cant decide - 24-105

S

slats

Messages
252
Name
James
Edit My Images
No
I have found a nice 2009 (june) whitebox 24-105 in the local camera shop for 650 with 6 months warranty on it. However there is also another one I have seen for 560 which is 2006 but no warranty.

Someone tell me which is the better one to get!! My head says the newer one as it also has the lovely warranty but my wallet says the cheaper one!!

Wife is no help as she just says "its your money" which does not help!!!
 
slats said:
I have found a nice 2009 (june) whitebox 24-105 in the local camera shop for 650 with 6 months warrantee on it. However there is also another one I have seen for 560 which is 2006 but no warrantee.

Someone tell me which is the better one to get!! My head says the newer one as it also has the lovely warrantee but my wallet says the cheaper one!!

Wife is no help as she just says "its your money" which does not help!!!
Click to expand...

The 2006 one could have been sitting on a shelf or in a bag for ages. It's difficult to say. I think your wife might have been right.

I'd have thought you should get some kind of warranty with any 2nd hand lens though, especially if it costs £560. Ask!
 
Aren't there some brand new ones here in the classifieds going for £650 ?
 
slats said:
but that is not a UK lens :(
Click to expand...

Canon lenses have an international warranty.
And they're all made in the same place ;) :p
 
it says in that thread that he would help send them back as it is was not international warranty.
 
slats said:
it says in that thread that he would help send them back as it is was not international warranty.
Click to expand...

Oh ok, I must admit to not reading the thread in depth.
I was under the impression all lenses, especially 'L' had international warranty on them.
Nevermind.
 
It's the same lens, Is a 6 month warranty worth £100?
 
Why are you chossing the 24-105?
How does it suit your shooting preferences/style?

I am just wondering if you are buying it because it is the ideal lens or because it's 'L' :)
 
My 2p - get the more recent one.
The lens was introduced late 2005 and there were initial production problems and lens recalls; IIRC it was taken off sale for a while. You need to dig back and check the serial number of the 2006 lens.
If the serial number checks out OK then it's really down to how much the lenses have been used/abused. For example, my lens hood is covered in fine scratches as it lives on the lens and the lens body has slightly glossy patches where it is being worn because I prefer to carry my camera by gripping the lens.
If you get the chance take a shot at 24mm f4 and do some pixel peeping; the corners will be slightly soft, that's normal; what you should check for is that all four corners are equally soft. If they are not then the lens isn't right and I'd walk away. BTW - 24mm f4 is the lenses weakest combination, it is still very usable but not quite up to the stunning quality the lens usually delivers.
 
My own personal experience would say buy the cheaper one. I've owned more lenses than I can remember for dozens of camera systems and so far, not one has ever had a fault. Bodies are a different matter for what it's worth.

If I'd have paid £100 extra on each lens, i'd be massively out of pocket.

You have to work out what the peace of mind is worth to you I guess.
 
Great lens and I think I'd probably go for the cheaper. if it doesn't suit sell it on and you'll not lose much (if anything).
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
As often said on TP - get the best glass you can afford.
I got my 24-105 instead of upgrading my 20D. It was such a good decision!
Click to expand...

Not if it's not the focal range he needs/wants.
On a crop body the 24-105 is an acquired taste. I loved mine and was an advocate of it's length even on a crop, but it is not an ideal walkaround for the vast majority.
 
jnO said:
Not if it's not the focal range he needs/wants.
On a crop body the 24-105 is an acquired taste. I loved mine and was an advocate of it's length even on a crop, but it is not an ideal walkaround for the vast majority.
Click to expand...
Yes - you are probably right. But this thread didn't start out as a 'what lens' thread - that's something you and I have been doing and we shouldn't de-rail the thread.
 
DuncanDisorderly said:
Yes - you are probably right. But this thread didn't start out as a 'what lens' thread - that's something you and I have been doing and we shouldn't de-rail the thread.
Click to expand...

Actually my question to him is perfectly valid. He is money concious and as such he may be tempted by the reviews of the glass without thinking about it's application in his photography, there may be a cheaper alternative that we can help him with. He won't be the first person blinkered in the reflection of a red ring on a lens.

If thats a discussion that is irrelevant to the thread then I'll wait for the OP to reply, you don't have to continue the discussion if you don't want to :)
 
I was not planning to replace this anytime soon so was not really worried about the resale value of it. I have always thought that the newer the better on items. I know the quality of the L series is top notch but if I was to sell again in 3 years time will the newer lens in fact hold its price better than the older lens?

The 6 month waranty is as much just a bit of a "hand holder" as this is the most I will have ever spent on a lens and would like to have somewhere local to take it to if it did go wrong after I took it home.

I am swaying myself to the newer lens at the moment as I am now thinking of the future value of the lens which I had not thought about before!!


As for the Focal Length I have been looking at all my shots and I never really go below 20mm and never over 100mm but always inbetween these. If I need lenth then I have a Tammy 70-200 not the best lens in the world but it does what I need it to (and I can count on my hand how many times I have used it in the last year).
 
To be honest if you dont plan on selling this on for a number of years I doubt there will be any difference in value at that time :) I wouldn't use that as an arguement for spending more money now.
If it's any help I was in a similar position recently over a 200mm 2.8L. Ihad an offer of a 4 month old one for £500 or a used Mk1 (1999 I think, I must check) including a tripod ring, unboxed with wear on the body for £400. Seeing as the newer lens will probably reach a value of about £400 in another 18 months anyway so resale was not an issue. Warranty, well if the Mk1 has been performing well for the last X number of years the likelihood is that any problems would be user error so that was kind of irrelevant to me too.
Not everybody feels this way and some people really want that extra warranty. Go with what makes you feel comfortable :)
 
I would pay as little as possible. In 6 months you will have no warranty anyway (and I doubt that you will kill an L lens in 6 months) but the extra £90 will still be yours!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top