Renting - who can afford it ?

[chris_letts]

<p>It bugs me that I read many times on various forums (should that be fora ?) the advice to 'rent one to see if you like it'.<br>

I'm not sure about other parts of the world, but here in the U.K. the cost to rent say a D700 is around £200 for a week and that's the body only - add another £50 for a lens.<br>

I don't think many people, including me, would want to pay out that amount of money just for a tryout - I could buy a new lens for my old camera for that sort of money.<br>

Do people really ever do this ? if you have, was it worth it ?</p>

 

[hjoseph7]

I don't think they are as steep down here in the USA, usually the rental fee is proportionate to the item you rent. The more expensive the item the greater the rental fee. The longer you hold the item, the greater the rental fee. I will usually rent an item for a day or maybe a weekend, but not any longer that.

[chris_letts]

<p>Weekend hire is of course cheaper, but still £100 plus lens - do you reckon you could tell in a weekend whether it's the 'right' camera ? Or maybe it's obvious in the first 10 minutes !</p>

[charles_wood]

<p>Indeed, rental prices are a lot cheaper here in the US. For a South American trip I rented a SONY a900 and a Zeiss 24-70mm 2.8 lens for a month for right at $600.00. For that particular trip and need, it was a far better way to go than investing in the gear by an outright purchase.</p>

 

[awahlster]

<p>Here in Portland Oregon a Nikon D700 costs $700.00 a week or $175.00 a day, same for a Canon 5D Mark II.<br>

Lenses run from $11.00 to $30.00 a day weekly is 4 times the day rate. LONG glass runs up to $80.00 a day. </p>

[andylynn]

<p>If I wanted to rent a D700 with a lens in Boston for a weekend it would be over $200, and if I wanted to compare it to a 5DII the 5DII and lens would also be over $200.The rental suggestions never made much sense to me either.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>Rental in the UK can indeed be extortionate- for example the cost of renting a Canon 5DII body from probably the UK's leading rental organisation for two weeks works out to be 55% of the price to buy. I don't think anyone could put forward a case that this is good value..</p>

<p>OTOH there are deals available that may make sense for some people. A Friday am-early Monday am rental is only charges as one day by Calumet and so you'd have up to three days to decide whether this camera was for you for about £135</p>

<p>Again from Calumet is an offer to refund up to half a weeks rental if you buy the same model new from them right after. All sorts of interesting questions here that aren't fully addressed in their pricelist- like do they refund 100% of a half week rental, or just 50% of a week's rental price for rentals of a week or more? Like do they refund the insurance? Like what does "up to" really mean? But there might be something worthwhile there if you do go on to buy.</p>

<p>But in general the OP is probably right and when you combine hassles of getting to a rental outlet with the high prices asked , I've been inclined for a long time to disregard rental</p>

[will_daniel1]

Those Portland and Boston prices sound low compared to the rental industry standard. Those folks who operate rental centers (lawn mowers, tools, party equipment, etc.) have standardized, I believe, on 10 percent of the original purchase price per day. After 10 rentals, they then begin to either make money on the rentals or sell the items off as "slightly used."

[stp]

<p>I'm wanting to try out a Hasselblad, lens, and back, but it's a film camera. I can rent that for $30 for a complete weekend. That's not bad for a $2000 system. If they can do that for a film Hasselblad, there's nothing to prevent them from doing the same for more popular digital systems except the desire to make money rather than provide a reasonable service to prospective buyers.</p>

[dave_s]

<p><em>If they can do that for a film Hasselblad, there's nothing to prevent them from doing the same for more popular digital systems </em><br>

<em> </em><br>

I wonder if the reasons are (i) depreciation and (ii) demand. Presumably digital cameras depreciate at a much faster rate than film cameras, and the rental companies may factor that cost into their pricing. Also, I bet many more people want to rent digital than film cameras. The rental outfit can charge whatever they want for the 5dii, but the Hasselblad may sit on the shelf most weekends.</p>

[graham_line]

<p>My local rental outfit will apply all or part of the rental expense to a purchase of the same item, if it's done within 30 days or so. I'm a little vague on the details, but it helped knock a chunk off the price of my D300 a while ago.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>if you are ready to invest 4000$ in a camera like a Canon 5DmKII it make perfect sense to rent it a day or a weekend to test it and see if you like it..for 200$.</p>

<p>Its like when people say they cant afford Photoshop CS4 because they dont have that kind of money, but have a Canon 5DmKII, 3-4 prime lens, zillion of unneeded Cokin filter, etc... and they still dont make a living out of it anyway... why do you have a Canon 5DmKII to start with?</p>

<p>I think it make perfect sense to rent a camera vs buying one, for a 1 day job (for a wedding for example), or for when you need a bigger model than the camera you have with you. Some renting place will give you a credit over a brand new camera if you rent one first.. just ask.</p>

<p>As to rent one just to try it, it depend of your budget, some will think it make perfect sense to invest 200$ before putting 4000$ down the drain, some will just look at a specialise web site to see how this camera is.. and some will buy the 4000$ camera, test it, bring it back to the store before 7 day and get a full refund ; P</p>

<p>___</p>

<p>I have a renting place that rent a Blad with a P45 for 500$ per day + lens.. you think its non sense, but a system like that cost 50 000$ .. so many photog just rent it, included it in there fee, and in the end its the client that pay for it anyway.. would not make any sense for a amateur to rent it of course.. but he is not making 3000$ that day in is pocket either ; )</p>

