p.2 #1 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
Look at how expensive the new lenses are becoming. It's probably cheaper for me to keep a lens that I'm happy with but don't use as much than to give myself reason to explore the new lens that would do a similar enough job.
p.2 #2 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
Lenses seem to be moving in two very different directions. On one side, the Sony GM, Canon L, and Nikon S lines keep getting sharper, more advanced, and more expensive. On the other side, there are now many Chinese brands offering surprisingly strong optics at much lower prices. And unlike the DSLR era, when third party lenses were far behind in autofocus and overall quality, that gap is closing quickly.
Unless you truly love a specific lens, it often makes more sense to swap it for something new and interesting. A smaller lens, a lens with unique rendering, or simply something different can keep the hobby feeling fresh.
urbanwild wrote:
Look at how expensive the new lenses are becoming. It's probably cheaper for me to keep a lens that I'm happy with but don't use as much than to give myself reason to explore the new lens that would do a similar enough job.
p.2 #4 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
I find the burden of ownership far outstrips the pleasure of having a variety of stuff I barely use, but might maybe someday use. I own two Nikon film cameras, one a sentimental/collector's piece and one an FE2 that I keep as a "beater." I own an X100V, which has become sentimental in that it has captured mine and my now-wife's entire relationship. When it breaks, it'll be retired to the display cabinet. And I own an R5 II and two VCM primes, and every time I add to that kit I find that A) I don't use whatever I added, and B) I feel gross.
I've made my peace with owning this much stuff, but realistically I could own just the Fuji and be happy. Gear lust and gear accumulation have always brought me more stress than joy.
p.2 #5 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
Lenses seem to be moving in two very different directions. On one side, the Sony GM, Canon L, and Nikon S lines keep getting sharper, more advanced, and more expensive. On the other side, there are now many Chinese brands offering surprisingly strong optics at much lower prices. And unlike the DSLR era, when third party lenses were far behind in autofocus and overall quality, that gap is closing quickly.
Unless you truly love a specific lens, it often makes more sense to swap it for something new and interesting. A smaller lens, a lens with unique rendering, or simply something different can keep the hobby feeling fresh.
I agree for many lenses. But for now, the following lenses are still quite unique and arguably still holding their own and then some:
28mm f1.4E
58mm f1.4g (love-hate lens typically, but it's still unique and special)
105mm f1.4E
200mm f2
The 500mm PF lens still holds its own vs contemporary options.
The holy trinity and a number of Z lenses are clearly a step up however.....I'm cherry picking the above lenses that I see no point in replacing at this point in time.....other than the 50mm f1.2S which is special in its own right, but the 58mm f1.4 remains unique nonetheless.
p.2 #6 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
I'm a hoarder—I mean, collector—so selling lenses doesn't happen. Some of mine that are holding their own include the Nikkor AF-S 28E, 70-200E, Sony STF, Canon TS-E 135/4L, FL-F 300/5.6, nFD 80-200/4L, Leica Summilux 50 v2. So far, I haven't bought the same lens twice, so senility is being held at bay.
p.2 #7 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
It's about joy - at least for those of us who are either not professionals who require a set of working tools - or dedicated amateurs (birders, HS sports shooters, or family documenters).
Some of you seem to get great joy from simply owning and maybe just occasionally using a piece of equipment - really nothing wrong with that. And some of you derive joy from keeping your kit pared down to the minimum - and that works too.
I used to get joy from simply owning and very occasionally using some wonderful photographic tools - a 70-200 that I haven't used in a coupe years, a Voigtlander 50 APO that is just a joy to use but just doesn't see much daylight (or artificial light for that matter). In the past year or so it has just started to seem like joyless 'stuff'. and I've sold a number of pieces. At this point, I really don't miss them.
Being well into retirement (and having dealt with two sets of parents who left mounds of 'stuff' that we and our siblings had to wade through) we are just not willing to do that to our kids. Purging can be cathartic (and dare I say joyful). At this point I'm keeping only those things I actively enjoy using. The rest is offered to the kids (there is real joy in seeing them use things that we found have value), sold if it has good market value and put toward other pleasurable uses.
