owned both Canon and Nikon, I'm convinced Nikon holds its value more than any other brand.
Click to expand...

Ryan

That's only coz you have Niks now! :D

Andy
 
AndyElliott said:
Surely this poll is a "What camera make do you own and make yourself feel better about owning it by voting for it?" poll.
Click to expand...

Ha ha, pretty much!

ryanyboy said:
Having owned both Canon and Nikon, I'm convinced Nikon holds its value more than any other brand.
Click to expand...

Why?

Some bodies decrease in value more than others in the months/years following intial release, and lenses hold there value better if they're sought-after and respected models, especially if there aren't a glut of them in the second hand listings, but I can't see any of these trends being brand-specific.
 
TheNissanMan said:
I work ni the motor trade where prices of like for like cars haven't changed in 20-30years but noone today can still accurately guess what the price of a car will be in a couple of years time, I'm guessing camera's are exactly the same...
Click to expand...

If the Future Retained Value figures weren't calculated for cars then the whole fleet and lease market would be in turmoil as an accurate forecast http://www.eurotaxglass.co.uk/products/Forecast_Service.htmof the FRV is vital in calculating monthly payments....
 
I'm going against the grain and voted Sony. I made about £10 when I sold my A100 (which I bought second hand), lost a total of 15% when I sold on my A200 (which I bought brand new).....

Most of my lenses I bought seond hand, but out of the two new ones, one I made about 10% and the other I lost roughly 5%!

Pretty good figures I think! :shrug:
 
having owned Canon I can say its is Nikon :)
 
Isn't it fair to say that if you buy your DSLR based on it's resale value you're making a mistake as most of them have pretty shocking resale value compared to the price paid. IMO there's a lot of mileage in the idea of buying the best lenses you can afford and the cheapest camera that does what you need.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
If the Future Retained Value figures weren't calculated for cars then the whole fleet and lease market would be in turmoil as an accurate forecast http://www.eurotaxglass.co.uk/products/Forecast_Service.htmof the FRV is vital in calculating monthly payments....
Click to expand...

There calculated but are still guesstimates...

Residual value of a camera...

Average number of shots, useage (indoors/outdoors etc), serviced or not, how well cared for, there are to many variables or am I seeing to much into this...
 
I tend to be a cheapskate and buy second-hand. Providing you're willing to wait for the right buy, getting stuff cheap and being able to sell it later without losing (often making) money, isn't too hard. Bodies go down quickly, but lenses will keep their value well, particularly the more exotic high-end zooms and the primes. If it's built like a tank, people usually know that and also know that it'll still be good after a few years of use.

The rarer optics hold well. In my experience, the Panasonic/Leica lenses for fourthirds are hard to get hold of new, have a great reputation (deservedly) and hold their value to degree that second hand and discounted new prices are not very far apart.

At the moment, with the recession's effects still around, there are definitely bargains to be had...

Andy
 
TheNissanMan said:
There calculated but are still guesstimates...

Residual value of a camera...

Average number of shots, useage (indoors/outdoors etc), serviced or not, how well cared for, there are to many variables or am I seeing to much into this...
Click to expand...

The factors governing the residual value of a camera are no different from those that decide the value of a used car - desirability, condition, mileage,scarcity etc...
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The factors governing the residual value of a camera are no different from those that decide the value of a used car - desirability, condition, mileage,scarcity etc...
Click to expand...

...and don't forget how good it was to begin with... I'm sure your bog-basic kit lens will depreciate way more than a top-end prime.
 
I'd say Nikon - primarily because they don't discount as aggressively as Canon, especially with the pro and pro-am bodies.
 
I vote Nikon from the brands available. They charge a premium as though it makes them more exclusive (which people seem to accept) and they are less readily available compared to the more common Canon. That's 'common' not popular :naughty:


I'm only jealous- if only Nikon had the brand image of Lada:D
 
Leica - the others are just tools and will be superceded in no time...
 
Nikon D200 has to be a good bet these things sell all day every day at £400 where as the D3 is dropping like a brick and you can pick them up for around £1700-1900 now but time will tell, also the 40D keeps its price as they sell for the same as the D200 all day long and have done for 2 years
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
Nikon D200 has to be a good bet these things sell all day every day at £400 where as the D3 is dropping like a brick and you can pick them up for around £1700-1900 now but time will tell, also the 40D keeps its price as they sell for the same as the D200 all day long and have done for 2 years
Click to expand...

I think that's more to do with their prices having bottomed out, as the D200 is now (sorry Pete ;)) quite an old model. It does make a minty one for around £400 a great buy though :D

My reasoning behind the initial post and the poll was that when I bought my first dslr, a D80 a friend tried to persuade me that the similarly-priced Sony A100 would be a far better buy. However when I look at the used prices on Ebay an A100 seems to be worth about £150-175 compared with around £300-350 for a similar age D80 body, in fact I noticed a couple of D80 kits with the 18-135 lens selling for a total of around £485/490, which is only about £130 less than I paid for mine new from Jessops 3 years ago....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top