Price Increases On Used Gear
Jan 3, 2023 14:50:14 #
JD750 wrote:
I’m not arguing. Just sharing My experiences.
All of the lenses I use function fine for me.
I don’t need VR in the lens because the camera body has stabilization on the sensor. It’s a good system, if I try I can shoot 1/15 sec hand held without camera blur.
Re the distortion mentioned by Burt in his excellent reply, if it’s noticeable I try to use it creatively and if that’s not practical, I fix it in post editing.
All of the lenses I use function fine for me.
I don’t need VR in the lens because the camera body has stabilization on the sensor. It’s a good system, if I try I can shoot 1/15 sec hand held without camera blur.
Re the distortion mentioned by Burt in his excellent reply, if it’s noticeable I try to use it creatively and if that’s not practical, I fix it in post editing.
It is not an argument, you just need to be honest that just because it mounts it will fully function.
Millions love having IS and would be very disappointed if they were led to believe that this did not need to be verified as all lenses work just fine.
Jan 3, 2023 14:51:46 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Interesting, I thought the M4/3 was 100% compatible with all such mounts regardless of camera.
Oh well, live and learn.
Oh well, live and learn.
The lenses will mount and work fine, but some of the advanced features of the camera won’t work. Even within Olympus with Pro Capture some of the higher frame rates with focus tracking only works on Pro lenses. With lenses that have OIS it will work on either brand, but you have to turn IBIS off. When I switched to Olympus bodies I sold my Panny/Leica 100-400 and bought the Olympus so that I can use IBIS and OIS together. And I can use TC’s that don’t work with the Panny. I use Olympus Pro lenses most often but I still use some Panasonic primes that work great.
Jan 3, 2023 15:21:51 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
The lenses will mount and work fine, but some of t... (show quote)
Never mind you still do not get it.
Jan 3, 2023 16:44:58 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
larryepage wrote:
I'd suggest that "State-of-the-Art" is a pretty badly distorted, misused, and otherwise abused term in the photographic universe right now.
Agree
Jan 3, 2023 18:03:42 #
billnikon wrote:
He who hesitates is lost. SEE IT, LIKE IT, BUY IT. This was my mother-in-laws motto. You should try it.
Seems like your doing a lot of looking and little buying.
That lens is very heavy and costly to put any filters on. I have always found the 16-35 to be an excellent lens for landscapes, and, I can put filters on it cheaply. I shoot with a polarizer and that would be very expensive to do on the 14-24 as you would need special adapters to add filters.
Seems like your doing a lot of looking and little buying.
That lens is very heavy and costly to put any filters on. I have always found the 16-35 to be an excellent lens for landscapes, and, I can put filters on it cheaply. I shoot with a polarizer and that would be very expensive to do on the 14-24 as you would need special adapters to add filters.
What a colorful, stunning composition 💛💓💛💓💛
Jan 3, 2023 19:03:53 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Never mind you still do not get it.
I totally get it. You don’t. I can put a Panasonic lens on my Olympus and every function of that lens will work flawlessly. The only things that won’t work are additional gear tires go the camera. Features that your precious Canons don’t even have.
Jan 3, 2023 19:26:27 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Fitting and fully functioning are totally different things and unrelated.
Your argument sounds like Nikon users, it fits but does not fully function.
Your argument sounds like Nikon users, it fits but does not fully function.
The minor differences with m4/3 are nearly nothing compared with the mess that Nikon created.
To be fair, Nikon has been working on messing up their mess since about 1975 while m4/3 is only about 10 years old. So its understandable that Nikons mess is as messy as it is.
With Nikon there are lens-body pairings that you simply do not use. M4/3 has no problems even slightly similar to that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Canon deserves kudos for their 1988 EOS mount being 100% glitch-free compatible with the 2021 EOS mount and for their seamless adapter between the EF-mount and new R-mount.
Jan 3, 2023 19:59:52 #
Okay!!
I met up with the seller today, and bought the 14-24 f/2.8 lens. I inspected it closely and couldn't find a single use mark on it. The glass was perfect, and it came with all the papers, cases, and complete box. Although the weather was really nasty, I did go outside, testing the lens in several modes on my D850. The A/F was instantaneous inside the Starbucks, even in the dim light, and the only real distortion, if you want to call it that was some key-stoning when I shot the front of a nearby building from ground level, up to about 25 feet. I uploaded the test shots, and the images are very sharp.
Now, to the seller - Turns out he and I retired from Ford the same day nearly 16 years ago. We didn't know each other but we certainly walked some of the same carpeting. He had nearly 30 years, and I had nearly 40 when we walked out with retirement packages.
For both of us, it was a great deal - I got the lens I wanted, and he got money to reinvest in his business. Win-Win.
I met up with the seller today, and bought the 14-24 f/2.8 lens. I inspected it closely and couldn't find a single use mark on it. The glass was perfect, and it came with all the papers, cases, and complete box. Although the weather was really nasty, I did go outside, testing the lens in several modes on my D850. The A/F was instantaneous inside the Starbucks, even in the dim light, and the only real distortion, if you want to call it that was some key-stoning when I shot the front of a nearby building from ground level, up to about 25 feet. I uploaded the test shots, and the images are very sharp.
