Used lenses

[canonguy12]

What is the best way to determine the quality of a used lens?

I have come across a canon 100mm 2.8 macro for half the price of a new one.

 

[sovietdoc]

What is the best way to determine the quality of a used lens?

Shoot with it.

On a serious note I wouldn't trust used anything. There could be lots of things that could be wrong with it besides scratches. Excessive aberration, focus issues..etc. I only trust used things I can try and see for myself.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

What is the best way to determine the quality of a used lens?

I have come across a canon 100mm 2.8 macro for half the price of a new one.

well if you've used one thats new, it'd be easy to determine if there's anything wrong with it.

if the pictures look sharp, and the focus ring is smooth, and the glass looks clean, than you're probably doing pretty good for about $300.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM (introduced in 2009)
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (introduced in 2000)
or EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro (introduced in 1990)?

 

[djacobox372]

What is the best way to determine the quality of a used lens?

Shoot with it.

On a serious note I wouldn't trust used anything. There could be lots of things that could be wrong with it besides scratches. Excessive aberration, focus issues..etc. I only trust used things I can try and see for myself.

Bah! all those things you mention (besides scratches) are manufacturing flaws could be wrong with a new lens as well.

Not much can go wrong with a lens that isn't immediately apparent once you start using it... so as long as you have a reasonable amount of time to return it... go for it--most ebay auctions allow for a few days to return if you are unhappy with it, and in disputes the buyer is HEAVILY favored by ebay and paypal... I'm much more scared to sell things online then to buy them.

 

[Big Mike]

I've bought many used lenses, with no problems (knock on wood).

 

[Derrel]

I've bought loads of used lenses over 30 years...only about 5% were not everything they should have been. I once bought a Nikon 35-135 zoom lens that was a total Coke bottle bottom, and it was on its fourth owner (me), but that was just a crap lens design I think. I normally prefer to buy used lenses. Macro lenses are a special category: many people buy a macro lens, try it, use it a couple of weekends, or one summer, then get bored with it, and sell it used. Macro lenses are a good item to pick up used.

 

[canonguy12]

EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM (introduced in 2009)
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (introduced in 2000)
or EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro (introduced in 1990)?

One of the things I am waiting to hear back about. He didn't specify in the posting. Found it on craigslist... so I will definitely want to meet with the guy and test it out.

 

[Big Mike]

Also...
As with buying anything used, it can be helpful if you know some of the history of the item. For example, if you can find one that was barely used (as Derrel mentioned) that would be ideal.
You might also consider the inherent durability of the lens. Pro quality lenses are made to work for a long time, so are often a good deal when you can buy them used. However, a lens that is used by a pro, may have been worked very hard (used & abused). So a pro lens that was only used by a hobbyist, may be another ideal scenario.

 

[canonguy12]

It is only a 100mm 2.8 macro- the non-USM version. They want $300, which seems pricey to me considering a new, USM lens is $500.

What do you think a fair value for this lens would be? I am going Friday to go look at it.

 

[canonguy12]

^bump

 

[Dao]

I have that old Canon 100mm non-usm macro lens. I bought it used for a little over $300 a year or so ago. That lens is build like a tank!

Pros:
- Very well build and feel very solid. Much better than my EF 50mm f/1.4 USM.
- Use smaller 52mm filter
- Front lens element is recessed, no need to use a lens hood.
- Very sharp.

Cons:
- Heavier than the USM version.
- Slower AF (non-usm) but I do not use the AF most of the time.
- Not internal focus, so the front part of the lens will extend.
- Manual focus via a switch. I like full time manual focus like my EF 85mm f/1.8 (but I use manual focus most of the time, so no big deal)
- Hard to clean the front lens element because of it position locates deep inside the lens.



Assuming the lens you are going to take a look is in good working condition, so if you get a used EF 100mm USM macro lens instead of the older one, you pay about $100 for better AF and internal focusing (IF). I choose the older version because I really don't care too much about the AF and IF since I am going to use it for macro stuff anyway. If you also want to use it for portrait lens, the USM version may worth the extra. By the way, the AF is slower, I do NOT mean the AF is sloooooooowww.

Here are some sample shots with my old 100mm Canon lens.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-took-another-fly-shot-afternoon-closeup.html

 

[KmH]

^bump

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: :thumbdown:

 

[canonguy12]

^bump

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: :thumbdown:

What, don't like bump? Needed an answer today before I got off from work.

Anyways, went and got the lens for $280. At first it scared me because I took a pic of the sky and there were several specks of dust. Cleaned the front element and that did the trick. Thanks for the help everyone, will be playing with my new toy tomorrow

 

[Dao]

$280 is a great price for the lens!

Also, if I am not mistaken, I remember Derrel said that the older non-USM version create a better Boken than the newer version. (I could be wrong, better wait for Derrel)