Why rent lenses?

[bullock1692]

Entertain the thought for a minute...why do people use rental companies for lenses (or any camera equipment for that matter) instead of buying/returning lenses? I'm not advocating the buy/return habit, I'm only posing the question.

Consider the Sigma 15mm 2.8 fisheye; I can rent it for four days with shipping at $57, whereas I could purchase it new and use it for 30 days at no cost (maybe $5 return shipping). Some people also rent camera bodies before purchasing, but why not simply purchase the camera, try it out, and return it if you're not happy?

I understand the same principle is often manipulated for clothing...buy a shirt for a night out, don't sweat in it, return it next week; but camera equipment holds up to minor use better than clothing. Is it out of respect to retailers?

 

[SnappingShark]

Some people KNOW they only need it for x amount of days.

Some people can't afford to buy a $2000 lens if their bank account balance is at $450

 

[Derrel]

Some people have what are called "ethics". They feel the need to do what "is right, just, and proper". SO...when they need a tool for a short-term use situation, they rent it, and thus they pay for their use, and also gain the benefits of insured shipping, and insurance on the equipment in case of damage, loss,theft,breakage, and so on. As for the buy-it-and-use-it-in-lieu-of-a-rental crowd, there are those types of people in the world, who will use other peoples' businesses for their own profit. We call them low-lifes out here on the west coast. There might well be a different name for them in your region.

 

[vimwiz]

Entertain the thought for a minute...why do people use rental companies for lenses (or any camera equipment for that matter) instead of buying/returning lenses? I'm not advocating the buy/return habit, I'm only posing the question.

Because they wont let you?
Surely a company wouldnt have a no-quibble policy on such things, and unless its faulty or not as descrived, they cant be under any obligation to accept returns (Excluding distance selling regs)
In fact, if you were using it for business reasons, you wouldnt even have those consumer protections
So I guess its not an issue, im sure they would cotton onto what you were doing and refuse your return of your £££ lens when they got fed up

 

[ratssass]

some people have moral values.when you pirate a product (and i see no difference,here),it drives the cost up for everyone.

 

[Tailgunner]

Hum…maybe people lack sufficient funds for the initial purchase? I mean a lens could run $500-5,000 or more.

 

[robbins.photo]

Entertain the thought for a minute...why do people use rental companies for lenses (or any camera equipment for that matter) instead of buying/returning lenses? I'm not advocating the buy/return habit, I'm only posing the question.

Consider the Sigma 15mm 2.8 fisheye; I can rent it for four days with shipping at $57, whereas I could purchase it new and use it for 30 days at no cost (maybe $5 return shipping). Some people also rent camera bodies before purchasing, but why not simply purchase the camera, try it out, and return it if you're not happy?

I understand the same principle is often manipulated for clothing...buy a shirt for a night out, don't sweat in it, return it next week; but camera equipment holds up to minor use better than clothing. Is it out of respect to retailers?

I dunno, integrity maybe? If I buy a lens new and return it then the company that it was returned to takes a big loss - thanks to my dishonesty. They can no longer sell it as new and the lens has lost a ton of value right there. But of course in the end I'm adding to their expenses, which means they have to charge more for other goods and services, so that drives up prices for everybody.

 

[bullock1692]

Some people have what are called "ethics". They feel the need to do what "is right, just, and proper". SO...when they need a tool for a short-term use situation, they rent it, and thus they pay for their use, and also gain the benefits of insured shipping, and insurance on the equipment in case of damage, loss,theft,breakage, and so on. As for the buy-it-and-use-it-in-lieu-of-a-rental crowd, there are those types of people in the world, who will use other peoples' businesses for their own profit. We call them low-lifes out here on the west coast. There might well be a different name for them in your region.

The low-lives...yes, they are referred to by that name in my region as well. Again, I'm not advocating the practice; only trying to pinpoint what it is that causes people to rent lenses. It seems that you credit it to a moral/ethical code.

some people have moral values.when you pirate a product (and i see no difference,here),it drives the cost up for everyone.

Price-inflation, yes.