<p> </p>

[Charles_Webster]

<p>I rent special lenses when I need them, and occasionally rent a Hassy H3V medium format digital camera system. I simply pass the cost on to the client.</p>

<p>I rent seldom needed items because it's not good business practice to tie up my capital in equipment I seldom need.</p>

<p><Chas></p>

[avery1]

<p>I think part of this is culture too. I've never heard of anyone (although I'm sure someone here will enlighten me) renting a car for 2 weeks before buying...and cars are usually more expensive than cameras.</p>

 

[john_c16]

<p>Well, if you are in the market for a $6000 lens, $3000 camera body, or some other piece of insanely expensive gear, a couple hundred dollars is a small price to pay to make sure it is the right one. For me, Nikon bodies fit my hands well and I like the interface so I wouldn't have to rent to make sure a Nikon body is for me. However, maybe I am looking for a really long lens. Should I get the 300 f/2.8 and a teleconverter or just get the 600 f/4? Renting each of these for a short time will tell me pretty quickly whether I am going to spend $2500 or $6000.<br>

It is true that you can only rent equipment so many times before you break even with just buying it. I will only rent lenses or bodies that I need for a specific reason and will use very infrequently. Renting the same piece of equipment multiple times a year for a couple hundred dollars each doesn't make sense.</p>

[jeff_higdon]

<p>Wow, those rates are high! In Baltimore, MD the going rate to rent a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS for the weekend (from noon Friday to 9am Monday) is $35.00 .</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>I occasionally rent the Canon 70-200/2.8 non-IS for $25/day. That gives a weekend for $25 since the place I use (in San Francisco) is closed on Saturday. Either rates are just higher in the UK or you have found an overpriced rental shop.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"If they can do that for a film Hasselblad, there's nothing to prevent them from doing the same for more popular digital systems except the desire to make money rather than provide a reasonable service to prospective buyers."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm sure that's part of the reason, Stephen, but there are other reasons to consider. The product life of a (rentable) digital system is probably (much) less than 3 years, and there's no telling how a renter will rattle off the shutter in continuous mode unless they charge by the number of frames. The residule value of a rental beater is also next to nothing. <em><br /></em></p>

[craig_gillette]

<p>As a casual amateur, I'd certainly consider renting if I was unsure on whether a particular camera/lens could handle a particular scenario. Finding out after spending a big chunk of money could mean one would lose more than the rental fee in trying to sell/replace something that didn't cut it. Renting also helps avoid the problem of someone buying and then returning a camera that they've "tested."</p>

<p>I've got two cameras/systems on my short list for the next big buy. I have a really good idea how they both perform in the areas they are directed towards. What I'm not sure is how well they will perform in areas that aren't their strongest points and how well that they might do, considering my level of interests. A couple of hours at a local park, lake or birding area can tell you a lot more than going to the front door and trying to snag cars as they drive buy. Likewise, some time spent in a local church or museum, etc., will tell you a lot about how high iso or anti-shake does for those times that flash and/or tripods aren't allowed, etc.</p>

<p>I can read how others have used them see sample pictures, etc., but that doesn't account for my lenses (maybe) or my abilities to hold the camera still or hold and track, etc. Renting may be "expensive" for a weekend but it's cheaper than reselling if I find something just doesn't cut it for "me."</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Those Hasselblads could be 10 years old. Digital cameras have a shorter life span and demand is higher. Film camera rentals are so inexpensive I'd like to rent a Fuji 617 or an Xpan for a weekend just for fun.</p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Instead of renting, consider buying used. If it's not your cup of tea, you can resell for a very minimal loss. You'll be out one-way postage. If you use paypal, you'll incur fees one way, too. So for $20 postage (may vary) + 3%, you can rent for extended periods of time. :)</p>

<p>Eric</p>

[neilambrose]

<p>UK rental pricing is expensive. But it's priced that way as the business model is B2B, not B2C. Pretty much all hire shops are aimed at professionals who will include the rental cost in their expenses for the job. There's not much supply for the casual user who wants to try something out.</p>

<p>Anyone wanting to try a lens or camera for a while would probably be better served at a main dealer. Quite a few offer short test drives, from a few hours to a few days. Usually the cost is modest, although they'll pre-authorise the purchase on a credit card to prevent theft, although you're not actually charged unless you fail to return it.</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>A new Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS lens is $1600 today at Amazon; $1400 used. Last month I rented one in the US southwest for 7 days for $125, and I now know I don't want this particular lens in my system for a couple of reasons. So do I think that was cheap? I sure do. I also understand that everyone can't afford to do that, but if you are thinking about investing thousands of dollars in new stuff you really should have a way to try it, and this works for me.</p>

[photo_galleries]

<p>For most of my DSLR shooting, I use 17-35mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm zooms -- all top-notch and expensive f2.8 zooms. I bought them because I knew I would use them frequently.</p>

<p>I have very little need for a 500mm. But an occasion did come up when I needed that kind of reach, and renting a lens for a weekend allowed me to do what I needed to do.</p>

<p> </p>

[bob_bill]

<p>I havent rented, but rather than paying $700 for a weeks rental to test it, why not buy it and if you dont like it, sell it. It shouldnt depreciate $700 with few activations. As for lenses, the same, except, if you keep it a while, you may actually make money when you resell it. My 70-200 was $1600 new about 2 years ago and goes for $1700 or more used now.</p>