June 25, 2018, 04:02:49 PM

Author Topic: Nikon vs Canon resale values  (Read 6000 times)

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2018, 01:54:34 AM »

Do the white lenses show wear more easily than Nikon's black lens?


No.  Canon's white lenses are built like tanks.  You don't need to be gentle with them.

really.  Perhaps structurally, but I find that unless I am gentle handling them, I get dinks in the white coating

Yes, that's true, but you get dinks in black coating with metal black lenses too, no? :D


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2018, 01:54:34 AM »

Aglet

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2018, 03:54:17 AM »
I'd agree.  Canon resale value holds up better than it should.
Which is why switching systems is easy.... you'll get most of your $ back when you sell your Canon gear.  ;D

YuengLinger

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1763
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2018, 07:22:46 AM »

Compare and contrast at your leisure:

http://www.nikonpricewatch.com/

https://www.cpricewatch.com/

I believe there are some listings of refurbs and used there.  Certainly they are for Canon, but I haven't mined the Nikon side.  (It's probably there as I believe both sites are run by the same folks.)

- A

Nikon Price Watch is pretty much dead, no updates since 2014.

He doesn't care.  He is just running up his post tally!  And apparently drinking lots of very strong coffee.

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2018, 01:45:08 PM »
I'd agree.  Canon resale value holds up better than it should.
Which is why switching systems is easy.... you'll get most of your $ back when you sell your Canon gear.  ;D

Hahaha.  I love your logic, bud!  Toyota owners should sell their cars and buy Chryslers, coz they'll get an amazing return on their Camry!!!  ;D

YuengLinger

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1763
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2018, 04:57:48 PM »
I'd agree.  Canon resale value holds up better than it should.
Which is why switching systems is easy.... you'll get most of your $ back when you sell your Canon gear.  ;D

Hahaha.  I love your logic, bud!  Toyota owners should sell their cars and buy Chryslers, coz they'll get an amazing return on their Camry!!!  ;D

Camry?  Ha ha ha ha ha ha!  Those are fleet cars.

jhpeterson

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 224
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2018, 05:26:29 PM »
Camry?  Ha ha ha ha ha ha!  Those are fleet cars.
Perhaps those fleets know something.
Mine has been good for over 180,000 miles and all I've replaced is the throttle body, a wheel bearing, one battery and two sets of tires. I still haven't touched the exhaust and brake systems. I should also mention, I've been in two accidents and come away with nothing more than body damage.
I tend to think of it as a four-wheel, rolling version of my 1D series cameras.
1D series bodies (x4), L glass (x9)

RGF

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2599
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #21 on: February 11, 2018, 11:39:20 AM »

Do the white lenses show wear more easily than Nikon's black lens?


No.  Canon's white lenses are built like tanks.  You don't need to be gentle with them.

really.  Perhaps structurally, but I find that unless I am gentle handling them, I get dinks in the white coating

Yes, that's true, but you get dinks in black coating with metal black lenses too, no? :D

I have not seen dinks in my smaller black lenses.  I don't have big black lenses so I can not speak to that.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #21 on: February 11, 2018, 11:39:20 AM »

RGF

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2599
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #22 on: February 11, 2018, 11:41:13 AM »

Compare and contrast at your leisure:

http://www.nikonpricewatch.com/

https://www.cpricewatch.com/

I believe there are some listings of refurbs and used there.  Certainly they are for Canon, but I haven't mined the Nikon side.  (It's probably there as I believe both sites are run by the same folks.)

- A

Nikon Price Watch is pretty much dead, no updates since 2014.

He doesn't care.  He is just running up his post tally!  And apparently drinking lots of very strong coffee.

D850 is listed so much be somewhat up to date

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #23 on: February 11, 2018, 12:12:25 PM »
Yes, that's true, but you get dinks in black coating with metal black lenses too, no? :D

I have not seen dinks in my smaller black lenses.  I don't have big black lenses so I can not speak to that.

I have one or two older (Nikon) black lenses that aren't massive, but in the size range of the 70-200/2.8 that definitely have a couple of dink.  But I mean, whether it's white or black paint, underneath, the metal is silver, so if you score it, it's gonna be silver underneath.

None of my black Canon lenses have chips either, but that's just because they're a lot smaller :)

aceflibble

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #24 on: February 11, 2018, 03:47:45 PM »
Being in contact with a couple of chain stores and several independents—plus, of course, keeping an eye on eBay for any bargain deals—I'd say that here in the UK, Canon and Nikon's second hand markets are roughly equal; which bits of gear hold their value more or less depends on the specific model in question, with a clear divide between lenses and bodies.