Hum…maybe people lack sufficient funds for the initial purchase? I mean a lens could run $500-5,000 or more.

Very true. It seems more practical for more expensive lenses.

 

[sm4him]

I can't answer for anyone but myself, but I rent for two major reasons:

1) As Bright said, I can't afford to plunk down $1500-2000 up front for some of the lenses I've rented. Sure, you'd have it for a longer time for less money in the end, but you gotta be able to front the entire price of the lens, AND be able to do without that money for up to a month.

and even more important:
2) For me, it would just be Wrong. Yes, just like "buying" clothes for a night out then returning them. Sure, a lens might hold up to minor use better, but it's the same principle. If I'm buying a new shirt, I don't want one that someone has already sweated in. If I'm buying a new lens, I don't want one that someone--possibly MANY someones--has "rented" for free by buying and returning. And really, unless the seller is also a bit unprincipled, the item could no longer legitimately be sold as "brand new," so the more this happens, the more money the company loses. The more money the company loses, the more likely it is that they're going to up prices, meaning WE end up being the ones to pay for those losses.
And *I* quite frankly don't want to be the one who ends up paying for OTHERS to get "free" rental lenses.

 

[ratssass]

when i rent,it's usually because i'm not sure if its the lens for me.if i purchase the rented lens within a month,they will apply my rental fee towards purchase.actually,i rent locally,and they've extended that to 6 weeks for me once.I rented the Sigma 200-500 this past Oct.,for a week.They messed up and charged for 1 day.$33.00 w/insurance.I told them of the mistake,and they said,that's fine,don't worry about it.One more reason I prefer a local "brick/mortar" store.

 

[ronlane]

I don't think you would be saving that much money doing what you suggest. I know that some companies have a re-stocking fee if you return something, so that would cost you more than the $5 you mention.

I agree with others that it's just not the right thing to do.

 

[amolitor]

If you buy a lens intended to return it in 30 days, you run a number of risks. You might forget to return it. It might get lost in the mail. You might accidentally damage the lens. You might have misunderstood the return policy.

At this point you might be stuck with quite an expensive mistake.

It's also possible, even likely, that you'll pay a restocking fee that's buried in the fine print, which renders this "rental" option a lot less cheaper.

Finally, you probably cannot do it that often. A one time thing, sure, no problem. Try it out 10 times. If one of the problems above doesn't nail you, there's a good chance the store is going to be on to, and will invoke some fine print that you didn't notice, or will simply hit the lens with a sledgehammer when it comes back in and blame you for it, and then you're in a world of hurt.

Also, that ethics thing.

 

[manicmike]

I have a habit of buying a lens, using it for a few months and then reselling it. I need to just get a setup and stick with it.

 

[Overread]

Also don't forget many shops will share information with each other - especially in a fairly niche market like high end photographic equipment sales. You could quite quickly suddenly find yourself on a black-list where most traders would start refusing your custom because of your past frequency of returning goods. (and in this day and age of the internet you could find that the blacklist net could be pretty big).


I recall a while back when someone posted a photo of a box with some rubbish and a brick inside on Photography on the Net forums. Claiming that one of the major rental companies had taken his money and shipped him rubbish instead of the agreed upon lens. It didn't take long for the rental company to compare notes on that customer with other rental companies to find that the person had done the same trick a few years past to another reputable rental company. Needless to say the online smear campaign and attempt to get a free lens or two backfired on that person.



In the end most people are fairly honest and they want to support the companies and industry that they enjoy the products of. You tend to get a handful (amid a lot of people who mouth off about it in open but who don't actually do it) who will target "BIG COMPANIES" in such a way because for some reason being successful is a bad thing; but they are a minority and should remain so and not be encouraged.

 

[nmoody]

I try not to take advantage of convenience systems like that as it will eventually raise the cost in one way or another for everyone else. Very selfish.

If its something I would only use once a year for a few days renting make sense. Still have yet to purchase a dedicated macro lens or fisheye because I wouldn't use them enough.

Also if I am about to drop over $1k on a lens I want to be damn sure I like before wasting that much. So renting it first is well worth the money.