assessing used DSLR
 

(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

assessing used DSLR
 

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

I wouldn't try to assume that much. Professional
photographers are a varied lot, and while one might
shoot hundreds of images per day and never put a scratch
on the camera, another might backpack the camera all
over the back country, beating it unmercifully, all for
a few dozen shots per week.

Take each instance in isolation, and look at what the
camera is and isn't.

Also, I doubt that new D300's will be dropping that far
in price that soon, but there will soon enough be used
D300's for sale at those prices, or lower if the camera
is significantly used.

Personally, I'd start looking for someone unloading a
D300 now. If you buy a D200 (unless you plan on keeping
it when you do get a D300) the cost of later swapping
to a D300 is just as much as the extra cost of the D300
now, so why not just do it right the first time and have
a D300 to use for the next few months instead of the
D200. (And I do think that is a truly significant
difference, as opposed to I think making a choice
between a D2x and a D300 is a very difficult decision.)

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

It's all about the same...

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

assessing used DSLR
 

In article
,
Tully wrote:

(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.

I think I'd rather have a camera that hadn't experienced wear, rather
than one that had been maintained - especially with modern, mostly
electronic products. There are far fewer components where "CLA"
applies.

A professional organization doesn't usually upgrade for the fun of it.
Their equipment has to earn a living, and unless there's a huge
advantage in a newer model (not the case here) they don't cycle
equipment until it's wearing out.

No, what you want is a camera from a well-heeled amateur who's
upgrading solely because he must have the latest and greatest. A
dentist is the stereotypical example. Check the want ads from better
neighborhoods, or (if any are left) camera stores that take trade ins.

assessing used DSLR
 

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.

What do you expect to pay for a used D200?

Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras.

Ask for a jpeg & check the total shutter count in the exif. This is
certainly something significant to look at.

More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

I've bought some old lenses which belonged to news agencies or something
& they were severely abused inside & out. Who else would use a lens so hard?

assessing used DSLR
 

In article ,
Paul Furman wrote:

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.

What do you expect to pay for a used D200?
Not much more than $900. A new D300 is about twice that.

Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras.

Ask for a jpeg & check the total shutter count in the exif. This is
certainly something significant to look at.
Agreed, and a precaution both simple and obvious.

More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

I've bought some old lenses which belonged to news agencies or something
& they were severely abused inside & out. Who else would use a lens so hard?
Concur with this also. A few years back I bought a couple of F4's (the
camera, not the airplane) from a newspaper that had gone to F5's (and to
all-digital soon after that). They had a guy who had been tasked with
sorting through the gear and giving an honest appraisal. He steered me
away from the ones that were unreliable. i got plenty of service out of
some ugly equipment, and considered it a good deal. I know from time
spent in a studio and ad agency that anything that's passed around gets
abused. It doesn't have to be ex-newsie stuff, although PJ's are
notorious...even fleet vehicles lead an amazingly rough life.
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

assessing used DSLR
 

In article ,
Scott Schuckert wrote:

In article
,
Tully wrote:

(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.

I think I'd rather have a camera that hadn't experienced wear, rather
than one that had been maintained - especially with modern, mostly
electronic products. There are far fewer components where "CLA"
applies.

A professional organization doesn't usually upgrade for the fun of it.
Their equipment has to earn a living, and unless there's a huge
advantage in a newer model (not the case here) they don't cycle
equipment until it's wearing out.

No, what you want is a camera from a well-heeled amateur who's
upgrading solely because he must have the latest and greatest. A
dentist is the stereotypical example. Check the want ads from better
neighborhoods, or (if any are left) camera stores that take trade ins.

Sound advice. Thanks for that.
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

assessing used DSLR
 

In article ,
(Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

I wouldn't try to assume that much. Professional
photographers are a varied lot, and while one might
shoot hundreds of images per day and never put a scratch
on the camera, another might backpack the camera all
over the back country, beating it unmercifully, all for
a few dozen shots per week.

Take each instance in isolation, and look at what the
camera is and isn't.
I don't know exactly what you mean here; this sounds like "it is what it
is" and I tune out statements like that.
Also, I doubt that new D300's will be dropping that far
in price that soon, but there will soon enough be used
D300's for sale at those prices, or lower if the camera
is significantly used.
I need to get something to tide me over until I can accumulate $1800 or
(hopefully) less. based on my experience with two refurb "factory demos"
from Cameta Auctions, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a similar D300 as long
as it represents a savings of at least 20% off the prevailing street
price of a new one.
Personally, I'd start looking for someone unloading a
D300 now. If you buy a D200 (unless you plan on keeping
it when you do get a D300) the cost of later swapping
to a D300 is just as much as the extra cost of the D300
now, so why not just do it right the first time and have
a D300 to use for the next few months instead of the
D200.
If I could have retained every dime I got for selling the D80 bodies I'd
only be about $400 short today, but expenses seem to occur in droves
when I have ready cash. I had to spend some money on the car this
weekend...couldn't be put off. I have an F2, but I only take about 10%
as many pictures when I use film. Not only that, but I've gotten into
the habit of using digital the way we used to use Polaroid backs before
exposing large format film =^)
(And I do think that is a truly significant
difference, as opposed to I think making a choice
between a D2x and a D300 is a very difficult decision.)
Probably by the time I find a used (or refurb) D300 I would be close to
getting the full amount together, but I'm looking.
My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

It's all about the same...
Not according to Scott...
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)

assessing used DSLR
 

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.