I have literally dozens of art pieces that I save to donate to auctions / fund raisers. I once found a box of high value cigars in the street (don't smoke, never have) with a value over $250. I posted them on a B&S board for anyone who would donate $100 to a food shelf and found a taker. We once found a thousand dollar art print on the street - the frame was cracked and there was a note with a number. We called the owner and she had moved and no longer had room for it and the frame had cracked when moving it. And she hoped someone would pick it up and enjoy it. We fixed the frame and donated it to a hospice fund raising auction. My point is that you can derive joy in other ways than just holding onto 'stuff'.
My brother told me that when Mahatma Gandi died, his entire worldly possessions fit in a shoebox. I have no idea if that is true, but it seems something worth pondering.
So yeah, I used to enjoy holding onto equipment for years. Now, not so much.
p.2 #8 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
I've kept almost everything I've bought and am not a fan of the selling process so have never wanted to deal with the hassle of trying to sell anything. I've moved to the Z 9 and my wife and kids keep telling me to get rid of stuff so they don't have to deal with my hording when I'm gone.
As I shot local professional and college sports as a second job/hobby, I accumulated all the toys. Now I am finally starting to organize and take pictures of my under used gear and trying to figure out fair resale pricing. Some has been listed on another forum and I'll probably put some on this forum eventually.
Here is a start, I still have accessories, bags, strobes, and miscellaneous stuff I dread going through. Decades deep into photography will do that.
p.2 #9 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
Film equipment doesn't depreciate. Some years it even beats the stock market. I only sell my film gear when I need space in the dry cabinet for another piece.
Digital is disposable and depreciates quickly. I try to buy mostly used here on FM or on my local craigslist. If I don't use it within 6 months it goes back there. This averages out to very little annual cost. The Buy&Sell section is fantastic.
p.2 #10 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
Do you want my 186? Now that my 100-400 is back from Nikon, the 186 isn't seeing much action, although I appreciated having it while the 100-400 was away. Maybe that's why I hang on to both?
p.2 #11 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
I use photo revenue to add something at least annually. I’m at a point where I don’t really need anything new to my kit. I have kept a well stocked DSLR kit and I now have a well stocked mirrorless kit.
I recently donated several decent but lately unused lenses to a friend’s granddaughter who is keen about photography on a students budget. I’ve decided that the remainder of this years revenue is going towards a new gravel bike as opposed to shoehorning a piece of photo gear into my kit that I don’t need.
p.2 #12 · How long do you keep gear you're not using before selling it?
Dave_EP wrote:
Sadly, once you look past the gushing recommendations for the ZR by the YouTubers being sponsored by Nikon, and start looking at the real world specs and capabilities compared to what else is out there, the ZR falls short in very many areas.
No false colour, terrible h.265 implementation poor customisation options, poor focus assist implementation etc, it soon becomes just another video capable mirrorless camera that just happens to shoot Red Raw and have Red on the body (which in reality is all the YouTubes get so enthusiastic about). Given how bad the h.265 is (even compared to the Z6iii) you are pretty much forced in to shooting Red Raw with file sizes that are unrealistic for most projects.
I don't have a ZR but have been following the debate on it.
I think what you're expecting is a video camera that contains the tools you're familiar with from traditional video camera brands. But this is a Nikon and they have their own history and approach to things (and they are not a traditional video camera maker). The ZR does support waveform monitoring which I have found to be a good tool for setting exposure in video; I would be quite startled to look at false color representation of the image without being able to look at the subject in normal color. For me the emotion of the subject and feel of the image are much more important than anything else. Yes, I get it false color can be turned on and off in cameras that support it. But still the waveform can be displayed, gives most of the same information without losing the normal view of the image. Similarly I don't like focus peaking as it overlays on the subject's image and I find it to be distracting. I get it sometimes it is useful, and the ZR can't display it in R3D NE with view assist active. But it can do it in other video codec modes including N-RAW. And other focus assist features exist, such as electronic rangefinder and zooming in to check the focus, and subject detection is available even in manual focus. Is it just the peaking that you find missing?
There are other codecs than R3D NE and h.265, including Prores HQ 422, which gives an intermediate quality option between raw video and h.265, and N-RAW which in normal mode produces about half the size of the raw video compared to R3D NE, and focus peaking should work fine with view assist in those modes.
I am not fully convinced that one would not be able to find ways of working with this camera to suit the project's needs, unless you specifically want highly compressed video in log mode. It seems to me more that people want the camera to work in a way that they are used to working, which is not available, but is a reasonable request. It's then better to choose something from a brand which does provide those options.
