I'm getting that sinking feeling again

Nikon D700, Sony A900, and now the new Canon 5D Mark II! I held on to film cameras way too long (like my Starbucks stock) and when I finally

got around to trading them in they were next to worthless. Am I going to experience the same thing with my small sensor digital SLR's in view of all

these recently introduced and reasonably priced full frame cameras? I already see D200's and even D300's showing up in the used market in

greater numbers.

In general anything electronic loses value quickly. I truely have no clue what the going rate is on anything like a used D200 or D300, but if it doesn't lose half its value in 3 years, especially if a newer model comes out to replace the existing one, I would be supprised. Film cameras mostly lost a lot of value because digital stepped in and replaced it. Before that happened they generally kept their value for quite a long time.

I buy cameras and lenses to take pictures, not as additions to a stock portfolio. If you need a new camera then buy a new camera. Don't worry about what it's trade in value will be down the road. Instead; dream about all the pictures you will take. That is what you are buying it for. If you want a return on your investment try stamp collecting.

Go to keh.com to see what used gear is selling for. A $5000 digital camera bought today will be worth about $1500 in 2 years. In 4 years it will be worth about $500. As John said I buy cameras to take pictures. My $20000 car I bought 5 years ago is probably only worth about $7000 now. So what? That means I spent $13000 to drive 100,000 miles. How else was I supposed to get around? So what if my camera lost $2000 in value. How else am I supposed to take the pictures that I took?

<i>>> Am I going to experience the same thing with my small sensor digital SLR's in view of all these recently

introduced and reasonably priced full frame cameras?</i>

 

<p>In a word - yes.

 

If you are worring about it, get rid of them now and get the most that you can.

 

In my opinion, small sensor cams are going to be relavent for a long time to come, because there are people like me

that use equipment to death. There are also a lot of excellent lenses in the "DX" format. I am currently looking to

upgrade my D1h to a D2h. Yeah baby! Woo hoo!</p>

 

<p>I can afford a D3, I just don't need a D3.</p>

As John stated, electronics are not an investment. They have always gone out of date quickly and people who pay for bleeding edge tech always take it in the wallet. If the cost/value ratio is that big of an issue, I suggest waiting until the buzz dies down before paying for the next big thing so that you are the one paying the deflated price rather than the one offering at that price. It's kind of like buying a car - you lose a good chunk of value the second you sign on the dotted line.

 

- Randy

You guys are right. The D300 does everything I need it to do with quality good enough for any purpose and a lens equivalent to

my favorite 18-200mm Nikkor zoom in full frame would cost a small fortune.

This hobby is a money-losing game. I have long resolved this issue, so it never gives me a "sinking feeling", as would matters that relate more to one's emotions.

 

Mary

No one can buy a digital camera that holds value. They are as disposable as the bic pens; computers, vcrs, cd players, and the software than run them.

 

Digital cameras have not replaced film cameras (but they have been displaced) .. no more than fast food chains have replaced fine restaurant dining or the desire of people to find those special family diners .. the fact that manufactures have driven the desire for the film camera ownership market into the ground is more the case of savy marketing and business economics .. keeping profitability first and foremost for manufacturers and stockholders. That's business and to be expected.

 

People today don't buy imaging systems for trade in value, they buy it because it meets an immediate want .. for lack of a better word .. they buy it because they succumb to marketing hype and fear that they can't be competitive unless they adopt newer technologies.

 

You could say and feel the same thing about your computer purchase .. does anybody really think a high end computer retains any value in 2-3 years .. no, but we continue to buy and upgrade every year .. as much as our budget allows .. and we usually dump the junk before it is even broken or fails to perform the functions for which it was built.

 

If you're worried about digital camera losing value .. no matter what you buy, you'll be just postponing that sinking feeling .. buy for what you want today and worry less about tomorrow; but buy knowinig that after 3 years you won't be getting much a return on investment as you did with film cameras. What is frequently overlooked is the fact that digital camera improvements usually drive a commensurate need to upgrade support with software, computers and printers, all of which have a seemingly short life of utility. Factor that into you cost for photography equation and you'll really get a sinking feeling.

 

All things considered I think buying a Nikon D200 new was good for me. I produce bigger prints when I need them and for awhile there was a lot of conversation about that particular camera which moved me from digital point and shoot to something more serious. None of this replaced my film cameras which by the way are already "full frame." And, unlike others, I had no problem with using 35mm or medium format for weddings or anything else photographically important.

Sanford, here's a strategy: Only buy digital cameras that are a year or more old. You'll still get fairly recent technology at half the cost. Now is a great time to buy a Canon 40D, for example. I just picked up a hell of a deal on a G9. Why follow the crowd like lemmings? Instead take advantage of those that need/want the latest G-Wiz camera and sell their near new one for a significant loss......while you score a bargin. The whole camera marketing machine is geared to make you think you NEED the up to the sec hardware. You don't. Another idea is to stay shooting film and scan the results. Just don't play the upgrade game at all. Instead of being "equipment centric", focus on image making. When you show your finest images, no one will know, or care, what camera you used.

I'm not sure the depreciation is as steep for high-end bodies in the 8Mp and above range. I contend that was the

watershed "good enough for most uses" point.

 

For example, the EOS 1D mkIIn was $3999 when it was introduced in Aug. 2005. I just checked KEH, and they list a

"LN" body for $3249. That's only about a 20% drop in price over three years.

