GLSmith Loc: Tampa, Fl

Another excellent source of selling/buying is www.mpb.com I have found in doing business with them is they offer slightly higher financial returns on selling used equipment & I have on occasion been able to get them to drop price a few $$ if called & spoke to a mgr.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Look for an "as new", "mint" or " excellent" used lens and save a packet on the new price. I have purchased several secondhand cameras and lenses from (mainly) two reputable dealers and never looked back.

n4jee Loc: New Bern, NC

I'm 79 years old. With one exception, the only new camera's that I've ever owned were cameras given to me as a child. I have saved thousands of dollars over my life time by buying used. The only cameras that I've bought new were a point and shoot camera that I bought on vacation and cameras for my wife and daughter. I bought used equipment in camera stores and newspaper ads before there was eBay or Craigslist. I bought off Shutterbug when it was mainly a classified ad publication. I have never had a serious problem.
Read the ad. eBay does a pretty good job of protecting buyers from sellers misrepresenting an item. If however their ad says "untested" or condition "used," they are adhering to the idea that if you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all. I have bought used items off eBay from both KEH and Robert's with good results. Robert's seems to under rate it's items. I've bought lenses from Robert's that were rated good, that looked like new to me. If there are conditions that aren't covered in an ad, ask a question to get a specific answer for the record. For example if the seller doesn't state that a lens is fungus free, you ask "Is there any fungus in the lens?" If the seller goes on record as saying "No," and there is, they have misrepresented it and you can request a return. If the vender says "no," you open a case and ebay will step in and force the return. eBay is pretty safe if you are careful. Always check sellers feedback.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I will make it simple for you, I do not have a single lens that I bought new.
Never an issue. Buy from reputable dealers.

KR Pletzer

I second Thomas902’s suggestion. My Nikon D500 and my Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 Micro were refurbished from Nikon. I also bought my Sigma 14mm f/1.8 refurbished from Sigma. All were like new and I’ve been extremely pleased with them.

I did purchase my Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 new, but that was shortly after its release. If I was buying it today, I would definitely buy refurbished. BTW, one of the deciding factors in my selecting the Nikkor over the Sigma Sport or the Tamron was the constant 5.6 aperture throughout the entire zoom range.

Best of luck whichever you decide upon.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

As a Sports photographer, and because I use my gear fairly hard, I buy new bodies and new lenses for anything that I use regularly. I recently bought a Nikon 50/1.4D used because you can no longer buy one new and it will not become a heavily used lens. A couple of years ago I bought a new 400/2.8 E FL to replace my older model and I bought it new as it is one of my most used lenses. I purchased a 200/2 used as it would see less use. Just my method. I have purchased from KEH, B&H and my local dealer, Allen's Camera. YMMV. Best of luck.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

I purchased the Tamron 150-600, the first version when it came out. It is great and the new version is said to be better, but, I don't know how.

cactuspic Loc: Dallas, TX

Since I bought my first camera, a Kodak Retina, for $25 some time in the 60's, at least half of my purchases have been used. That has included everything from a Sinar view camera and lenses for it, several Pentax 67 bodies and lenses, L lenses for my Canon system, obscure macro lenses, and microscope objectives for my photography. I have had to return several items. The only time that I have gotten burned was when I purchased a lens, got into one of those time crunch projects at work, put the lens on a shelf, only to find that it was it was defective after the return period lapsed. My fault clearly.

I have saved thousands of dollars. Sometimes it's a bit more effort to buy used, but it has been worth the effort for me. Just make sure you can return the item if it does not work.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Those who doubt the safety of used gear purchases should research the concept of the "bathtub curve."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve

I would rather have a used lens from a reseller that has a six-month warranty than a new lens with a one year warranty. The original purchaser took the depreciation hit, and the reseller backs up the second owner's purchase. Plus, any increased likelihood of early failure is endured by the original purchaser and any repair or replacement may have been covered under warranty by the importer.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Because the Nikon 200-500 is OEM with your camera and 5.6 instead of 6.3, the AF will be slightly better - especially for fast moving subjects or in lower light - if that matters to you. Otherwise, flip a coin ! If you were on a full frame camera, the extra 100mm of the Tamron might be an influence.
Used from KEH will be OK.

.

redturtle

In 15 years, I've never bought new and have had only 1 problem with 1 lens, and that developed after usiung the lens for 5 or 6 years. I have always physically inspected and tested each camera and lens over the years. I've not bought everything I've looked at, but have bought most. Be careful. If the seller gives you a "bad vibe" or otherwise makes sketchy comments, or if the item is priced "too good to be true", then it's in your best interest to walk away. You may have stumbled onto a gem, but it's unlikely. Best thing you can do is to become familiar with what problems various items have and make sure you check for them. Hair/dust/fungus/etc inside lenses, full (or less than) functioning cameras (bring a couple lenses to test function and IQ), loose connectors, etc should all influence your willing to purchase and/or the negotiated price.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

My preference is buying new and risking the new product failure. But I have also bought used products from Ken (preferred), Adorama, and B&H. I have also tried to buy refurbished from Olympus, but I am always too slow on the buy button (the selling out indicates they are doing a good job of refurbishing). I have had no problems with either new or used when buying from reputable sellers. People like Gene51 and Burkphoto, people that use their new and used equipment all the time, just reinforce my findings. So the finds are that with new, you are the first person to use it and you will pay more money because of that. Used, there is a chance you will find the one "lemon". But if it is from a reputable retailer, you will be able to remedy the situation. Is there a right or wrong? No. Just a preference as to how you spend your money, new or used.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I have lenses from a range of sources...new, used from my camera store, used from individuals (mostly here from UHH sellers). I've not had any problems with any lens purchased in the last 25 years. But a long time ago, I did have two lenses that developed problems...one was a lens for my Mamiya C330 and a 50mm Zuiko f/1.2. Both were purchased from dealers, and both worked perfectly for quite a long while. But...the irises in both lenses eventually seized and froze. In both cases, it turned out that somewhere along the way a previous owner had lubricated the diaphragms improperly, and over time the lubricant first turned gummy, then stuck everything together. The lenses were both unusable until cleaned. (If I had not realized what was happening, it would have been possible to quite literally tear the diaphragms apart.) Not knowing how lenses have been cared for can be a risk.

Having said that, new lens designs are ever more complex. The Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6, in particular, uses a design that replaces the old mechanical diaphragm control with a new electronic system. While there is nothing inherently wrong with this design, it does introduce a new element of complexity into the lens. Any lens with any sort of image stabilization system is significantly more complex than one without. I only have one lens with VR bought used and quite frankly do not completely trust it, because it sometimes does some odd things when the shutter is released, sometimes significantly changing the framing. Fortunately, it is the lens that I use for only the most casual of my photographic activities.

There is always some risk when buying anything...used or new. You just have to decide how much of that risk you re willing to assume adn how much you would rather have someone else share with you.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

I probably bought 35+ used lenses with no problems and considerable savings!

bwa

Ira

I recently replaced my Tamron 160-600 G2 with the Nikon 200-500 f5.6. The stabilization is much better on the Nikon, focus aquisition is a bit slower on the Nikon, but much more accurate. The images on the Nikon are consistantly sharper. I'm much happier with the results I'm getting with the Nikon, many more keepers.
The only thing I miss is that the Tamron had a built in Arca mount on the foot of the collar.
I'd get the Nikon over the Tamron. Nikon has a $140 instant rebate on that lens now.