abam wrote: you still have a 300D? wow, mad respect. (did i use that term right?)
I still have my 300D because I didn't end up selling it (I decided to keep it as a backup for my 20D) and after that, it wasn't worth selling, so I've kept it. I still use it every once in a while, and it still produces great photos! It's not my main body, I'm shooting with a 7D now (I've owned many different bodies in between, just take a look at my signature).
I will be listing my 50mm Macro soon. Love the lens, but now I have a 24LII and a C-Y 35-70 that are as sharp (but much more expensive) than the 50CM. I still think, price wise, you can't get sharper than the 50CM for under $1000 from any Canon lens. Its pretty amazing, but no longer need it given my much more expensive choices.
My Olympus 50/1.2.... I don't use it anywhere near as much as I should.
I have been having some issues with my eyes and find AF lenses easier these days. I have been thinking about selling it for a 50/1.4 Canon but just cant bring myself to commit to a sale. Every time I take it out of it's case to photograph it for eBAY, I just look at it's beauty (it really is beautiful piece of glass) and put it back away again.
10D converted for IR... was fun for a while but has been gathering dust.
Maybe I'll give it another chance next summer, it works great even if the image files are small by today's standards.
With the battery grip it's still the best feeling camera in my hands, and I like how silent the shutter is.
EOS20 wrote:
I've only got 2 of the original lenses that I started out with, one is the original 18-55 kit lens that I got with my 300D, and the other is the 50mm f/2.5 Macro. I won't sell the kit lens because it's not really worth anything (I just keep is mounted on my 300D which I still have) and the macro is so sharp! I doubt I would sell this lens (Unless Canon updated the 50 macro with ring USM and 1:1 macro).
They have, in the form of the 60/2.8. BTW, I have it and love it.
kdlanejr wrote:
If I truly thought I'd never again use a lens that I have... and it was worth quite a bit, I'd definitely sell it. That said, I don't buy tools to turn around and sell them. If I did that I wouldn't have any tools for woodworking, auto maintenance, hunting, fishing, lawn care, etc. (I'd have to sell everything off every winter wouldn't I) I don't usually buy a tool unless I need it or know I can afford to hang on to it.
My sentiment pretty much word for word. It's only my 35mm film equipment that I know I'm never going to use again, but those cameras (an Exakta, an AE-1P, and An Elan I) have achieved nostalgic memento status on my desk book shelf.
I sold my F1 cameras years ago (because they still fetched a good price), and I'm sad about that. I may buy one again just to put on my shelf. I'll probably get around to picking up a Yashica A, a Yashica 124G, a Mamiya C330, and a Topcon Super D--also cameras I've owned in the past and then sold--just to complete the collection.
harrygilbert wrote:
I have a whole collection of Minolta MD lenses (from 21mm to 300mm), bought new, that I no longer use (along with two like-new X-700s and an XD). But, when I consider selling, I'm offered $15 for a lens and $25 for a camera, but if I wanted to buy, they're listed for a LOT more. So, I dutifully keep the batteries fresh and hang on to them. When I die, I'll donate them.
Why keep them? Just now I'm scanning in over 6,000 slides and an equal number of negatives taken over many years with the above kit. They were (and are) fine gear.
Digital - I use every lens I have bought, from 15mm to 500mm....Show more →
Harry, PM me with a list of MD lenses you'd like to sell and the prices you want--I have a terrible weakness for them.
As far as lenses I don't want to get rid of, one is a Minolta lens, a Rokkor-X PG 50mm f/1.4 that rides on my Minolta XE-7. It's insanely sharp and is one of my all-time favorites.
For me, it would be my 70-200/4 IS. While I bought it gently used, it's still a lot of money to have tied up in one lens, but if I sold it to downgrade to a less expensive lens in the same range, I have a feeling I would really regret it. I currently have a 40D, but would eventually like to upgrade to FF, so I keep telling myself that I'll use it more once I get the FF body, with the elimination of the crop factor. While I love my 24-105 that gets used almost all of the time, the 70-200/4 IS just has that WOW factor.
I'm the opposite.. I've owned a 70-200 2.8 IS three different times.. if I'm not using it, I sell it to try something new (been through most of Canons line up at one point or another.. bought a 200 f/1.8 for a little while even though I really had no use for it!)
heatherwb wrote:
For me, it would be my 70-200/4 IS. While I bought it gently used, it's still a lot of money to have tied up in one lens, but if I sold it to downgrade to a less expensive lens in the same range, I have a feeling I would really regret it. I currently have a 40D, but would eventually like to upgrade to FF, so I keep telling myself that I'll use it more once I get the FF body, with the elimination of the crop factor. While I love my 24-105 that gets used almost all of the time, the 70-200/4 IS just has that WOW factor.
Whaler wrote:
Me? It's a 1.4 TC MKII. Bought it, used it a couple of times and it sits in the bag. Ms Heather, your 70-200 f/4 IS will come alive on a FF. Trust me.
Such a truth, I loved my 24-105L on my 30D, and I got my 5D, and the images just looked "right". My 80-200L on the 5D is amazing as well. I Picked up a 40D a few weeks ago, and though I love the 40D, my 5D is reached for nearly 3 1/2:1.
My Fuji G690 and lenses. I have not used it since I ran out of Kodak HIE 220 rolls.
I also have a Mamiya 645 1000s and fisheye lens on a book shelf, og, and a 4x5 system in a case in the garage
AaronNegro wrote:
Which lens you never use but never going to sell it?
Currently, it seems to be my second copy of the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro. I haven't used it in a while, but when I sold my first copy, I had severe remorse and immediately got a new one. Hopefully, once the winter goes away and spring hits, I'll find use for it.
I have a silver EOS 300 with the matching 28-90 kit lens. The only reason I keep them is because it was the first camera I bought with my own money and, besides, selling them would get me about £20. So for the last 4 years and up until two days ago they made a nice decoration piece next to the travel guides in the library.
But what a good thing it was that I kept them! I just bought an EOS 3 and if I didn't have the 28-90 I would have no lens to play with till the 28/1.8 arrives in the mail, hopefully tomorrow! And with a few bricks of film arriving in the next few days, who knows, the 300 might get a film or two put through.
PetKal wrote:
A few years ago I thought my "like new" 300 f/2.8 IS wasn't used enough so I sold it. All in all, I must have lost about $1,000 in that transaction, when one takes into consideration that the lens was bought new and the taxes I had to pay on it.
Within less than 6 months I've realised that the lens is missed for those special low light occasions, so I bought another brand new one.
That kinda reinforced my position not to sell any stuff even if not used that often, unless there is a clear cut case of needless redundancy or some sorta neccessity. ...Show more →
Even redundancy can be great! I owned 3 versions of the 70-200, 3 85L's along with a f1.8 version, a few 50's (f/1.2, f/1.4, f/2.5) (not to mention the boatload of 50's in FD mount), and i had a few lenses that would cover the 300mm FL, but I still have a 300 2.8 IS sitting here.
I've since come to my senses (well, sort of) and lightened the load a little, but I still have several overlaps/redundancies that I can't part with for some reason