Now, to the seller - Turns out he and I retired from Ford the same day nearly 16 years ago. We didn't know each other but we certainly walked some of the same carpeting. He had nearly 30 years, and I had nearly 40 when we walked out with retirement packages.
For both of us, it was a great deal - I got the lens I wanted, and he got money to reinvest in his business. Win-Win.
Jan 3, 2023 20:50:01 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
pendennis wrote:
Okay!! br br I met up with the seller today, and ... (show quote)
That's the best kind of story! Keep us posted on how you like the lens.
Jan 4, 2023 02:21:02 #
dmjjr
Loc: Mesa AZ
Architect1776 wrote:
The 7DII is still a state of the art DSLR just as much as the ancient D500 that is discontinued also.
And has far superior live view and video capabilities to the antiquated D850.
So it is a good choice for one wanting a DSLR that every EF and EF-S lens they get can be seamlessly migrated to the RF mount cameras if they ever want to do so. Unlike the F mount that is not all that compatible with the Z mount.
And has far superior live view and video capabilities to the antiquated D850.
So it is a good choice for one wanting a DSLR that every EF and EF-S lens they get can be seamlessly migrated to the RF mount cameras if they ever want to do so. Unlike the F mount that is not all that compatible with the Z mount.
The D500 might be ancient but still exceeds expectations. Never will sell mine-that’s why the used market still is strong. I don’t play well with EVF’s & don’t have 5K to plunk down for a mirrorless body.
Jan 4, 2023 04:32:49 #
OldSchool-WI
Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919
leftj wrote:
The prices of everything have gone up. It's called inflation.
_____________________________(reply)
Definitely inflation is real and caused by bank money expansion and from my coming of age one can set prices today at ten fold what they were then on average. But near term, fluctuations in camera prices are totally market driven. Although 1960 cameras are not comparable to 2022 digital cameras, in many cases they are relatively cheaper than the 10 fold multiplier.---------------
Jan 4, 2023 06:03:45 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
I totally get it. You don’t. I can put a Panasonic lens on my Olympus and every function of that lens will work flawlessly. The only things that won’t work are additional gear tires go the camera. Features that your precious Canons don’t even have.
Additional FEATURES. Dang autocorrect.
Jan 4, 2023 07:28:07 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Sort of.
But that is the problem.
You need a score card to keep track of all the restrictions of the multiple versions, not just as simple as you state.
I believe since 1959 until the Z mount was introduced Nikon went through 9 different "Mounts". I say 9 mounts because Nikon fanboys kept saying Canon kept changing "Mounts" when they stuck with the same breech mount until the EF mount.
But that is the problem.
You need a score card to keep track of all the restrictions of the multiple versions, not just as simple as you state.
I believe since 1959 until the Z mount was introduced Nikon went through 9 different "Mounts". I say 9 mounts because Nikon fanboys kept saying Canon kept changing "Mounts" when they stuck with the same breech mount until the EF mount.
Where did you get your data from that Nikon had 9 different mounts I only know of the “F” and the “Z” mounts. Just curious.
Jan 4, 2023 07:40:32 #
turp77 wrote:
Where did you get your data from that Nikon had 9 different mounts I only know of the “F” and the “Z” mounts. Just curious.
He meant 9 different variations within the F mount. I don't know if it's 9 or more or less but there are a lot of variations of the F mount.
Jan 4, 2023 08:54:50 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
Strictly speaking, a manufacturer has no more obligation to maintain indefinite compatability among elements of their systems than they do to maintain support and repair services. (Or to continue manufacturing mirror box cameras forever.) Progress often requires a change of approach...many times that change is radical. Telephone companies abandoned mechanical switching systems over 50 years ago. It would be difficult to find a "mechanical office" still in service.
The Nikon lens compatibility "problem" is one of the most ridiculously overblown discussions that arises. The real problem is basically limited to whether the lens has a focus motor or not and whether it has an electronic aperture or not ("P lenses"). (I'm ignoring the decision to get rid of the clunky aperture interface appendage. That was long past due to be eliminated.)
Cameras that face potential "problems" are either very old models or are the least expensive entry or "beginner" models. No reasonable person should expect that these cameras will have all of the capabilities and flexibility of the higher end products. And the changes never produced a situation in which any reasonably needed lens was not available.
So this seems to be an area (perhaps one of several) where there just needs to be some serious "growing up."
The Nikon lens compatibility "problem" is one of the most ridiculously overblown discussions that arises. The real problem is basically limited to whether the lens has a focus motor or not and whether it has an electronic aperture or not ("P lenses"). (I'm ignoring the decision to get rid of the clunky aperture interface appendage. That was long past due to be eliminated.)
Cameras that face potential "problems" are either very old models or are the least expensive entry or "beginner" models. No reasonable person should expect that these cameras will have all of the capabilities and flexibility of the higher end products. And the changes never produced a situation in which any reasonably needed lens was not available.
So this seems to be an area (perhaps one of several) where there just needs to be some serious "growing up."
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.