When do you sell gear?

[StanZ]

Hello everyone,

I would like your thoughts on when to sell some of your gear. My photography has shifted more and more towards landscapes and cityscapes and about 18 months ago I bought a Nikkor 24-120 f/4. Since then my 24-70 f/2.8 has not seen any use. My most used apertures are between F/8 and F/11 and I use a tripod about 99% of the time, I don't shoot action or portraits so basically don't need the F/2.8 zoom. Still I'm reluctant to part with it ;-) but at the same time I don't see myself using it anytime soon either.

So what are your thoughts on something like this?

 

[petrochemist118 143]

I've only ever sold 3 photographic items, and it's not for having little available.
I'm quite sure I should have sold some more by now - having 2+ copies of a particular lens is generally pointless - with the M50/1.7 (which I think I have 4 of) I have at least been able to modify one to produce a soft focus lens so sometimes a second copy is worthwhile.

The gear I have sold was when a colleague at work mentioned his wife was after some lenses, and spare models I had available happened to be suitable.
Having recently brought a job lot of 21 lenses, because of just 1-2 of them I wanted, I really need to start selling more soon!

I don't know Nikon lenses well, but I'd expect your 24-70 to give better IQ then the 24-120 even at the smaller apertures you use. I'd also find the faster aperture very useful even with a tripod if shooting after dark.

I suppose you could sell it then buy another if your style of photography shifts to something where it's more suitable, but that's not the way I work. I'm too much of a hoarder & jump around with different types of photography continuously.

 

[jaomul]

If I don't use it I sell it.

 

[Overread17 5]

It depends really - I would say that there's a few criteria

1) When the item has been totally replaced by something else that I've purchased. Ergo when I've upgraded my kit and the item no longer has any real purpose in my kit because I'll always choose the newer/better item over it.

2) When I find that I don't like/enjoy/get what I want out of it. Sometimes even leading product lines can have items in them which just don't work out. Thus the item frustrates and is often replaced with something more suited to the users end needs. Again this is another case where the item ends up gathering dust.

3) When financial pressures are such that it necessitates a sale. This is, of course, the nasty one when life throws problems at you that you have to overcome and it forces you to sell items that you otherwise wouldn't want to part with. Sometimes this can be good as it helps you kick those handful of items that you know you'll never use or get round to using; other times it can be a real pain as your forced to part with stuff that you really don't want to.

When it comes too good quality, but rarely used through no fault of its own its a trickier area. In this case of a high end lens that doesn't get used because its not suiting your current interests then it can come down to more of a case of "do you need the money now". I say that because interests always shift and change - even the season of the year can dictate what you end up photographing and you could go several months not touching certain lenses or bits of kit; but come the spring and summer you'll suddenly break them out again.
I think if you buy something its good to make sure that you really don't want to use it before you sell it on; because you will always lose out on money if you sell it on and the last thing you want is in 6 months time to be eyeing it up again to rebuy (or buying something similar but "not as good" because you don't have the money for it)


Also keep in mind that quality isn't everything. For example I've kept my starting camera (400D) and my kit lens and cheap 70-300mm. I've used them when I've gone out on work days and other events where I don't actually want my good camera - where there's an increase chance of damage/loss; where the quality isn't as important; when photography isn't the key part of the trip and when I seriously need to keep weight down. In those cases some cheaper gear that doesn't really matter at all if it gets damaged, broken, lost. Where other people can easily be allowed to pick it up and use it without any fear etc... Now granted this doesn't mean I'm throwing it around, but it means that I'm not worried about it so I can focus on other things.

 

[SquarePeg37 8]

I say that because interests always shift and change - even the season of the year can dictate what you end up photographing and you could go several months not touching certain lenses or bits of kit; but come the spring and summer you'll suddenly break them out again.

This. If you don’t need the money don’t sell it unless it’s been a year or two without being used. Even then, interests change!

 

[Braineack]

I sell lenses and equipment I don't ever use; but only for more photo equipment I will use.

 

[F5 Penguin]

Don't know when you sell but I know I regret everything I've sold.

 

[astroNikon]

If you don't use it, then why have it?
At one point I kept adding equipment. But then I didn't use all the equipment I added. So I just sold the ones I didn't use. It's just cash sitting there in one sense. I guess it also depends upon what you do with the proceeds after that.

 

[Cortian]

I think one also has to figure into the keep/sell equation how much they'd get for it and the potential hassle of moving it.

