Selling 200-400

[privatebydesign]

Will the Sigma 150-600 sports not be good enough for once a year Africa trips for the kind of photos on website?

Now I am nervous and feel like stopping the sale.

Of course it will.

It will mean you don't have the biggest dick in the jeep, but who cares? For once a year use it makes little sense to keep it and the safari images you have posted are not in the same league as many of your people images.

 

[KitsVancouver]

Unless you "need the money", I think you should keep the Canon 200-400. I look at capital budgeting for a good chunk of my real life, so for what it's worth, this is my rational.

The cost of keeping the lens is not $12,000. The cost is the opportunity cost of the $12,000 so unless you need the money for something that will earn you money, the cost of the money is just the interest you would earn by putting the money in some liquid investment. At 3%, that's only $360 per year. You will easily spend that much money in rentals per year.

Your residual value will change little to none at this point because lens depreciation is stepped. Meaning, you take a big hit once you open the box and then it levels off.

I have a 200-400 that I use very little. I use it for eagle photography once a year and for my young kids in field sports. The cost and hassle of renting isn't worth it for me.

So...unless you need that $12K to buy the other lens or you need it to fund some other capital item, it makes no financial sense to sell the lens and rent.

 

[Monchoon]

Unless you "need the money", I think you should keep the Canon 200-400. I look at capital budgeting for a good chunk of my real life, so for what it's worth, this is my rational.

The cost of keeping the lens is not $12,000. The cost is the opportunity cost of the $12,000 so unless you need the money for something that will earn you money, the cost of the money is just the interest you would earn by putting the money in some liquid investment. At 3%, that's only $360 per year. You will easily spend that much money in rentals per year.

Your residual value will change little to none at this point because lens depreciation is stepped. Meaning, you take a big hit once you open the box and then it levels off.

I have a 200-400 that I use very little. I use it for eagle photography once a year and for my young kids in field sports. The cost and hassle of renting isn't worth it for me.

So...unless you need that $12K to buy the other lens or you need it to fund some other capital item, it makes no financial sense to sell the lens and rent.

I am not sure but I think his intention is to replace the 200-400 with the $2k Sigma. So then he would have a similar lens and $10k for other expenditures .

 

[scyrene]

I don´t use the 200-400 enough either. I tend to go for the 600 most of the time, with the 1.4xIII extender (I rarely use the 2xIII). But with the 7DII coming, I believe that will change. If it works well with the 200-400, that will be a very potent combo for the majority of birding and wildlife that I do. With a 320-896mm equivalent focal range, it covers (almost) all the focal lengths I´m getting with the 200-400 and the 600 with the 1.4xIII extender. But it remains to be seen what IQ I will be getting, compared to the 1DX.

That's the sort of comparison I'd love to see.

 

[Dylan777]

Will the Sigma 150-600 sports not be good enough for once a year Africa trips for the kind of photos on website?

Now I am nervous and feel like stopping the sale.

I know the feeling of selling a high quality L lens ???

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23186.0

 

[sdsr]

Will the Sigma 150-600 sports not be good enough for once a year Africa trips for the kind of photos on website?

Now I am nervous and feel like stopping the sale.

You may find this encouraging:

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=417

 

[sagittariansrock]

Two things:
1. I never dispute the quality of the lens. God forbid! But I use it once a year and can't justify it.
2. The 1.4x is a pain to use. One has to wait for the lens to 'cool down' before engaging it or it over exposes. Many times shots are lost or over exposed because of this. I think the ease of having the entire zoom range available without engaging the extender (150-600) would be easier.

I am sure you will love the lens combo with the 7D.

I appreciate your comment much. Am concerned too at times.

I am very curious as to how that can be. As far as I understand, the metering is controlled by the camera, and switching from 1x to 1.4x provides an immediate, real-time input to the camera's sensor to allow it to meter for the next shot. Considering the fact that cameras can adjust metering within fractions of seconds, being unable to expose correctly due to a rapid change in magnification seems quite unlikely.

 

[sanj]

Two things:
1. I never dispute the quality of the lens. God forbid! But I use it once a year and can't justify it.
2. The 1.4x is a pain to use. One has to wait for the lens to 'cool down' before engaging it or it over exposes. Many times shots are lost or over exposed because of this. I think the ease of having the entire zoom range available without engaging the extender (150-600) would be easier.

I am sure you will love the lens combo with the 7D.

I appreciate your comment much. Am concerned too at times.

I am very curious as to how that can be. As far as I understand, the metering is controlled by the camera, and switching from 1x to 1.4x provides an immediate, real-time input to the camera's sensor to allow it to meter for the next shot. Considering the fact that cameras can adjust metering within fractions of seconds, being unable to expose correctly due to a rapid change in magnification seems quite unlikely.

But it happened to me so so many times. Please see the lion photos I have posted in this thread. Am baffled too.

 

[sanj]

Will the Sigma 150-600 sports not be good enough for once a year Africa trips for the kind of photos on website?

Now I am nervous and feel like stopping the sale.

You may find this encouraging:

http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=417

I do not understand the charts so much but I am relieved by most of what I read. Thx…

 

[sanj]

Will the Sigma 150-600 sports not be good enough for once a year Africa trips for the kind of photos on website?

Now I am nervous and feel like stopping the sale.

Why not wait and rent one, or buy one and return it if its not up to expectations.

Unfortunately the 200-400 is not for rent in my country and to get it in Africa becomes very expensive.

 

[FEBS]

I will never sell my 200-400 lens for a Tamron or Sigma 150-600. The Sport version of Sigma seems to give good results. The big difference with the Canon 200-400 is that you need to switch in the extender to get a 280-560. That just seems to give you incorrect exposed photos. I never experienced that during switching in or out. I can understand that this problem is one of the drives to sell this lens. I would contact your dealer for that and try to find out what's going wrong, as I see many here on this forum who have no problem at all with this point.
Weight is not a big difference compared to the 200-400.
Max. aperture is really important for wildlife. I did find out a few weeks ago, that even after 16:00 the iso of the combo 1dx-200-400 dead go up immediately to 6400 and higher. With Sigma/Tamron you do directly start with f5, while the Canon keeps the f4 until 400mm.
Concerning hiring instead of owing such a lens, its quite clear. Look at the rental rates if you need to rent them 2 or 3 weeks a year. Then most economical is buying. See this lens as an investment. The value of the lens will not drop that quick. All the money you pay for renting that lens is really lost.