Used equipment, why buy new?

TheKrikkitWars

Suspended / Banned
Messages
375
Name
Joshua Kelly
Edit My Images
Yes
Well I've just bought two more Nikkor lenses, second hand from Greys. For less than a new sigma version of one of them.

I was put off sigmas by the tales of massive optical variability between individual lenses and poor QC, but with genuine Nikkor so cheap (relatively at least) I doubt I'll ever get one now (unless I need a 100-600 or a 500mm prime).

Am I alone here or are there more like me who'd rather have a 20yo lens of premium quality for a reasonable price than a 3rd party new lens at the same price point?
 
Nope always look Second Hand first, even when new lens are avilable.:lol:

Tend to hunt Flea Bay and have got some nice old Nikon stuff for a bargin price. Only really got one half dog of a lens. Stiff focusing action but it is usable.:thinking:

In fact apart from the E3, OM4, XPan all the ones in my sig or second hand :thumbs:
 
i only buy new i just like the shiny new packing and the hole im my walet :lol:
 
yep quality glass will always be quality glass, that doesn't change much, its all the other abilities like AF speed, digi compatibility, through lens flash metering, weight, etc etc. that makes people buy new, a modern lens tends to be much more useful in these areas, like for instance, if your a pro doing motor sport you want a fast lens but with fast AF reaction times too.
 
I'm with you, I have a 20 year old canon 70-210F4 that I much prefer to the modern sigma 70-300 the image quality seems much better. Granted the AF speed isn't great but it's on a par with my nifty fifty and isn't really a problem unless you want to focus on something a couple of metres away and then imediately on something in the distance.
 
The thing is the Nikon CPU lenses have been around for 23 years now, the Canon EF for 22, other than AF speed (which is only a problem for some sports togs) the only change has been more plastic.

I really meant with a relatively new second hand Nikkor with VR for half the price of a new one, why the hell would I want a sigma with IS (which is in some ways rather inferior to either Nikon or Canon's proprietary systems).
 
i think providing you are carefull and know what you are looking for and stick to the right price you can get some really good deals second hand.

i have had a couple of disapointments with new (expensive) items so sometimes this is not always best - new items devalue very fast but older (quality) items hold their value very well
 
Just to move away from the thread a tad ... whats a nifty-fifty?????
 
Just to move away from the thread a tad ... whats a nifty-fifty?????

A fast 50mm prime lens. My two (Nikon F and Canon FD) are both f/1.8
but f/1.4, f/1.2 f/1 and f/0.95 are also available
 
A nifty fifty is a bog standard 50mm prime lens.

Prime means fixed focal length. Bog standard means "common or garden". Eh?

Yeah, simonkit, recently discontinued Pentax glass and PKA Adaptall mounts sell for more than they did new. There's strong demand for all the 50s and the 55K. The metal bodied primes would cost over £750 if made today. I've got two KX bodies (which introduced the K mount) and over 30 years' worth of compatible lenses to draw on.
 
yep quality glass will always be quality glass, that doesn't change much, its all the other abilities like AF speed, digi compatibility, through lens flash metering, weight, etc etc. that makes people buy new, a modern lens tends to be much more useful in these areas, like for instance, if your a pro doing motor sport you want a fast lens but with fast AF reaction times too.

But how many of us are pro's I would guess for most of us more modest kit is our lot,however by buying second hand more exotic gflass is availible to us lesser mortals
 
But how many of us are pro's I would guess for most of us more modest kit is our lot,however by buying second hand more exotic gflass is availible to us lesser mortals

There has been a big turnaround in people hocking things trading in there gear for cash, and there's a lot of people out there who buy this gear find they cannot use it and sell it on at a massive loss, our Friend visa/MasterCard is to blame... Guy+visa+gadgetshop=$$$$$$ spent on nice new shiny things, they get it home £1700 out of pocket have a couple of months then sell it, there are hundreds of bargains out there,

My latest was 100-400mm L IS USM £687....4 months old with receipt, the guy brought it from jessops he paid 1,256 pounds .....Mad world, it's basically BNIB
i could go on but won't.

Regards Mark.
 
One anomaly I've found is the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS.

I've been saving my pennies for one (and selling some of my less used gear).

I've been researching the prices and I can get one second hand from a variety of retailers for £950, they have been selling on fleabay for about £850.

I can get one new in the UK for £950. (and I've bought from the seller before and he's 100% reliable)

So why would I buy second hand when I also get a one year warranty by buying new. That one does not make sense.

However I am very open to buying second hand. I got a cracker of a 1Ds MKII from MPB Photographic and I bought a Mamiya 645 on fleabay that is near to perfect despite being 20 years old. The optics for that are superb :)
 
I can get one new in the UK for £950. (and I've bought from the seller before and he's 100% reliable)

So why would I buy second hand when I also get a one year warranty by buying new. That one does not make sense.

One year? I got that on my second hand purchases, and three on new.

I see what you mean there, but I think that's something of an anomaly really.

A lot of the older metal bodied lenses are much better than their new replacements.
 
I agree, metals wins mostly .... but plastics not poor anymore though is it, my d70's a very impressive constriction all in, also compared to anything I've ever had in metal, tough as heck it is.

Out of interest, Do any of you know of a comparison guide for lenses, new against old? ...do we have that here somewhere, should we make one? :D

But how many of us are pro's I would guess for most of us more modest kit is our lot,however by buying second hand more exotic gflass is availible to us lesser mortals

There has been a big turnaround in people hocking things trading in there gear for cash, and there's a lot of people out there who buy this gear find they cannot use it and sell it on at a massive loss, our Friend visa/MasterCard is to blame... Guy+visa+gadgetshop=$$$$$$ spent on nice new shiny things, they get it home £1700 out of pocket have a couple of months then sell it, there are hundreds of bargains out there,

My latest was 100-400mm L IS USM £687....4 months old with receipt, the guy brought it from jessops he paid 1,256 pounds .....Mad world, it's basically BNIB
i could go on but won't.

Regards Mark.

Hmmm yeah, I've certainly got some worries buying second hand, mainly will I actually be able to tell if there is anything wrong with it! I bought my Nik 70-200 2.8 for that reason new, just couldn't bare the thought of not quite getting the 'the daddy' of zooming clarity, and then also not knowing that I didn't have it either. :gag:
Especially the Sigmas with there stories of inaccuracy, they've gotta be turfing them out again and again on flea bay.
 
Out of interest, Do any of you know of a comparison guide for lenses, new against old? ...do we have that here somewhere, should we make one? :D

Ken Rockwell's site has a review of just about every Nikkor Lens going, but he is inexplicably reviled in some circles, I think its a good resource though.


Hmmm yeah, I've certainly got some worries buying second hand, mainly will I actually be able to tell if there is anything wrong with it! I bought my Nik 70-200 2.8 for that reason new.

This is why I've bought reconditioned or dealer second hand, rather than ebay I know that it adds some cost but worth it for a warranty and peace of mind.
 
Back
Top