E.g.: I've a 20D body that, if I get the 40D body I want, I likely won't use any more. While it's in pristine condition, it'd only fetch maybe $75 on eBay, and I'd have to deal with the chance of being done wrong by a buyer. So I'll almost certainly keep it.

I bought an EF 100-300mm USM lens for the 20D. I'm being gifted an EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. I'll have to play with both, but the odds are the latter lens' IS will make it the superior lens, thus rendering the lens I bought superfluous. But the 100-300mm is LNIB and I paid only $99 for it. Not worth the hassle of selling it, I think.

 

[ac12]

Tough call.
The 24-70 f/2.8 is THE pro lens in that range, paired with the 70-200 f/2.8.
But the 24-120 f/4 is a nice GP lens, with a more flexible zoom range.

So as was said it depends on what and how you shoot.
Personally, I would go with the 24-120 and sell the 24-70.
BUT, if I would take a significant loss on the 24-70, I might keep it. Which does not make sense if I won't use it.

 

[bratkinson]

Thus far, I've unloaded equipment for any of these reasons:
1) Something you don't use.
2) 'There is a better <whatever> that can better handle what I need (low light shooting, in my case).
3) Anything malfunctioning.

Maybe 35 years ago, my father told me that if I haven't used something in 2 years, it's almost guaranteed I never will. He was right! When I finally moved from a 'compact' camera (fancy point and shoot that I could shoot in manual mode, etc) to a DSLR, the compact became surplus so it got sold on ebay a week or so after I got the DSLR. As my photography skills improved and, at the same time, most of my photography transitioned to indoor events, I had no choice but to upgrade lenses as well as camera body. At that time, I hadn't decided on whether I wanted to use mostly 'primes' (single focal length lenses) or zoom lenses. So, I decided to try 'both ways' (I had the money to do so back then), settling on 4 primes and 3 overlapping focal length zooms. After maybe 8 months or more, I found I used the zooms perhaps 90% of the time and primes the other 10%. Of the primes, the 135mm f2 was also 90% or so of prime usage, the others, maybe a couple dozen frames apiece in each of multiple shoots 'just to see how well I use them'. I ultimately sold the other three primes from disuse. For what it's worth, back in my film-shooting days, I had mostly on zooms and only the 50mm flat-field prime I bought with my first SLR.

As I transitioned to mostly low light shooting, it didn't take long to decide I needed to upgrade my camera and get faster (lower f-stop number) lenses. That was at the same time I did my 'prime or zoom' tests. I also needed a camera capable of shooting at ISO 2400-3200 so I could raise the shutter speeds to reduce images blurred by subject movement at shutter speeds in the 1/10 to 1/60th or so. So, I ended up with 2 f2.8 zooms and one f4. A bit over a year later, I upgraded the body again to one that I'm OK with shooting at ISO 6400 or higher when needed, and ISO 25,600 when I'm in almost total darkness. Yea, at 25,600, the noise is extreme, but I've been able to get acceptable results after fooling with noise reduction in Lightroom and Photoshop Elements (I'm a hacker) for 5-6 minutes per picture. The Canon 5D mark iv is 'calling me' for it's improved high ISO performance, but money's tight these days.

One of my zooms was the Canon 24-105 f4L lens. After 5 years of using it, it malfunctioned due to it's well documented design flaw. Out of warranty, it went to Canon and it was all fixed. 8-9 months later, the same problem happened. Off to Canon again. I used it for only 1 or 2 shoots after I got it back and the lens error occurred a couple of times, I decided I didn't want to put up with the risk of another total failure. Canon also produced the mark ii version of the lens as of the last year or so, so it gave me the option of buying the better lens which I finally did. I sold the first 24-105 on ebay and fully documented the lens' history in the listing so the buyer knew up front what risks he was taking. It's been a couple months now, and he left positive feedback for me. Win-win in my book.

 

[paigew]

I don’t sell anything. I have three different 50mm [emoji85]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

There are some GREAT replies to your question here!

I dunno'..."tough call" is right! Interests can and do change. In some ways, an item like a 24-70mm f/2.8 or a 70-200mm f/2.8, that type of lens is in one way a staple, a basic, an essential part of a comprehensive lens kit; for any number of photographic tasks, a staple lens like a 24-70 or 70-200 can often be the go-to lens, or the only lens needed. And in that way, even though right now you're shooting mostly small-aperture landscape stuff, if next week you want to shoot a cocktail reception, or a wedding, or a family reunion, the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens could be a hugely valuable lens!

One part of me says to hold on to lenses like the 24-70 or 70-200 or 300/4, and use them for 15 to 20 years.

Of course, YMMV.