Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

RED lenses...devalue worse than a new car!

Brigham Edgar

Brigham Edgar

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
864
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.brighamedgar.com
Sorry to start this thread but I think this deserves discussion.

While it's great to see RED selling their used lenses in store and giving the option if you can't afford it new, but the price of these lenses are ludicrously low. It means if you were to buy either of these lenses new from RED you lose %40 the minute you buy it! This is worse than buying a new car!! PL glass should hold it's value far better than this and for every other lens maker it does. It has royaly done me over with my 300mm that cost almost $6k and now RED have made a market value of $3500...and I have used this lens maybe half dozen times. So by my calculations this massive undervaluing would put a mint condition set of RPP's at $12K or less...bet all the RPP owners love this! Heck, I am seeing old worn B speeds that need work for this much!!!

Cmon RED, %20 devalue is more like it and in reality is still generous for good glass!
 
Brigham, with all due respect, it is the first time I hear a complaint that RED is not charging enough.

I personally welcome the RED bargain corner "Battle Tested". I think it is an excellent way to give even more value to the community. Like in every bargain corner, there are some real gems at bargain prices there.

Also, you can't really compare with used car market because filming equipment is less liquid and, if you really want to sell something quick, like a single lens not in the set, you need to offer it at very attractive prices.

I think it is a great way to move second-hand items quickly and efficiently.

Well done RED.
 
I'll give anyone 12K right now for RPP 5 lens set. Seriously.
 
Don't worry, Mr. Edgar, perhaps RED will be willing to raise the price of your Epic-X by 40% to make you feel better.

:-)

Stephen
 
First off, WTF? Why are you buying lenses?

If you are buying lenses for their resale value, as some sort of investment ... well there are better investments. Like a car wash.

I tend to buy mine for making pictures, and derive my profits and value from my work using them, not from their sale value.

As such, I am investing in MY SELF, not my lenses. The lenses are merely a tool with which I can ply my trade and that is their TOTAL value to me.

So, since we seem to have a different premise from which we begin reasoning, you can imagine that I don't really give your position much credence.

The Battle tested lenses are, from what I can tell, ones that Red took back from customers (because there was some problem I suppose) and refurbished and are now reselling.

Without some resale, they are probably a total loss for Red. And, lets face it ... Red doesn't have the best reputation for lenses. They may be great lenses, but lens buyers want the century of tradition they get from Zeiss and Cooke.

So, from Red's perspective, any sale on these "battle tested" lenses is probably a win.

As usual, Red is trying to get customers using decent lenses with their cameras. I know nothing breaks my heart like SLR lenses on Red One.

Moving on ... Zeiss B Speeds were once some of the best lenses humans could manufacture. They were very expensive in their time ... sort of like buying Ultra Primes today.

They have depreciated dramatically over their lifespan.

If you want to talk about manufactuers devaluing lenses ... Zeiss has done so with their entire lineup (using your logic) by introducing the Compact Prime set. I mean roughly $30,000 for a set of seven PL Zeiss lenses brand new? That lens set compares positively with a set of Mark 1 or Mark 2 standard speeds in many regards- and its NEW.

Coming back to lens buyers wanting that "century of tradition" I alluded to ... the fact that you can buy some old B speeds and recondition them 30 or 40 years after their initial purchase and put them back into service on top tier theatrical productions adds value to the new lenses.

When Red has that history and real field experience in their lens manufacture, they'll command higher original sale value, and used sets will command higher resale as a percentage of their new sale value.

So, in conclusion, if your business is NOT image making, but rather lens resale speculation, then I recommend you buy Angeniuex, Cooke or Zeiss lenses. Leica may be a good second tier.

Well, that and I also propose you choose some other venue in which to focus your investments.
 