 

OTOH, the IIn many be an outlier. The the pre-"n" mkII cameras are going for substantially less. In about 4 1/2

years, it's price has dropped from $4499 to $1899 (for an "EX" item @ KEH).

KEH has pretty high prices on items they rate LN. You can probably get one rated a little lower which looks the same and costs

much less. But then LN- with them really looks LN, just w/o a box.

<i>I buy cameras and lenses to take pictures, not as additions to a stock portfolio. If you need a new camera then buy a new camera.</i>

 

<p>I agree with this -- cameras are tools. Check out what kind of camera suits your type of photography best and calculate what it will cost per picture. When I bought my first DSLR, I thought that I want the flexibility but also justified it with spending less money on 35 mm film. It ended up paying itself in terms of film, since quitting photography would not have been an option. Now I know what can be done with the latest DSLRs and can assume a 2-3 year life as primary camera for my current DSLR. After that, I assume little or no value; digital cameras are the price one pays for taking pictures.

 

<p>For a professional, this calculation is even easier, as one doesn't have to place value on how fun it is to do photography, one only needs to estimate revenue earned with the new camera.

Thomas Hardy, "KEH has pretty high prices on items they rate LN. You can probably get one rated a little lower which looks the same and costs much less."

 

I think they only had one 1D mkIIn (which may explain the relatively high price - supply v. demand and all that).

 

In any case, I choose a highly rated item because I was trying to compare "apple to apples" (i.e "really-new" to "like-new") to get an estimate of depreciation simply due to time, with use (somewhat) factored out of it.

With all due respect...<br><br>

 

No item really becomes obsolete or looses value unless:<br><br>

 

1. It is no longer repairable because<br>

 

• there are no longer any replacement parts; <i>and/or</i><br>

• no one no longer knows how to repair it; <i>and/or</i> <br>

• the cost of repair greatly exceeds the cost to replace it with a newer technology.<br><br>

 

2. It no longer provides any usefulness what-so-ever.<br>

<a href="http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/3/19/10456/6589"><u>Here's one man's opinion</u>!</a><br><br>

 

3. The newer technologies are far beyond what you can <b>reasonably</b> afford to spend.<br>

Check out <a href="www.teslamotors.com"><u>this new electric car</u></a> and then look at the car's base

price.<br><br>

 

4. The newer technology provides benefits, and fulfills needs that far exceed current or older technologies.<br>

One only needs to review the history of computer technology since 1984 as an example.<br><br>

 

I'm quite sure that there are a few more reasons.<br><br>

 

IMHO, if if whatever technology you've bought into still serves you well, <br>

then it is not obsolete ... it is useful, and it still has value ... for you.<br><br>

 

Unfortunately most of us, including yours truly, buy into what manufacturer's marketing departments and

advertising tells us.<br>

That is that what we currently own is no longer any good for us to use and enjoy because it's old technology.<br>

So consequently we're not smarter, sexier, wealthier, interesting, better, etc., etc. than those who buy into the new

stuff.<br><br>

 

By-the-way, just like a few others, I'm already lusting over the new, <i>'soon-to-be-released'</i>, full-frame

DSLRs!<br><br>

 

Cheers!<br>

:)

I am thinking about building a retirement home for obsolete equipment...

 

All of you are welcomed to start sending me your "old", "obsolete" (but still working!) D200 and D300´s.

I can even make an exception for more recent models... :P

 

LOL ;)

You are talking about the just released pre production mark II series multi function camera bodies with Super

Venus de Milo processing and second generation dust bunny scoopers. pixel mapping, GPS, cup holder for Atkins-

san. high definition multi channel sound and faster microprocessors. I see their ilk as comparable to the

latest video card that my friendly neighbor lusts for to get his flying program flying ,well, faster- takes up a

whole drive by itself. For little old me,Sanford, lenses of quality are the stable investment things and maybe

for any hip photographer. The rational and grounded types with sales resistance. Meaning only this- Buy a good

lens and it is like putting money in the bank ... (whoops, poor analogy today :-(( ) Seriously, it is hard to

know where the technology is going isn' t it. And I agree with buy used if it will do for you.

I bought my last camera body 26 months ago for $960. I've used it just about every day since then. That works out to a cost of about $1.20 a day. I could just about buy a cup of coffee for that, and I don't much like coffee. So I reckon $1.20 a day provides a whole lot of fun and I'm getting a pretty good deal, even if my camera gives up tomorrow. And for every extra day I get to use it, that cup of coffee is looking more like a bad deal.

It is possible to build a photographic kit that is worth more than you paid for it in 2-3 years time (or straight away if need be) but it takes some looking for. I don't get swept along with the 'all consumer goods loose value' motto. My car - it is a 1986 model with rugged build and easy home servicing. I paid 50 pounds for it in 1999, but now it is worth 1500 pounds, even with more miles and rust. My cameras and lenses are picked up used as and when I find them. The super deals stand out a mile, and with a little effort, you can find similar. My latest lens - a Nikkor 24mm f2.8 for 30 pounds. Yes, it is used, but in perfect condition and will last a lifetime with care and it will not depreciate. I picked up a Nikon F3 body in as new condition with instructions, unused strap and ERC for 50 pounds. Photographic equipment need not be a bad investment, and I know that they are tools and all, but it is nice to think that if I really needed the money in the future for some emergency or even something like intensive hospital treatment, that my my money is fairly safe.