You are possibly on the wrong track.
Unless a D200 offers some specific feature that you *need* over the D80s
that you have sold (ie weather sealing, full mirror lock up, better
compatibility with old manual focus lenses, or faster burst rate) then
you're probably grabbing at straws. The D200 won't allow you to take
better pictures than the D80s. Why did you sell them?
The D300 quite possibly will allow you to take better pictures -
especially at higher iso and/or if you shoot jpeg rather than raw.
On the price of the D300, it seems that we live in a USA-centric world.
In most currencies / countries outside the US, the D300 is priced
lower than the D200 was when first released. You could say that the D300
isn't "more expensive", just that US dollars are a bit cheaper these
days. It's also much cheaper than a D2Xs, and in many ways a much better
camera.
It will get cheaper (but perhaps not where you are if the US dollar
stays weak), but I'll wager that it depreciates at a slower rate than a
laptop computer, TV set, or car.

assessing used DSLR
 

Tully wrote:
In article ,
(Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
of lens changes and the type of maintenance.

I wouldn't try to assume that much. Professional
photographers are a varied lot, and while one might
shoot hundreds of images per day and never put a scratch
on the camera, another might backpack the camera all
over the back country, beating it unmercifully, all for
a few dozen shots per week.

Take each instance in isolation, and look at what the
camera is and isn't.
I don't know exactly what you mean here; this sounds like "it is what it
is" and I tune out statements like that.

I mean do not apply a "rule of thumb" to buying used
equipment. Not all "pro" cameras are beat up. Not all
enthusiast cameras are well cared for. Look at each
camera, not at generalizations.

Also, I doubt that new D300's will be dropping that far
in price that soon, but there will soon enough be used
D300's for sale at those prices, or lower if the camera
is significantly used.
I need to get something to tide me over until I can accumulate $1800 or
(hopefully) less. based on my experience with two refurb "factory demos"
from Cameta Auctions, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a similar D300 as long
as it represents a savings of at least 20% off the prevailing street
price of a new one.

That's one very distinct possibility. Plus there are
sure to be at least a few people who are today buying a
D300 that next month will decide, for whatever reason,
to sell it. Initially there won't be many, but there'll
be more as time goes on.

I'd be watching eBay on a daily basis. In particular,
look at the "most recently listed" sort for used items
with a Buy-It-Now price.

....

My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
digital beasts?

It's all about the same...

Not according to Scott...

He's saying the same thing I am. My "all about the
same" was in reference to any difference between film
and digital cameras. I think equipment that is worked
is going to be, well... *worked*. You buy something off
the local news agencies shelf with 90,000 on the
counter, and it simply is not as good a bet as a camera
with a peg count of 1500, no matter who owns it.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

assessing used DSLR
 

On Feb 24, 9:38 pm, Tully wrote:
In article ,
Paul Furman wrote:

Tully wrote:
(I sold the two D80's)

I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.

What do you expect to pay for a used D200?

Not much more than $900. A new D300 is about twice that.

Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
likely be using multiple cameras.

Ask for a jpeg & check the total shutter count in the exif. This is
certainly something significant to look at.

Agreed, and a precaution both simple and obvious.

I would suggest that this is almost the only thing you can rely on
(other than obvious signs of problems, such as cracks indicating a
drop etc). The total shutter count, an indication of the number of
shots taken, tells you how much it's been used. How could you tell
anything else?

My own d200, for example, is covered in black tape (the rubber started
coming unglued so I taped the whole thing up to not have to worry
about it); also there's brassing in various places, from where the
rings connecting to the strap I use rub against the camera etc. But
it's never been dropped, it's clean, the metering is fine, the AF is
fine, everything works perfectly. A friend has a pentax k10d which
looks brand new and yet I've seen him drop the camera a couple of
times! You could never tell by looking at it.

So I think your safest bet would be to get a used one with as low a
shutter count as possible and from a single user, preferably one with
no other camera if you can determine that (since he'll then have had
extra incentive to take care of it, not having a backup).

Alternatively, have you given any thought to just getting a used d40
or maybe d100/d70 until you get money for the d300? Should work with
your lenses (maybe without AF/metering etc) and minimise expenditure.