Sony lenses are so $$$$ and nothing beats the resale value of EF
Canon official announces the EOS R, what are your thoughts? Are you buying one?
- Last Updated:
- Nov 9th, 2018 3:09 pm
Tags:
- SCORE0
- DustyPug
- Deal Addict
- Aug 1, 2010
- 1588 posts
- 1599 upvotes
- Montreal
- rebel_rfd
- Deal Fanatic
- Aug 4, 2008
- 5752 posts
- 2585 upvotes
- Toronto
Maybe, if resale value of the lenses are under 2K.
It took me three months to move a Canon 16-35 f/2.8 Mark 3. Barely used and came with Canon accidental coverage. I priced it fairly, and finally got a guy that bought it for his video production company that uses C200s.
Sony lenses cost more but they are better than Canon versions.
The 16-35 GM is lighter and sharper than the Canon 16-35 Mark 3 f/2.8.
The 24-70 GM is on par/slightly better than the Canon 24-70 Mark 2.
The 70-200 GM is sharper than the Canon 70-200 Mark 2, what was updated to the Mark 3, with the same internals. And the Mark 3 still doesn't allow you to just slip the tripod foot off the ring like Sony does with their lenses.
And let's not forget the very useful focus hold button on each of the G and GM lenses that can be remapped.
The only thing Canon has going for it are their rebates on their lenses but that program isn't offered in Canada and the US offers now require two or more lens purchase to qualify for a rebate.
- malaujai
- Deal Addict
- Jul 2, 2007
- 2005 posts
- 691 upvotes
- GTA
I'm actually a hobbyist but have been for a while and never really hopped onto the mirrorless train with tunnel vision for DSLRs... I've got a a few L primes that I would prospectively consolidate down to maybe 2-3 Zeiss lenses I suppose?
The current plan in my head is to get the A7III and metabones adapter and then see if I can ween myself off the 5D3 that I shoot with normally. I have a feeling the A7III + MB may still perform better generally speaking than a 5D3...
- DustyPug
- Deal Addict
- Aug 1, 2010
- 1588 posts
- 1599 upvotes
- Montreal
You must be unlucky, never had trouble selling used EF lenses, even when some of them were abused lolrebel_rfd wrote: ↑ Maybe, if resale value of the lenses are under 2K.
It took me three months to move a Canon 16-35 f/2.8 Mark 3. Barely used and came with Canon accidental coverage. I priced it fairly, and finally got a guy that bought it for his video production company that uses C200s.
Sony lenses cost more but they are better than Canon versions.
The 16-35 GM is lighter and sharper than the Canon 16-35 Mark 3 f/2.8.
The 24-70 GM is on par/slightly better than the Canon 24-70 Mark 2.
The 70-200 GM is sharper than the Canon 70-200 Mark 2, what was updated to the Mark 3, with the same internals. And the Mark 3 still doesn't allow you to just slip the tripod foot off the ring like Sony does with their lenses.
And let's not forget the very useful focus hold button on each of the G and GM lenses that can be remapped.
The only thing Canon has going for it are their rebates on their lenses but that program isn't offered in Canada and the US offers now require two or more lens purchase to qualify for a rebate.
- rebel_rfd
- Deal Fanatic
- Aug 4, 2008
- 5752 posts
- 2585 upvotes
- Toronto
It's not about luck.
I've easily sold EF and EFS lenses that were under 2K. Once you start listing lenses that sit above that bracket, you aren't going to get a lot of offers at your price, well, a lot of lowballers. Unless it's niche like tilt-shift or super telephoto it's not going to sell locally right away.
Most people aren't going to pay up for the 16-35 Mark 3 when the 16-35 Mark 2 is still available. But the Mark 3 improved on the Mark 2 by quite a bit; it didn't have an extending barrel and used the larger 82mm the 24-70 Mark 2 uses.
This is based on Kijiji and RFD.
It's easier to sell lenses using other sites for the price you want, but it takes more time and effort.
The allure to Canon is that they make great lenses but also affordable lenses, so it's a very saturated used market with deals for buyers.
- rebel_rfd
- Deal Fanatic
- Aug 4, 2008
- 5752 posts
- 2585 upvotes
- Toronto
That combo will excel the 5D3 but it will also be heavier than a traditional Sony + native lens (Sony, Zeiss).malaujai wrote: ↑ I'm actually a hobbyist but have been for a while and never really hopped onto the mirrorless train with tunnel vision for DSLRs... I've got a a few L primes that I would prospectively consolidate down to maybe 2-3 Zeiss lenses I suppose?
The current plan in my head is to get the A7III and metabones adapter and then see if I can ween myself off the 5D3 that I shoot with normally. I have a feeling the A7III + MB may still perform better generally speaking than a 5D3...
Not sure what Canon is smoking with the EOS R line. The bodies are lighter but larger than Sony and the R lenses are even heavier.
- malaujai
- Deal Addict
- Jul 2, 2007
- 2005 posts
- 691 upvotes
- GTA
95mm filter thread...
- rebel_rfd
- Deal Fanatic
- Aug 4, 2008
- 5752 posts
- 2585 upvotes
- Toronto
- AncasterRFD
- Deal Expert
- Jun 15, 2012
- 15662 posts
- 10440 upvotes
- Southern Ontario
No trouble selling EF lenses, got rid of a bunch last couple of years, just have to be patient refreshing the ad. Always sold near what I bought, little loss, or profit as I bought almost all used to begin with. What I have left are 16-35 f/2.8II, 50 f/1.2, and 70-200 f/2.8II. One more summer wedding this Saturday, might be interested in the new EOS R body and 28-70 f/2. Sticking with Canon here for familiarity and muscle memory, I don't bird/sport. That said, new gear won't improve my images anyway.
- twitchyzero
- Deal Addict
- Sep 26, 2007
- 4156 posts
- 522 upvotes
better grip?
remember most Sony mirrorless until 2015 had very shallow grips, making it difficult to handle with a medium/large lens.
- DustyPug
- Deal Addict
- Aug 1, 2010
- 1588 posts
- 1599 upvotes
- Montreal
You can really compare the size of the lens, both the 50mm and the 28-70mm have larger apertures, they will be bigger for sure. The 24-105mms are very similar in size.rebel_rfd wrote: ↑ That combo will excel the 5D3 but it will also be heavier than a traditional Sony + native lens (Sony, Zeiss).
Not sure what Canon is smoking with the EOS R line. The bodies are lighter but larger than Sony and the R lenses are even heavier.
50mmS-C.jpg
zoommm-2-S-C.jpg
zoommmS-C.jpg
- DFS 360
- Deal Addict
- Dec 29, 2006
- 2748 posts
- 942 upvotes
- DustyPug
- Deal Addict
- Aug 1, 2010
- 1588 posts
- 1599 upvotes
- Montreal
Tempted by it but really really really really hate that touch bar. I tried it and I much prefer having a nipple.
- andy28
- Member
- Jul 12, 2010
- 498 posts
- 89 upvotes
I think the EOS-R is a interest offering. I think the price point is alright - reasonable for a canon - obv not better value than a A7III cuz of the features. But atleast its not crazy like Nikon mirrorless, those are crappy non pro bodies at D850 pricing where ppl would just buy D850 still.
Still has all the Canon defects like bad video , but atleast better compression format ... Rofl. The stupid smart bar is a total failure though. But the redeeming factor is that Canon lens line up for this new system is PRO TIER ... LIKE a ZOOM F2 .. unheard of ... GAME CHANGING .. sharpest 50 1.2. GRip is better than Sony. balance is probably better lens to body ratio even though the lens is HUGE. Focus is better on SONY atm still.
Not sure why ppl care about Mirrorless weight. You can't notice a weight savings between a DSLR and mirrorless with PRO lens on it. I actually find Sony heavier over time when carrying it since the balance is all off compared to DSLR.
Sure Nikon mirrorless has pretty much all the features they can throw at it in video but it still an entry lvl camera with crappy lenses and no reason for nikon shooters to jump to mirrorless.
Overall I;m super surprised all the youtubers put Canon EOS-R as last place. I feel like there is very exciting future proof system. sure its not PRO lvl system with 1 sd slot...but maybe they will release a PRO model with the adjustments. But they really need to change sensor and fix cropped 4k ...
I don't regret getting an A7III, but if they had eOS-r released at the same time earlier this year I probably would have gotten the Eos-R just cause I'm in the canon eco-system.
Major growing pains were probably the EVF being so trash... people needed to stress it more for the a7iii... I probably should have have gotten the A7Riii as I'm not confident at all with the EVF. The ego / grip is quite bad even though I have small hands I tend to hold it with 2 to 3 fingers at a time probably need a battery grip, it doesn't sit right with pro lens and flash on it. I wish there was DSLR sized Mirrorless cameras, I don't care about space savings it's just the same hassle to travel with.
Still has all the Canon defects like bad video , but atleast better compression format ... Rofl. The stupid smart bar is a total failure though. But the redeeming factor is that Canon lens line up for this new system is PRO TIER ... LIKE a ZOOM F2 .. unheard of ... GAME CHANGING .. sharpest 50 1.2. GRip is better than Sony. balance is probably better lens to body ratio even though the lens is HUGE. Focus is better on SONY atm still.
Not sure why ppl care about Mirrorless weight. You can't notice a weight savings between a DSLR and mirrorless with PRO lens on it. I actually find Sony heavier over time when carrying it since the balance is all off compared to DSLR.
Sure Nikon mirrorless has pretty much all the features they can throw at it in video but it still an entry lvl camera with crappy lenses and no reason for nikon shooters to jump to mirrorless.
Overall I;m super surprised all the youtubers put Canon EOS-R as last place. I feel like there is very exciting future proof system. sure its not PRO lvl system with 1 sd slot...but maybe they will release a PRO model with the adjustments. But they really need to change sensor and fix cropped 4k ...
I don't regret getting an A7III, but if they had eOS-r released at the same time earlier this year I probably would have gotten the Eos-R just cause I'm in the canon eco-system.
Major growing pains were probably the EVF being so trash... people needed to stress it more for the a7iii... I probably should have have gotten the A7Riii as I'm not confident at all with the EVF. The ego / grip is quite bad even though I have small hands I tend to hold it with 2 to 3 fingers at a time probably need a battery grip, it doesn't sit right with pro lens and flash on it. I wish there was DSLR sized Mirrorless cameras, I don't care about space savings it's just the same hassle to travel with.
- AncasterRFD
- Deal Expert
- Jun 15, 2012
- 15662 posts
- 10440 upvotes
- Southern Ontario
Very fair and good evaluationandy28 wrote: ↑ I think the EOS-R is a interest offering. I think the price point is alright - reasonable for a canon - obv not better value than a A7III cuz of the features. But atleast its not crazy like Nikon mirrorless, those are crappy non pro bodies at D850 pricing where ppl would just buy D850 still.
Still has all the Canon defects like bad video , but atleast better compression format ... Rofl. The stupid smart bar is a total failure though. But the redeeming factor is that Canon lens line up for this new system is PRO TIER ... LIKE a ZOOM F2 .. unheard of ... GAME CHANGING .. sharpest 50 1.2. GRip is better than Sony. balance is probably better lens to body ratio even though the lens is HUGE. Focus is better on SONY atm still.
Not sure why ppl care about Mirrorless weight. You can't notice a weight savings between a DSLR and mirrorless with PRO lens on it. I actually find Sony heavier over time when carrying it since the balance is all off compared to DSLR.
Sure Nikon mirrorless has pretty much all the features they can throw at it in video but it still an entry lvl camera with crappy lenses and no reason for nikon shooters to jump to mirrorless.
Overall I;m super surprised all the youtubers put Canon EOS-R as last place. I feel like there is very exciting future proof system. sure its not PRO lvl system with 1 sd slot...but maybe they will release a PRO model with the adjustments. But they really need to change sensor and fix cropped 4k ...
I don't regret getting an A7III, but if they had eOS-r released at the same time earlier this year I probably would have gotten the Eos-R just cause I'm in the canon eco-system.
Major growing pains were probably the EVF being so trash... people needed to stress it more for the a7iii... I probably should have have gotten the A7Riii as I'm not confident at all with the EVF. The ego / grip is quite bad even though I have small hands I tend to hold it with 2 to 3 fingers at a time probably need a battery grip, it doesn't sit right with pro lens and flash on it. I wish there was DSLR sized Mirrorless cameras, I don't care about space savings it's just the same hassle to travel with.
- twitchyzero
- Deal Addict
- Sep 26, 2007
- 4156 posts
- 522 upvotes
a7iii is not a pro body, it's their mainstream offering into full-frame
a9 series is where your criticisms would be more appropriate, even if they are still valid
absolutely agree with you mirrorless handling/balance sucks on full-frame, but it truly shines on crop
haven't played with the new ff mirrorless from panny/canon/Nikon...any reason why you're shitty on the Nikon so much? On paper it looks to be built ground-up like the original a7 in 2013, whereas EOS-R is a half-hearted effort from the 5D series (they seem to want to commit, but also don't want to fully convert their extremely well established fan base, if that makes sense)
a9 series is where your criticisms would be more appropriate, even if they are still valid
absolutely agree with you mirrorless handling/balance sucks on full-frame, but it truly shines on crop
haven't played with the new ff mirrorless from panny/canon/Nikon...any reason why you're shitty on the Nikon so much? On paper it looks to be built ground-up like the original a7 in 2013, whereas EOS-R is a half-hearted effort from the 5D series (they seem to want to commit, but also don't want to fully convert their extremely well established fan base, if that makes sense)