would you buy a 5 year old lens?...

phildaintith

phildaintith

Messages
325
Name
phil
Edit My Images
No
ok well iv seen a canon 24-70 2.8L on ebay which was bought in 2005, what would your opinions on spending 600+ quid on a lens this age, would you just spend the extra 300 and get a new one with warrenty etc or recon it could be a good buy? is it common for them to break at this age or just keep on going...

cheers, phil
 
I brought a Nikon 28-70 f2.8 which isn't or wasn't a brand spanking new lens & that was over £600 & no doubt the 70-200mm VR I got is I spose is about the same age and that was near on a grand - so in short YEP

Althou the Nikon 70-200mm VR was brought from a pro tog thou...


edit: :thinking: then again I have brought new & have had problems....
 
has it had 5 years of professional, daily use, or has it been sat in some rich hobbyist's camera bag being taken out once a month and polished for the last 5 years? ;) ask the seller.
 
It's a problem, sh stuff goes for daft prices. IMHO too close to the new price so for me I will buy new normally, although buying sh does make sense if you can save enough....The market will level out
 
Being 5 years old would not worry me much. If it is that old and still working ok, it must be a good one. It has got to be worth a lot less than a new one though.
 
Mike.P said:
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest, infact last year I spent £1300 on a 20 year old manual focus lens .. not regretted it once. :)
Click to expand...

Ditto that! I have just bought a Nikon 500mm f/4 p manual focus for £1150,its as sharp as a very sharp thing,more importantly was it worth it? you betcha.I really would not worry about it,just make the effort to see it and try it before parting with your hard earned.Good luck if you decide to go for it.
 
I've spent over £400 on a lens at least 10 years old, if not 15, and not regretted. As long as the lens hasn't seen daily abuse it'll hold up just fine. At 2/3rds the new price I'd say it's a saving worth making. Put that £300 towards a nice fast prime or flashgun or just save it.
 
alastairb said:
nope, a good condition 5 year old lens would be not be that much cheaper than a new lens, they hold their value well
Click to expand...

I tend to buy used camera bodies because they lose a lot of money, and new lens because if there's not much difference in the price, you may as well get a new one.
 
phildaintith said:
it was sent off for a service last week too so i suppose it cant be that bad...
Click to expand...

Ask to see a photo of service papers to get it confirmed. I've seen some cases where this has just been added to a listing to bump the value up and a lot of people don't question it.
 
phildaintith said:
hes said int he listing that it will be sent with it... just bidded and its gone up to 700 so i might just leave it for now as i can get a new one for an extra 200 with warrenty etc...
Click to expand...

Makes a lot of sense. I'd happily buy a 5 year old lens but it's gotta be at least 25% less than a new one, and be mint.
 
I'd be happy buying a 5 year old lens from a keen hobbyist but would probably be wary of buying a 6 MONTH old one from a certain member on here who uses his kit in some rather extreme environments and has more important things to worry about than making sure his kit doesn't get the occasional knock.
 
Nod said:
I'd be happy buying a 5 year old lens from a keen hobbyist but would probably be wary of buying a 6 MONTH old one from a certain member on here who uses his kit in some rather extreme environments and has more important things to worry about than making sure his kit doesn't get the occasional knock.
Click to expand...

Are you saying the said person doesn't look after his kit then ? and that's why you wouldn't buy, or is there another specific reason ?
 
I'm saying that his kit has a (by his own admission) very hard life and gets knocked about. At least, his work provided kit does. Pretty sure that his personal kit gets looked after a lot better.
 
Age doesn't really matter - I've got 40 year old lens that are stll are going strong.

As long as its not been dropped or abused, it should be fine.

Second hand items don't have warranty, so 13 months, 13 years - really doesn't matter!
 
No I don't have a problem buying equipement over 5 years old, just so long as its in good working order and its not be abused!

In fact, since Christmas I purchased 3 Tamron SP lenses (35-80/60-300 and the 70-150 f2.8 varisoft) all circa 1985, all in excellent condition.

Granted, a lot depends on the asking price, particularly when you can buy new for a few quid more.

BTW the 3 Tamrons cost me less than 40 quid! Including the 70-150 soft focus lens.
 
I'd check the dealer sites before buying off ebay as prices can often be silly on ebay. I've never bought a lens off ebay and maybe I've just had bad luck but every camera I've bought off ebay has had faults and / or damage.

There's a Siggy 24-70mm f2.8 on Ffordes, might not offer the ultimate quality of the Canon lens but adds a little perspective to the price.
 
Can't see the problem with buying secondhand... go shopping on here :D
 
I think I sold the 28-70 mentioned earlier on and although it was a tad over 10 years old, it was in pretty good nick. Used for the most part in studios then put away in about 2002 when we went to DX-digital - I preferred the 17-35 and 70-200 lenses.
It came out of retirement a year ago when I bought my own D3 and was only let-go as I got a stupid deal on a 24-70...

If it were the 'right' lens then I wouldn't hesitate if knew the pedigree of the item and trusted the seller - and that's the key point, I think...

Now, does anyone have a good 10-year old AF-S 105mm Micro-Nikkor for under £350?
:D
 
I just bought a 40 year old lens off ebay, it looks like it's never been used (Tele-Takumar 300 F6.3).
Just looking for a M42 adapter now so I can make use of it.
 
Missed out on one yesterday on ebay, I might get a copy which allows infinity focus. I did get a second hand one but it was missing the spring clip.
 
just bought a £1600 lens that's 17 years old, and is immaculate
 
Totally agree, I would buy based on condition rather than age.

I have lenses that are more than 20 years old and are in excellent condition and have been using often for 1 year now.

I once bought a 2 year old lens that lasted 2 weeks before it broke down...
 
I buy all my lenses second hand where possible. The only exception recently was the Nikkor 135mm F2 that I spent 6 months looking for and only ever found it 15% cheaper than new.

I reckon 25-30% discount to new means that you could sell it for what you paid for it most of the time.
 
Arkady said:
I think I sold the 28-70 mentioned earlier on and although it was a tad over 10 years old, it was in pretty good nick. Used for the most part in studios then put away in about 2002 when we went to DX-digital - I preferred the 17-35 and 70-200 lenses.
It came out of retirement a year ago when I bought my own D3 and was only let-go as I got a stupid deal on a 24-70...

If it were the 'right' lens then I wouldn't hesitate if knew the pedigree of the item and trusted the seller - and that's the key point, I think...

Now, does anyone have a good 10-year old AF-S 105mm Micro-Nikkor for under £350?
:D
Click to expand...

You did but it wasn't to me thou - I missed out by a feew minutes :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top