Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2013 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?
  
 
kylehess10
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


I notice on eBay and other selling formats like FM that people brag about a lens "being used by a pro" while others list as "not professionally used".

If a lens is professionally used, then that tells me it was used heavily, but well taken care of.

If a lens is used by a hobbyist, then to me that says it saw lesser use, and may or may not have been well taken care of.


So this leads me to ask others, which would you prefer? Does knowing a lens was used by a professional make it more appealing for you to buy? Or could you care less and just worry about the current condition of the lens?



Feb 22, 2013 at 06:24 AM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


Makes no difference to me. The condition and price are of highest importance.

P.S. I couldn't care less. If I could care less, then I would.



Feb 22, 2013 at 11:54 AM
sandycrane
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


Pro = lots of clicks.


Feb 22, 2013 at 02:02 PM
peter_n
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


The OP is asking about lenses, not bodies.

I have no preference for pro/amateur, but what I do care about is the glass and mechanical condition (I only use manual focus lenses) and what I don't care about is the cosmetics of the lens.

The worst looking lens I've bought was seven years ago, a 24mm/f2.8. Bought from a Kodak executive, it was only two or three years old but looked like it had been through several wars. However the glass and mechanics were perfect and they still are. I love the lens and will never sell it.




Feb 22, 2013 at 02:21 PM
BenV
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


I'd rather buy from a non-pro, simply because to pros, the camera gear is just a tool. Tools get used, and hard sometimes.


Feb 22, 2013 at 02:47 PM
ocir
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


sandycrane wrote:
Pro = lots of clicks.



This is a myth!

There are tons of hobbyist out there that have shot at least the same amount if not more than the pros.



Feb 22, 2013 at 03:34 PM
ocir
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


BenV wrote:
I'd rather buy from a non-pro, simply because to pros, the camera gear is just a tool. Tools get used, and hard sometimes.



This is a myth too!

Pro lenses are extremely expensive and a lot of Pro's do really take good care of their stuff like it's their own child.



Feb 22, 2013 at 03:38 PM
ocir
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


jcolwell wrote:
Makes no difference to me. The condition and price are of highest importance.

P.S. I couldn't care less. If I could care less, then I would.



Agree! Fully inspect it from appearance to performance. Return it if it doesn't satisfy you.



Feb 22, 2013 at 03:39 PM
binary visions
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


ocir wrote:
This is a myth too!

Pro lenses are extremely expensive and a lot of Pro's do really take good care of their stuff like it's their own child.


It's not a myth. He didn't say all tools get used hard all the time. He said, and it's totally valid, that a pro is more likely to have put their tools through a hard life. This is not any different from any other field.

By and large, a pro uses his tools more often than the casual users. It doesn't mean that a hobbyist can't use it just as much. It doesn't mean that a pro can't rabidly care for his/her equipment. It doesn't mean that a hobbyist can't treat it like garbage. It's just that a pro is making their living with their gear, and that will often result in more or harder use.



Feb 22, 2013 at 03:55 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



ocir
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


binary visions wrote:
It's not a myth. He didn't say all tools get used hard all the time. He said, and it's totally valid, that a pro is more likely to have put their tools through a hard life. This is not any different from any other field.

By and large, a pro uses his tools more often than the casual users. It doesn't mean that a hobbyist can't use it just as much. It doesn't mean that a pro can't rabidly care for his/her equipment. It doesn't mean that a hobbyist can't treat it like garbage. It's just that a pro is
...Show more

My early days as a hobbyist, I couldn't leave my house without my camera. I take it from mountain biking, to skiing to rock climbing...just about any physical activities..you get the point and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I recall my first DSLR was a D90 with 17-55 2.8 lens and I have amassed to almost 40,000 shots in just one year. Now, I know a lot of Pros that protect their investments and probably would be less hesitant to take their gears to any physical activities so I still believe the statement that Pro's use their equipments harder and often is a myth. Also, just because somebody is a Pro, it doesn't mean he shoots often, it could just be a part time gig and labeled himself as a pro.



