Buying used lenses

RubyGloom · Aug 17, 2011

So I put my lens baby (used once mint condition) up for sale with the option of trading for a 50mm. I had a reply for a trade. He said the lens is about 5 years old. It's the latest design (mark 2). Handled the lens carefully, and there is very little brassing or scuffing on the lens barrel. The glass is perfect - no scratches or anything like that. Is it worth the trade? I was just worried because its 5 years old, is that old for lenses? He said he bought a new lens and never uses the 50mm.

Dao · Aug 17, 2011

Personally, I think the mark1 (which is even older) is better than the newer version. I used to own the mark II, but I sold it after I bought the mark I. (I sold the mark I after I bought the f/1.4)

My Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 mark I lens has a date code that date back in the 80s. And before I sold it last year, it works beautifully. On and off I own few Canon AF lenses that made in the 80s. They all worked fine without any issue before I sold them. (I bought them used)

g-fi · Aug 17, 2011

Sounds like a good trade to me! Maybe I'm jinxing myself here but I've never had a bad experience buying used lenses. Knock on wood!

RubyGloom · Aug 17, 2011

OK Thanks! I am excited to get a 50mm, I know they are not very expensive and could buy one new no problem but I never use the lens baby and I would imagine it would be more difficult to sell so a trade seems good to me. I was just worried about the age as I dont really know what is considered "old"for photography gear lol!

g-fi · Aug 17, 2011

Some of my favorite lenses have been super old (70's) lenses. One of the things that I love about photography is that you can find some truly excellent gear that is OLD, I think it says something when you see some of our generations iconic photographers using bellows view cameras, old Polaroid models, etc. When it comes to lenses, it's all about condition rather than age. Newer is definitely not always better.

KmH · Aug 17, 2011

The Mk II is a CPOS. The build quality is embassingly cheap, though the optics are good enough. The Mk II only has 5 aperture blades, so a shallow DOF, blurred background, looks like something/someone was shaking the snot out of the background when you released the shutter (really poor bokeh quality). You're subject is reasonably focused, but the background behind your subject looks like ****.

As always, you get what you pay for.

A well cared for, used Mk II is worth $65 to $70 if includes the manual and original box.

RubyGloom · Aug 17, 2011

Thanks all! I am glad to know that age is not always and essential facor in buying used equiptment!

RubyGloom · Aug 17, 2011

KmH said:
The Mk II is a CPOS. The build quality is embassingly cheap, though the optics are good enough. The Mk II only has 5 aperture blades, so a shallow DOF, blurred background, looks like something/someone was shaking the snot out of the background when you released the shutter (really poor bokeh quality). You're subject is reasonably focused, but the background behind your subject looks like ****.

As always, you get what you pay for.

A well cared for, used Mk II is worth $65 to $70 if includes the manual and original box.

I had no idea, I was always hearing sch good thing! Would you suggest I hold out and buy a Mark 1?

Dao · Aug 18, 2011

Optical property wise, Mark1 and Mark2 is about the same. I could not tell the different when I had them both at the same time. The main differences between the 2 are build quality, manual focus ring position and distance scale.

However, the older mark1 EF 50mm lens (used) usually cost more. Even more than the brand new mark2 version.

brandibell · Aug 18, 2011

I agree with what everyone says about the mark 1 vs the 2. Although I am sure you would be happy with the mark 2. It's an alright trade I think your Lens baby is worth more but the problem is I dont think you will get many people who want to buy it. I would probably do the trade