Just a observation, not a judgement

[Robert Harshman]

I've been selling some Canon and Nikon lens along with other gear I'm no longer using in my work. One small difference between the potential buyers of Nikon lens verse the Canon lens has surprised me and while it's a relatively small sample the percentages are much larger than I would have imagined. I guess it has to do with the Canon Date code markings verse just the Nikon serial numbers.

The difference is about 70-80 percent of the potential Canon buyers want to know the date code or when the lens was made while not one Nikon potential buyer has asked about the date, not a one. This small sample is the result of selling three Canon and three Nikon lens via Craig's list. I've gotten about 20 inquiries total.

I guess I must be missing something as the only thing I care about when buying a used lens is  the condition of it.   Anyone else seen this difference?

it's gotten even funny in my view as the last person I was talking to ( a potential Canon lens buyer) wanted to know how many pictures I had taken with the lens - What....?

Regards,

Robert

[Sheldon N]

It's something you can know easily by looking at the lens, so it's become something the masses want to know.

Now that the lenses are differentiated, people start attributing a financial value to getting a newer lens. This affects market price.

Once the market price is affected, then you'd be foolish not to inquire about it even if you don't personally care about how old the lens is.

For the most part, the age of the lens doesn't matter. However, things can happen over time. I have an excellent condition 70-200 from the mid 1990's, and a screw worked its way loose. It had to be sent back to Canon for servicing. That would be much less likely in a new lens.

[NoahJackson]

Also, when I was researching the purchase of my used 24-70 2.8 (Canon), I came across some information about a particular date batch that had some issues. As a general rule of thumb, the newer dates are nicer. This is more important if the lens has been in rough climates such as the tropics.

[Brad Proctor]

it's gotten even funny in my view as the last person I was talking to ( a potential Canon lens buyer) wanted to know how many pictures I had taken with the lens - What....?

Maybe the person was trying to get an idea of how often the lens was used vs sitting in a camera bag (although it still seems like that would be a poor way to measure wear and tear).  lol, then again, ...

[Robert Harshman]

Sheldon, good points on the market view, I wonder if used brokers like KEH will ever start to list that info?  Also if the warranty period is still valid that adds quite a bit of value. I also had a new 70-200 but it failed after a couple of months of light use; had to be sent back twice to Canon service during the first year of use. Worked fine for 4 years after that - who knows.  

Noah, tried to find any info on bad lens batches from Canon, could not find anything. And yes, never buy anything from a photographer on the seashore. I like salt on my food.  

And Bradley, yes lol, number of shots for a lens is a very crude measure of a lens condition and wear, but we all have our guides. I still think condition is 95% of a lens value over any other measure.

Anyway, if you're buying local, take you matching camera body, test the lens, bring a flash light to look for mold or other possible interior aberrations, and like any used car, look for wear signs that don't match what your being told by the seller.

Regards,

Robert

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

"This lens is guaranteed for 100 photographs. For $100 more, we'll be happy to provide you with the 200-photograph lens."  

[Justan]

I wonder if camera equipment is coddled by most? I predict that except for accidents the vast majority of all camera gear is treated as carefully as one would handle a newborn baby.

Mine isn’t.

How about you? Do you treat it like a precious thing or just another tool in the toolbox?

[JeffKohn]

Also if the warranty period is still valid that adds quite a bit of value.

I don't know about in Canon-land, but Nikon warranties are non-transferrable.  So it doesn't really matter if it's still in the warranty period. I laugh when people selling a Nikon lens state that they still have the blank warranty card, as if that matters. To get warrany service you're going to need a dated sales receipt. Even if the seller is willing to provide the original receipt you would probably have to convince Nikon that the lens was a gift in order to get them to honor the warranty if the receipt has someone else's name on it.

[Brad Proctor]

I wonder if camera equipment is coddled by most? I predict that except for accidents the vast majority of all camera gear is treated as carefully as one would handle a newborn baby.

Mine isn’t.

How about you? Do you treat it like a precious thing or just another tool in the toolbox?

Mine is, but that's because photography equipment is expensive and I don't make a lot of money.

[Rob C]

Mine is, but that's because photography equipment is expensive and I don't make a lot of money.

And so is mine, and it also was when I did have the pleasure of making quite decent money with it. The real point is that it's a personal thing - an extension of your personality. Anyway, babies bounce. Joke.

Rob C

[Mike Louw]

Anyway, babies bounce. Joke.

And they're largely self-repairing, unlike lenses......

The initial batch of Canon 24-105 f4L lenses had an issue with bad flare under certain circumstances. This affected only lenses made before a given date/within a particular range of serial numbers. I know because mine was one of them.

Maybe that's where the Canon date thing comes from.