For example, the Nikon 35mm sensor SLRs from ~10 years ago or so are holding their value much better than the Canon ones of the same era, especially the 5D2 which can now be bought cheaper than new entry-level APS-C SLRs. I would probably attribute this to the strong sales of the 5D2 in the first place, leading to the market then becoming flooded with them; more people bought them back then, so more people have one to sell now.
Conversely, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II costs nearly as much second hand as it does new (assuming it's in good condition, of course), while the Nikon equivalent of the same age sells for just about 60% of its original value. It's also much easier to find those Canon 70-200s in good condition, while the Nikons do tend to be a bit more worn down, even when described as being in good condition.

Cheaper stuff is more of a mixed bag. Looking at less-pro examples, the Canon 85mm f/1.8 holds its value very well, while the technically-superior-but-less-famous 100mm f/2 doesn't; for Nikon, both their mid-priced 85 and 105 lenses land right in the middle of the two Canons. None of them wear down or are any less or more tough than the others, and in practical, 'real world' terms, they're all optically up to scratch. In these cases it's a matter of raw popularity.

As a general rule, here in the UK, Nikon's pro bodies hold value better, while for lenses, it's Canon which retain value, and the same goes for condition; easy to find Canon L lenses in good condition, easy to find Nikon pro bodies in good condition. This shouldn't be at all surprising to anyone, given that the public perception for years now has been that Nikon have the superior bodies while Canon has the better lens range.

Though for what it's worth, go back 15 years and things were dead even, and go back 25 years and it was the total opposite. In another 5-10 years it'll probably be the opposite again. It's best to not worry too much about gear value in the long-term, and absolutely never think of gear as any kind of "investment". Buy what you need to get the photos you want/need. If the time comes to sell it out and you manage to get a fair chunk of the money back, think of that as a bonus. You could "invest" in the reportedly-toughest lenses and bodies on the planet, but they still won't retain their value if a front element gets smashed, a body falls out a 7th-story window, or it's all stolen. And you never know when the secondhand market will simply bottom-out, too. (That happened to Fuji cameras here very recently; bodies and lenses which had been holding their value very well suddenly dropped to bargain-basement prices and people have been really pissed off that they didn't sell their older Fujis sooner.)

RGF

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2599
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #25 on: February 11, 2018, 10:35:41 PM »
Being in contact with a couple of chain stores and several independents—plus, of course, keeping an eye on eBay for any bargain deals—I'd say that here in the UK, Canon and Nikon's second hand markets are roughly equal; which bits of gear hold their value more or less depends on the specific model in question, with a clear divide between lenses and bodies.

For example, the Nikon 35mm sensor SLRs from ~10 years ago or so are holding their value much better than the Canon ones of the same era, especially the 5D2 which can now be bought cheaper than new entry-level APS-C SLRs. I would probably attribute this to the strong sales of the 5D2 in the first place, leading to the market then becoming flooded with them; more people bought them back then, so more people have one to sell now.
Conversely, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II costs nearly as much second hand as it does new (assuming it's in good condition, of course), while the Nikon equivalent of the same age sells for just about 60% of its original value. It's also much easier to find those Canon 70-200s in good condition, while the Nikons do tend to be a bit more worn down, even when described as being in good condition.

Cheaper stuff is more of a mixed bag. Looking at less-pro examples, the Canon 85mm f/1.8 holds its value very well, while the technically-superior-but-less-famous 100mm f/2 doesn't; for Nikon, both their mid-priced 85 and 105 lenses land right in the middle of the two Canons. None of them wear down or are any less or more tough than the others, and in practical, 'real world' terms, they're all optically up to scratch. In these cases it's a matter of raw popularity.

As a general rule, here in the UK, Nikon's pro bodies hold value better, while for lenses, it's Canon which retain value, and the same goes for condition; easy to find Canon L lenses in good condition, easy to find Nikon pro bodies in good condition. This shouldn't be at all surprising to anyone, given that the public perception for years now has been that Nikon have the superior bodies while Canon has the better lens range.

Though for what it's worth, go back 15 years and things were dead even, and go back 25 years and it was the total opposite. In another 5-10 years it'll probably be the opposite again. It's best to not worry too much about gear value in the long-term, and absolutely never think of gear as any kind of "investment". Buy what you need to get the photos you want/need. If the time comes to sell it out and you manage to get a fair chunk of the money back, think of that as a bonus. You could "invest" in the reportedly-toughest lenses and bodies on the planet, but they still won't retain their value if a front element gets smashed, a body falls out a 7th-story window, or it's all stolen. And you never know when the secondhand market will simply bottom-out, too. (That happened to Fuji cameras here very recently; bodies and lenses which had been holding their value very well suddenly dropped to bargain-basement prices and people have been really pissed off that they didn't sell their older Fujis sooner.)

About 5 years ago I sold my 500 F4 Mark I for the more than I paid for it in 2000.   However by then the price of a new lens had doubled.

Thanks for the detailed reply

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Nikon vs Canon resale values
« Reply #25 on: February 11, 2018, 10:35:41 PM »