Price of used 35mm equipment

"Chris Brown" wrote in message
...
In article N4GGb.135394$8y1.415169@attbi_s52,
Don Coon wrote:

However, I will say that used Canon EOS lenses are *NOT* selling anywhere
near half price. The demand for EOS lenses is so high that
"out-of-stock"
is common at many etail sites and prices on Ebay are high.

Indeed, and now they've introduced the 300D, it's going to be even harder
to
pick up a nice second-hand bargin.

Having said that, I did get a pretty good deal on a Canon 20-35 USM and a
Canon 15mm fisheye, both used, both in mint condition, recently. It wasn't
anything like as low as half price, but it was a reasonable discount from
new. The fisheye makes a very nice companion for a 10D, although it does
exhibit a bit of chromatic abberation, easily fixable in Photoshop CS's
raw
convertor.

You can occassionally snag such a deal especially if they pick a poor ending
time between 3am and 8am, What were they thinking? : )

"Clanger" wrote in message
...

"The Spectre" wrote in message
.. .
WTF, is going on with the price of used 35mm equipment? I can not
believe
that Nikon F5's, F4's, n90s's etc.. and associated Nikon f2.8 lenses and
accessories are selling for so little. I mean come on I saw an F5 with
MF-28
sell for $725.00!!! And that was after the seller reduced it twice.
These
are still current production $1500 - $2000 cameras. Also, f2.8 glass is
many
times half of new price. Makes me wish I had an extra grand laying
around.



DIGITALLLLLLLLLL that's what.


Yep. Someone yelled DIGITAL and all of a sudden there was a panic as if
being caught in a Chinese fire drill.

Nick

"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
"Howard McCollister" writes:
That url didn't make it, can you post the complete url? Thanks.

Bad wrap...try this...http://tinyurl.com/2l3u8

Thanks. The comparison of film with 8mm movies is valid. 8mm movies
are not dead, but have gotten mostly-displaced by video. As another
example, you can still get analog wris****ches (mechanical with gears
inside) but almost everyone wears electronic watches these days.
(Even the quartz watches with analog dials and hands actually have a
digital circuit inside).


Quartz watches are indeed worn by many people. I even have two. But I wear a
mechanical watch and most of my collection are mechanical watches.

Nick

"Mac Breck" wrote in message
...
"Don Coon" wrote in message
news:HsiHb.664880$HS4.4717193@attbi_s01...

"Paul Rubin" wrote in
message
...
Chris Brown writes:
AFAICS, EOS lenses are holding their value very well,
and selling fast
on
the second hand market. If you know somewhere this
isn't the case, do
let me
know as I could get a nice late Christmas present for
my 10D. ;-)

I have the impression Nikon lenses are getting creamed
pretty badly,
especially manual focus ones of which I have quite a
few, but I
haven't been able to bring myself to check.

Possibly because the manual focus ones can only be metered
with the D1/D2 series and not the cheaper ones which are
based on the cheaper model film bodies. It's the reason I'd
go with a D1/D2 series body instead of say a D100. Somebody
who has a lot of or just likes manual glass better, would
keep their manual glass and gravitate toward a D1/D2 body.
Somebody who's willing to give up (sell/dump) their manual
glass may just switch to Nikon AF and a D100. There's no
reason to knee-jerk jump to Canon.


That's my assessment. Notice how many Nikon lenses are
being offered for
sale on the rec.photo.marketing usergroups compared to
Canon lenses. Leads
me to believe a lot of Nikon users are bailing out and
converting to Canon
DSLRs.

How you got from that premise to that conclusion, I'll never
know!

What's you explanation??? Many more Nikon lenses being sold than Canon.
Buyers of DSLRs tend to hang onto their lenses when converting to the same
brand of DSLR. Those switching DSLR brands tend to dump their old lenses.
I'm curious to hear your explanation.

"Don Coon" wrote in message
news:35kHb.677971$Fm2.585734@attbi_s04...


How you got from that premise to that conclusion, I'll never
know!

