Lens prices
June 18th, 2007
I’ve always been shocked by how well SLR lenses hold their value. Case in point: Three and a half years ago, I purchased a Canon 28-135mm IS lens, hood, and UV filter on eBay for $385. Two years ago, I sold the package there for $399. Today, that set goes for over $400.
The same phenomenon is noticeable when comparing the prices of new lenses to those of used.
That price stability is bittersweet. On the one hand, it lets photographers acquire lenses without much financial risk. On the other hand, it makes it difficult to afford those lenses.
(This post is part of the 100/100/100 challenge)
so what are you shooting with now then?
But you can afford it… since if you resell the lens when you are done with it, you are only losing the opportunity cost of the $400 or whatever. Ignoring compound interest, and assuming you can make 8% on that money, the lens only costs you $32/year.
The only problem is if you can’t front the $400, but then maybe photography isn’t the hobby / profession for you.
Also, why the heck does an analog piece of tech like this hold its value? Wouldn’t the used lenses be scratched? I don’t get it, since stuff that I would think would be similar (like hifi digital studio equipment, which is also sold to professionals and serious hobbyists) loses half it’s value the minute you take it out of the store.
At the moment, I’m just using the kit lens.
I’m not sure why the high-end lenses hold their value so well. One factor could be their durability; the Canon L-series lenses are built like tanks.
Scratches don’t seem to be very common. I suspect that the people who bother to purchase such expensive lenses also bother to take excellent care of them.