Feb 22, 2013 at 04:20 PM
Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


ocir wrote:
My early days as a hobbyist, I couldn't leave my house without my camera. I take it from mountain biking, to skiing to rock climbing...just about any physical activities..you get the point and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I recall my first DSLR was a D90 with 17-55 2.8 lens and I have amassed to almost 40,000 shots in just one year. Now, I know a lot of Pros that protect their investments and probably would be less hesitant to take their gears to any physical activities so I still believe the statement that Pro's use their equipments
...Show more

Most people have to work And then they can leave the house without the camera. Those 8 hours or more most people can't put any clicks on their cameras. Except the Pro of course



Feb 22, 2013 at 05:09 PM
M635_Guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


I don't think you can correlate condition by pro vs. non-pro.

Mainly I want to buy my stuff from a meticulous person.



Feb 22, 2013 at 09:23 PM
mpmendenhall
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


I suspect that camera/lens usage patterns vary immensely between different photography professions --- are they shooting between ducking shrapnel in a war zone? grinding through 5,000 school yearbook photos a day? wading through brackish swamps? posing celebrities in a studio? --- so "professional" alone will tell you very little about what kind of wear and tear the gear gets.


Feb 22, 2013 at 09:53 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


In general, pros probably use gear harder. Probably rather buy from an amateur. But Id probably look at the gear because of exceptions.


Feb 25, 2013 at 10:43 PM
justruss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


Professional photographers-- if we can generalize, as a rule; and it's true-- don't baby their gear.

They are not emotionally attached. They don't get paid more for ding-free, perfectly-painted lenses. They shoot a lot. It doesn't matter whether you're chasing wars in a desert, lingerie shots in a perfumed studio playing soft music, or setting up full location-based, light controlled, AD/Makeup-prepped commercial shots.

Maybe some of the lower level, semi-pro (AKA not their main source of living/just getting started/dabbling in charging) baby their stuff. And perhaps a few really active top level pros are careful (sure, there's variation).

Personally, I don't give a rats ass about how pretty the gear is-- only what it produces. But then my gear is a way for me to eat; yes, shooting is a passion, and I'm a sucker for technical minutia, but I care about my images not my cameras. That said, I've rarely seen much correlation between how a lens/camera looks (chips, rub-marks, etc) and how long it will last or how well it will work. Obviously anything with moving parts is that much closer to death after every X shots... but in the real world almost none of us run into those issues.




Feb 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM
Javier Munoz
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


People tend to think that a pro wouldnt use a sub-standard copy of a lens which it is why I think the person in ebay said what he said.

Not that I agree though



Feb 26, 2013 at 05:19 PM
justruss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Buying from a pro/non pro: Which would you rather?


Javier Munoz wrote:
People tend to think that a pro wouldnt use a sub-standard copy of a lens which it is why I think the person in ebay said what he said.

Not that I agree though


+1

When in fact I'd wager that most pros care LESS about copy variation than most amateurs, particularly amateurs or weekend pros on a camera forum.

Unless a lens/camera is so out of whack that it can't produce an acceptable image (very unlikely), the difference between measured sharpness wide open using some kind of bench hardware or charts is a quarter of a drop in the the bucket compared to the HUGE differences in image quality a skilled shooter induces via controlling light, composition, color-- particularly when stopped down (which is where the vast, vast majority of paid work happens, specially at higher levels of professional photography).

I like to think of a commercial shooter I assisted back in the day. Someone who shot primarily with MFDB on big campaigns... the kind of jobs that can pay for you equipment in a single shoot. He also sometimes shot with a Canon FF DSLR w/ the non-L primes (24, 28mm, 85mm). He paid attention to the overall rendering style of those canon primes, but didn't even think about copy variation, or differences in sharpness between the lenses. He thought in focal length and use. And he didn't baby that gear.



Feb 27, 2013 at 07:36 AM





FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password