Current/Future Classics - lenses to hold their value...

Started Jan 14, 2015 | Discussions thread
knightmelodic
knightmelodic Senior Member • Posts: 1,647
Re: Current/Future Classics - lenses to hold their value...

gear1box wrote:

Knight --

i think that your point on cost per month is a central -- and largely under-appreciated, by non-pros at least -- one. The central insight is compare the stream of benefits -- images that you can make over time -- with the comparable stream of cost incurred "at the end of the day." In that sense, also, repair costs need to be factored in.

Forgive me for perhaps tediously making two corollary observations. For us non-pros there is no clear impetus to ever sell. And many GAS enthusiasts pile up the gear in their closet. Even though i don't view myself as GAS-oriented, i still have a shelf of AIS lenses that i cannot bring myself to par with, yet are not actually useful for my current photography. So for them, doing the computation you suggest is, er, problematic.

Secondly, in the film era the economic cost was dominated by consumable film. Hah! i love the posts that say words to the effect of "what ever happened to bodies that lasted a decade?" Blah, blah. I was a pretty typical hobby shooter and averaged over $400/yr in film & processing costs (NOT enlargements). So in the 16 years i used my Nikon FM body extensively, i had over $6k of film cost for something like 20k exposures. Boy, it was great to be Kodak.

The consumables now are the bodies it seems to me. Burning through three $1500 bodies (net $1200 when you sell the old one) in 15 years costs you something under $4k for about $20/mnth and Gawd-knows-how-many additional exposures.

Anyway, for the most part lenses are cheap relative to the consumable bodies; 40 years ago as now, most "enthusiasts" over-invest in bodies and under-invest in glass in pursuit of their art . . . but that assumes that the print is what those buyers seek. Maybe it is just using the fancy body that they wish. I don't judge, but pros have to be more mercenary.

Well that certainly is an interesting take. But I'm in reference to zooms almost exclusively. I would say that even if you're not selling your pictures maybe pro glass is too expensive. Personally I would get it anyway because of image quality and resale value. Repair costs are virtually nil with pro glass and the lens life cycle is usually about 6 years so unless you drop it you're good to go. Even if I never sell a picture I want the best image I can get. Like most I always shot with slide film because the processors could only process it one way (ie. not too much magenta or cyan) and to this day those images look clean. Other non-slide images look over-processed. In that case I chose the best image quality and I'm glad I did. I've gotten high quality primes and sold my "consumer" zooms. Primes will last way longer than zooms and I may not have to replace them for decades. Of course this is just my opinion and everyone's needs and wants are different. I suffer from GAS and mission creep as much as anyone, LOL. But I'm able to resist. When the new 24-70 VR comes out the value of my non VR will drop considerably. Even though the GAS will surely follow I really can't see upgrading unless the optics are significantly better. Through the years I've considered selling my trinity lenses and getting cheaper, lighter glass. I try a few, shoot real world and test charts and the pictures are great. Then I do the same with the trinity and forget it. No comparison. I think it comes down to what is acceptable to the photographer. This even applies to bodies. I sold my D3s for a relatively small loss, got a D600, sold my D7000, got a D7100, sold the D600 and D7000, got a D7100 and D610, sold everything and got a D750. In all that I actually made money even with adding (soon) a D7100 which I can now buy refurb for half of what I paid for the new one. But, different strokes for different folks. The bottom line is and always will be: get what you want and makes you happy because the worse thing is buyers remorse. IMO you won't shoot with what you don't like. Cheers.

-- hide signature --

Just keep clicking, something will turn out fantastic.

 knightmelodic's gear list:knightmelodic's gear list
Nikon D750 Olympus E-M1 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +15 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
xtm
xtm
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow