can't believe my 5R has lost almost half value in 7 months

Started Sep 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
oklaphotog Senior Member • Posts: 1,093
Re: can't believe my 5R has lost almost half value in 7 months

Sir Punk wrote:

I have been reading a bit the news on nex rumors and I happened to noticed a post about the 5R being sold for $429

I bought my 5R at the end of January for $700 and now it's probably worth $300 on the used market. I know how much technology depreciates but also my experience with other expensive digital cameras I have owned (one example to LX3) was that the value wouldn't go down so sharply. Not even a year has gone by.

This makes me reconsider Sony for my next purchase of a digital camera with such short product life.

What are people thoughts on this matter? I am quite upset about it. I always sell my gear and reinvest that money to buy new one but this 5R is going to be quite a financial loss.

Any time a new camera is released the resale value drops on the previous models. the LX3 is an old camera and Panasonic seems to update this camera every 2 years or so, which is why it held it's value like it did. Sony has always had short product cycles in most of it's consumer electronics products, especially in NEX cameras. NEX is a lot newer system than Alpha, and there are almost as many NEX models as there have been Alpha's. It's obvious that Sony considers NEX more of a consumer electronics product vs. it's Alpha line.

Most people don't buy cameras to only resell them quickly. They buy them and shoot them for years until they either die, or it's truly time for an upgrade. It's highly likely that the 5R a was a great camera when you bought it and will be 4 years from now. Getting caught up in the upgrade cycle of every body is what costs money. Fact is, most of the improvements on these newer cameras are hardly ground breaking, but rather minor instead. Today is not like it was 10 years ago, where a new model brought a significant reason to upgrade and we are now in somewhat of a plateau when it comes to IQ. These minor updates are just hyped up by marketing folks and gear heads in order to generate sales. It will be a few years before Sony makes an aps nex that gives a substantial upgrade in IQ vs. what you have now. A stop better ISO or a hair more DR just isn't significant. 3-4 stops improvement and a lot more DR is a real improvement. By the time that happens you will have thoroughly had your money's worth out of the 5R and it shouldn't matter what it's resell value is.

Buy lenses instead, they are more useful than incremental body upgrades. Upgrade bodies every 3-4 generations and save yourself a lot of money. There simply isn't much of a reason to always have the newest body, unless you just want to look cool.

I try not to upgrade bodies any sooner than 2-3 years these days. Buy something that fully fulfills your needs then shoot the thing into the ground, and then go get another one. Using Nikon as an example, the D7100 doesn't give a significant IQ increase over a D90 or D300 in 99% of real world usages. Many pro's still shoot D300's and D2X's. I would bet that if a good shooter took a D90 and a D7100 out in the field, shot some high quality work with good technique and quality lenses, made several quality 16x20" prints from the images, hung them on the wall in a gallery, and asked you which camera was which... You probably couldn't tell which camera was used and if you guessed right on any of them, it was by chance. You could also apply this to the A700 vs. A77, A900/A850 vs. A99, or an original Nex 5 vs. Nex 6 or 7.

Analyzing the cell phone mentality gives a ggod picture of it too. Some folks always have to have the newest iPhone etc.. But reality is... for a phone, what does the iPhone 5 really give you over an iPhone 3? They make the same phone call, send the same messages and email, play the same music, videos, and browse the web the same. Yet people go out and get the new 4 then 5 model etc... Which did nothing for them except for cool factor/status symbol along with less money in their bank account. Had they hung on to their iPhone 3 and waited for a significant upgrade before purchasing again, they would have saved a lot of money.

We as consumers are slightly to blame for short product cycles. Because we give in to it as a society and always try to have the latest and greatest, it allows companies to do this. If we didn't do this, it would make for longer product cycles, with better products that have real serious advantages when they are released along with less bugs and faults. How many years were there between EOS 1/1n/1v, Nikon F3/F4/F5/F6, Minolta 9000/9xi/9 releases etc...? Quite a few, but each one of those cameras brought a big upgrade to the table when they came out and they worked really well, as advertised.

Sony is definitely the worst when it comes to short product cycles, especially in lower end products. I wish they would bring out better cameras with more solid performance over longer cycles and spend a lot of the time in between making more and better lenses. I think they would have more respect in the market if they did. Instead, they always have to throw some gimmick into the mix on a new release, while at the same time leaving something important out that leaves the consumer hanging to upgrade again on the next cycle to get that important issue fixed. Instead of spending time putting in crap like sweep panorama, face detect af, and smile shutter... Why not spend that time and resources giving better noise and AF performance? The A77 and A99 were best in class cameras... almost.... A77 had bad noise and the A99 has a tiny af array in the center that is almost worthless for action shooting.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow