Author Topic: "Ethical" question...  (Read 8064 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stef.

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 11520
    • Stef's photographs
"Ethical" question...
« on: April 09, 2008, 12:09:21 AM »
Just wondering: if you have a certain lens such as my new love- the beercan and you buy for instance the super grandiose Sony 70-200mm f2,8 are you not in fact devalutaing your older lenses that cover the same range? In other words- what are you doing with all the lenses that cover the same range as your new toy? I have seen for instance that I don't use the Tamron 17-50mm at all since I have bought my CZ 16-80mm eventhough the "Tammy" is a very good- if not fantastic lens! Are you in fact buying and selling lenses constantly via eBay?
One of the reasons I am asking is: I do have quite a "few" lenses and tend not to part with any of my babies ( I know this is probably stupid!). Now I am awaiting my new Sigma 100-300 f4 lens and have a "real bad conscience" each time my beercan "looks" at me...

How do you deal with your lenses and are you still using the older ones and if for what occasion???
Stef.
Stef.'s photographs

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/15931938@N05/]flickr


"Dream as if you'll live forever- live as if you'll die today"

Offline fother

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 7846
  • Gender: Male
  • Michael
    • MichaelFoth
    • au.linkedin.com/in/fother
    • fother
    • MichaelFoth
    • my index site
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2008, 12:29:28 AM »

I should be selling the items I've bought upgrades on.

I should.

But I like having backups. And I'm a hoarder. *sigh*

DonSchap

  • Guest
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2008, 01:00:07 AM »
I do believe we all maybe suffering from the same malady.  I find the glass piling up, even MF glass.  But, when I look at the incredible prices for each new SONY piece ... I retreat.

I've posted: asking for a retreat in prices for Carl Zeiss glass, in order for me to even get past this $1000 stuff ... but, I just cannot bring myself to pay that, considering images I was able to acheive with the MF ... at a tenth the cost!

One of the main reasons I am entertaining and going ahead with the Katz Eye upgrade to the A700, is to once again, make a run at MF optics, that I already own.  Sure, I have duplicated the range ... through zooms, but PRIMEs are cool in the studio ... where autofocus is really not all that important.

I have a TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD that is nearly new ... and it never gets used, because of the older Tokina AT-X 840 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6.  The TAMRON is much lighter, but the Tokina's range just is incredible for basically the same amount of light.  The Tokina also seems faster to focus, compared to the TAMRON.  Do I feel guilty ... nah, the TAMRON also was only $150.  The Tokina ... $500+, when new.  Heck, I feel lucky just being able to get one of these older Model I for the SONY/Minolta mount.

Yeah, let's just call it "backup-glass" ... and feel better about it. :D

« Last Edit: April 09, 2008, 01:06:57 AM by DonSchap »

Offline Dr.Theo

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Your Vietnam Connection
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2008, 02:01:54 AM »
hoarder combined with snowball effect here
The first step is admitting you have a problem.
A700/7d/A100 sony 50/1.4|70-200 ssm|70-300G|CZ 16-80|Min 17-35G|
28-70G|28/2|35/2|85/1.4GD|100/2|100/2.8D|135/2.8|200/2.8HSG|300/2.8G|Sigma 10-20

Offline Clive

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 11976
  • Gender: Male
    • My galleries
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2008, 05:15:46 AM »
Good question which until now did not apply--okay, well I have the Minolta 28-85 which is covered my the Tam 24-135 which is better. However, I hung onto the 28-85 figuring it was not worth a lot and my DIL took it and the 7D to Hawaii last month.

But now, Stef., I will have an issue since the CZ16-80 arrives tomorrow and what will I do with the Tam 24-135 SP which really has been a decent lens? It is rugged and has a tad more tele than the 16-80...a bit handier for (say) grandkids in the back yard. But not as sharp.

Now I have this issue I will have to address it. I also do not use (nor want) the 7D grip--it is de facto new as it's only been used a couple of times. Most of the other old stuff is just that, obsolete old stuff that no one wants. Witness our Mamiya 645s, eh?   
Galleries
============================================
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted, counts. Albert Einstein

Offline Dr.Theo

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Your Vietnam Connection
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2008, 06:08:54 AM »
i have been thinking about this dilema, and the way i have thus far justified it is you can have three sets of lens

the good glass
nice prims and fast pricer glass used for serious photography and speacial stuf  such as in my circumstances trips to cambodia "one weekend one temple" trips where you are truley trying to get the most out of everything with long setups and waiting for the light to be just right leave the guest house at 430 am to beat the crowds kind of things or night time
or in a night club or at concerts or races or some such

the battle bag glass
decent glass maybe older not so fast stuff things like the beer can family a prime or two 
tough lenses that wont break your heart or the bank if something should happen on say a canoeing trip or backpacking or some such

the walk around glass
maybe a nice prime or 2 , perhaps a TC and then some generous zooms such as
your primes of choice

the the 17-35
35-200
200-400

or perhaps a 17-35
35-105
100-300 or 100-400 apo

there now even if you forgo the primes you have pretty much everything covered quite well in an easy to carry package

that is how you get around having duplicate ranges
(at least thats how i justify with myself)

The only problem is you cant let this extend to cameras as well or then you would need a 5d a 7d and an a700
or perhaps as i have had amost talked my self into as an excuse
the 7d an a100 and an a700
« Last Edit: April 09, 2008, 06:11:26 AM by Dr.Theo »
The first step is admitting you have a problem.
A700/7d/A100 sony 50/1.4|70-200 ssm|70-300G|CZ 16-80|Min 17-35G|
28-70G|28/2|35/2|85/1.4GD|100/2|100/2.8D|135/2.8|200/2.8HSG|300/2.8G|Sigma 10-20

Offline Fud

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 3399
  • Gender: Male
    • ElmerFud on Flickr
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2008, 08:36:03 AM »
I must admit I am quite good about selling old glass when replacing it with new.  I had tokina 28-80 and 80-200 f2.8 ATX-Pro lenses which I liked the feel and build of but sold them when I upgraded to Minolta G glass (had to have some help paying for that expensive G glass :)).  I even sold my Tamron 200-500 when I got the 300 F2.8 plus teleconvertors (though I do sometimes miss having that zoom ability to frame the subject)
A900+VG, A77+VG, Minolta 17-35G,  Sony CZ24-70 F2.8,Sony 70-200 F2.8 SSM, Sony 70-400 SSM, Sony 135STF,85 F1.4, 200 F4 Macro, 600 F4 HS APO

Offline Stef.

  • Past Moderator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 11520
    • Stef's photographs
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2008, 04:37:45 PM »
Theo- not sure about your comment ??? Why would I run around with glass even if only for shooting grab shots that I know is not as good as other glass that I have? At the end of the day it is only a lens. If it gets battered well bad but not the world. On the other hand if the "one in a life time" shot turns up than I would want to have the best lens on my camera that I own. For me the dilema is that I am after 100% quality (if something like this is possible) or at least as close as it can get. If I have two lenses and I know one is better than the other I will always go for the better one. I can see that one buys primes as they usually are better quality and as DonSchap says even MFs are very well suited in some circumstances. So primes for me are no contender to zooms. It's for instance the question: should I really even think about buying a 70-200mm lens (doesn't matetr which one the Sony or the Tamron or even Sigma) if for now I am very happy with my beeercan. Is the ultimate quality of one of the above lenses soo much better to justify a lens that will be sitting on my shelf from then on? One of the reasons why I went for the Sigma 100-300 beside the fact that it got fantastic reviews is that the range is slightly different to for instance the beercan or the other 20-30 lenses in that range that are already on my shelf ;)
Just wondered how you "coped" with that dilema... and as a last point yes I agree sometimes I wonder is it even worth selling it when you don't get that much for it or should I better keep it and pass it on to somebody who might appreciate it (if there is somebody...)
Theo- also cameras well sometimes it is actually good to have backups or for instance i was pretty fed up in Martinique to have to change lenses all the time (thinking of buying a second A700 at the moment...hmmmm...)
Stef. :P
Stef.'s photographs

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/15931938@N05/]flickr


"Dream as if you'll live forever- live as if you'll die today"

Offline Rob aka [minolta mad]

  • Administrator
  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • ******
  • Posts: 10061
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1260183143#!/profile.php?id=1494244129
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/robkendall/
    • http://www.redbubble.com/people/minoltamad
    • Westcountry Photographic
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2008, 05:14:49 PM »
sometimes I wonder is it even worth selling it when you don't get that much for it or should I better keep it and pass it on to somebody who might appreciate it (if there is somebody...)

Stef. :P

I would appreciate them ;-)

But seriously,
I am in the process of upgrading my lenses, so that ultimately i get a lens in each catergory that i find i shoot in.

10-20 (need something in this range)
17-50 Tamron (got, perfectly happy with it)
35-70 Minolta (use for IR)
50/1.7 (dont use enough)
70-300 Sigma (too slow) Probably replace with the Tamron 70-200/2.8
500/8 Minolta mirror (use for wildlife on suuny days)

Recently sold my Sigma 170-500 Great range but cumbersome and slow af.

I also think along the lines of Stef and probably most others in that i want the best quality image when i take a pic of whatever it is. So wouldnt have the Three sets of lenses you talk about. But could see sometimes why it would be beneficial to have some lenses that i wouldnt really 'care about'.


Rob




Offline hopeless

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Gender: Male
  • Jamie Lawrence
    • Hot off the Memory Card
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2008, 06:26:16 PM »
Personally, I'd only ever keep the best lenses I had in a particular range and sell on the rest -- and I'd always have them with me (no leaving spares at home... can't see the point in that, but then I'd never want more lenses then I could carry).  The only exception might be keeping primes even if the focal length is covered by a zoom (you'll have to pry my 50mm 1.7 from my cold dead hands no matter what fancy standard zoom I upgrade to). 

Selling lenses as you upgrade makes great sense (to me, at least) 'cos then I can possibly afford to buy them from you ;-)  and its easier to get "used" equipment past the spousal audit
http://hopeless.smugmug.com (gallery)
Hot off the memory card (photoblog)
Shutter Scouts (photographer's notebook and forecasting service)

Offline Frank [aka Wires]

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirehawker/
    • uk.linkedin.com/pub/frank-etchells/53/319/784
    • Frank Etchells Falconry and More
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #10 on: April 09, 2008, 07:35:59 PM »
When I got my first SLR - a Minolta 7000 - I only managed 2 Minolta lenses, the 50mm f1.7 and the "beer can" 70-210 f4 [both described to me by members here as classic Minolta lenses] with it and one Sigma 35-80. Would have loved more but funds weren't available and those three seemed to cover most of what I needed - except those "long distance" shots :(

Having got the a700 and "found" ebay I seem to have become obsessed with getting more glass... making up lost time? ;)... but now trying to get to grips with them all. I guess I'll finally thin them out as I find the ones I'll use more than others and if I can afford better quality glass. Having gathered around nine or ten with some overlap in focal lengths I'll have to decide on which give the quality. One thing about this "collection" is that my son will be able to get an idea of what the different lens lengths will achieve before he goes and buys for himself... or sees about getting an adapter to convert for use on his Canon EOS 300D - which I believe are available?

Frank
Frank (aka Wires)
:)
The Dalai Lama said; “Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively”

Offline pttdds

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Gender: Male
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #11 on: April 09, 2008, 11:05:30 PM »
    Stef. has asked a core ethical question current in my photographic life.  Recently went manic on high end lenses starting with the CZ 85 1.4.  I had lusted after that lens for decades in its Minolta form.  It exceeded even my wildest image of what it could do.  It changed my whole concept of how to shoot.  Portraits had not been my strong interest.  Now they are. 

    Over the past couple of months have added the CZ 135 1.8, the Sony 70-200 2.8G and most recently the CZ 24-70 2.8.  They all work incredibly well!  Each one opens new vistas.  Each has been unbelievably expensive!  Net result is that I now have 16 lenses that fit the Alpha mount.  The last four make everything else sad by comparison. But, also have not yet put the redundant ones on eBay as planned.  Am feeling more than a little guilt about the big credit card bill (expenditures have substantially outpaced income designated for hobby spending) and blush at the fraction of our family budget now tied up in my hobby.  An ethical question indeed.  There's more.  I also still have several sets of medium and large format film gear driving me to upgrade my scanning capability.  The amount they would bring on eBay isn't sufficient to drive me part with them. 

    Is there a 12 step program for folks in my situation?

    Don



DonSchap

  • Guest
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2008, 05:44:43 AM »
I'll tell ya, it's not easy being "green."  Or, should I say, the lack of Green (greenback, that is).

CZ-lenses are the bane of today's DSLR owner.  All of them are easily 25% more than they probably should be.  Personally, I won't buy into that ... for a long time.

Maybe when someone posts their CZ's & "G"s up on ebay ... I'll be letting someone else pay the initial premium ... then, I might bite.  Otherwise, I'll live with what I can get out of the TAMRON's and SIGMA lenses (Tokina, in their infinite wisdom, quit playing Minolta-mount).  It may take a few years, but I've got some time to go with this.  I was shooting through this older glass before SONY took the reigns ... guess I'll just keep on a cruisin', since they're out of their minds with the pricing.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 05:47:38 AM by DonSchap »

Offline Dr.Theo

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 1196
  • Your Vietnam Connection
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2008, 07:09:08 AM »
Stef, I am just saying that is how i justify it to myself. LOL

Don, i have only found the first step in that program, so i put it in my signature for all to see incase they need that program as well
The first step is admitting you have a problem.
A700/7d/A100 sony 50/1.4|70-200 ssm|70-300G|CZ 16-80|Min 17-35G|
28-70G|28/2|35/2|85/1.4GD|100/2|100/2.8D|135/2.8|200/2.8HSG|300/2.8G|Sigma 10-20

Offline Fud

  • Friend of DynaxDigital
  • *****
  • Posts: 3399
  • Gender: Male
    • ElmerFud on Flickr
Re: "Ethical" question...
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2008, 09:08:37 AM »
        Over the past couple of months have added the CZ 135 1.8, the Sony 70-200 2.8G and most recently the CZ 24-70 2.8.   

I thought I had it bad last year when I bought the minolta 17-35G,28-70G and 200 macro :)
A900+VG, A77+VG, Minolta 17-35G,  Sony CZ24-70 F2.8,Sony 70-200 F2.8 SSM, Sony 70-400 SSM, Sony 135STF,85 F1.4, 200 F4 Macro, 600 F4 HS APO