What's you explanation??? Many more Nikon lenses being sold than Canon.
Buyers of DSLRs tend to hang onto their lenses when converting to the same
brand of DSLR. Those switching DSLR brands tend to dump their old
lenses.
I'm curious to hear your explanation.


I think the point is that the older Nikon lenses don't work on the D100, so
they are being sold whether the photographer is moving to Canon OR Nikon.
Either way, they have to buy new lenses. *Most* photographers can't afford
the steeper prices of the Nikon D1x models AND new glass, so they're buying
the less expensive D100 or Canon 10D/300D.

Tom P.

"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message
...

"Don Coon" wrote in message


Tom ,

Some of those great AI-S lenses can be converted to work with a digital
Nikon.
An example is the 28mm F/2.8 AIS. This can be chipped to use with any Nikon
DSLR.
Price I have seen is less than $80. A superb lens.

Jim




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Being a Canon user, I'll take your word for the ease and cost of the
upgrade. Does it add matrix metering, AF and distance info to the camera
interface? I'll bet many of the older Nikon lenses out there aren't really
worth spending $80 on to upgrade and still end up with a non AF lens. I
realize there are better lenses that justify being kept around, but they are
probably in the minority. Case in point would be my older Minolta manual
gear. There were a couple of expensive, fast 2.8 zooms, but I also had 5 or
6 that were just sentimental favorites that could have been replaced for
~$100 each. Without knowing the particulars of either lens, I would wonder
why spend $80 to upgrade an AIS 28mm lens when the 28mm AF-D version can be
had for the same price?

Tom P.



"Jim Waggener" wrote in message
...

"Tom Pfeiffer" wrote in message
...

"Don Coon" wrote in message


Tom ,

Some of those great AI-S lenses can be converted to work with a digital
Nikon.
An example is the 28mm F/2.8 AIS. This can be chipped to use with any
Nikon
DSLR.
Price I have seen is less than $80. A superb lens.

Jim




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"Tom Pfeiffer" writes:
Without knowing the particulars of either lens, I would wonder
why spend $80 to upgrade an AIS 28mm lens when the 28mm AF-D version can be
had for the same price?

The AIS is a better design and the AF-D is more than $80.

Actually, the last 28mm AF-D sold on eBay went for $75:
http://tinyurl.com/37w8e

and as I said in my post "without knowing the particulars of either lens".

Tom P.


"Paul Rubin" wrote in message
...
"Tom Pfeiffer" writes:
Without knowing the particulars of either lens, I would wonder
why spend $80 to upgrade an AIS 28mm lens when the 28mm AF-D version can
be
had for the same price?

The AIS is a better design and the AF-D is more than $80.

"Mac Breck" writes:
If DSLR buyers have a large investment in a lot of manual glass that
they really like, and it's a system of glass that they've built up
over many years, why wouldn't they want to hold onto their favorite
glass when they get a DSLR? There are manual lenses that I'd never
sell, because I really love the optics. The D100 does not meter
with them, so to Hell with the D100. I want to have a DLSR that
meters with all of my lenses, and that's the D1/D2 series.

I'm sort of in the situation you describe. I have maybe $2K of Nikon
stuff, not a large investment by pro standards but not trivial. At
the moment there's no D1/D2 camera with a 6 MP sensor with square
pixels, so if you want that you have no choice but the D100. Maybe
there will be a D2H soon which will probably cost around $4K. At that
price it's cheaper for me to throw away my current lenses and get a
D100 and new lenses, than to buy a D2X and use my current lenses. Of
course if I ditch my current lenses, I'm more likely to get a Canon
DSLR than if I can keep using my lenses, so Nikon IMO did a pretty
dumb thing in making the D100 unable to meter with MF lenses.

The MF lenses usefulness is sort of altered anyway by the small DSLR
sensor. The ultrawides become medium wides, my favorite 35/1.4
becomes a non-wide, the 55/2.8 becomes a short telephoto. They're no
longer good for the shooting that I bought them for. Meanwhile the
newer lenses (at least the pro ones) really do seem to improve on the
old ones (e.g. the 17-35). If I had a 300/2.8 I'd probably feel
different, but I have mostly shorter lenses.