I used the RPP set as just an example of the devalue percentage to make it sound as bad as it is. The 18-85mm which is a great individual lens by itself and can stand by itself not in a set...almost $10K new and look at the BT price! I know it's only these lenses, but that can change. Seems it could be any lens that is used in their arsenal and there is already two primes there. What's stopping the others going there and with the same discount would be around $12K give or take. A lot of people consider the 18mm as part of set and its resale value is set, the ball is rolling.
Pawel, you have MP's correct? If you were to know that the value of your glass the minute you purchased it dropped 40% i don't think it would feel great...but it hasn't. And of course the MP's won't, neither does any PL glass really when you look at it, or even decent stills glass. The point is that they have set a second hand market value on their lenses and it is at least 40% but more likely closer to 50% on the open market as RED offer a warranty. One of the most attractive things about buying into good PL glass is that it holds value well, will be working for decades and a usually a solid investment. Most lenses second hand if immaculate would be only around 10-20% at most. It's a HUGE mark down in their value from new. The new price is extremely generous and very attractive especially considering their quality but it re-sale is looking shockingly bad. As before, glass is supposed to hold value well. I also very much support and love the idea of battle tested gear, i just think they are offering too much on the glass and my investment into PL glass of RED's has been devalued substantially. Not all the lenses but who knows what else can be added...so thinking a RPP set is not unrealistic. The sold 'set' isn't there but it could easily be at anytime. We're also not talking the original zooms that got sold as EOL either. Cameras lose value quickly from new as does a lot of other gear everywhere, i just used the car market as an example as it is notorious for devaluation...and even a test model only sells for around 5-8% less than a new one. My point was 100% just that PL glass it supposed to hold value well, and by the few examples that RED have set in the bargain corner...it sets a precedent.
Stephen, i love how this forum tows the line for people with creative input as yours. There is an endless list of people who just post rubbish and noisy comments, but there are only a select handful that post good, creative and intuitive enjoyable discussable posts as yours . Thanks for getting on board!
RED are one if not the most generous companies in existence offering more bang for buck than anyone or pretty much anything i know of not only in our industry but anywhere. I am a big recipient of there generosity and a major voracious RED supporter. I know very well the devaluation of equipment especially in items such as cameras and technology that outdates quickly, lenses are one of the things that shouldn't. But heh, if it was around when i bought i never would have bought new ones if the battle tested ones were on offer. With the two lenses i bought as a good little kit (18-85mm and 300mm) costing me around US$16 that should easily be worth around $12-13K now and for a long time in the future...instead they are forced into a market set less than $10K just to even match RED's and more likely $8K to have a chance of selling! It's not an ageing technology, they are quality PL glass. Somehow i only think the people that may agree are people that own the lenses there currently...unless the 'set' primes appear there as well.
 
Alexander Ibrahim said:
First off, WTF? Why are you buying lenses?

If you are buying lenses for their resale value, as some sort of investment ... well there are better investments. Like a car wash.

I tend to buy mine for making pictures, and derive my profits and value from my work using them, not from their sale value.

As such, I am investing in MY SELF, not my lenses. The lenses are merely a tool with which I can ply my trade and that is their TOTAL value to me.

So, since we seem to have a different premise from which we begin reasoning, you can imagine that I don't really give your position much credence.

The Battle tested lenses are, from what I can tell, ones that Red took back from customers (because there was some problem I suppose) and refurbished and are now reselling.

Without some resale, they are probably a total loss for Red. And, lets face it ... Red doesn't have the best reputation for lenses. They may be great lenses, but lens buyers want the century of tradition they get from Zeiss and Cooke.

So, from Red's perspective, any sale on these "battle tested" lenses is probably a win.

As usual, Red is trying to get customers using decent lenses with their cameras. I know nothing breaks my heart like SLR lenses on Red One.

Moving on ... Zeiss B Speeds were once some of the best lenses humans could manufacture. They were very expensive in their time ... sort of like buying Ultra Primes today.

They have depreciated dramatically over their lifespan.

If you want to talk about manufactuers devaluing lenses ... Zeiss has done so with their entire lineup (using your logic) by introducing the Compact Prime set. I mean roughly $30,000 for a set of seven PL Zeiss lenses brand new? That lens set compares positively with a set of Mark 1 or Mark 2 standard speeds in many regards- and its NEW.

Coming back to lens buyers wanting that "century of tradition" I alluded to ... the fact that you can buy some old B speeds and recondition them 30 or 40 years after their initial purchase and put them back into service on top tier theatrical productions adds value to the new lenses.

When Red has that history and real field experience in their lens manufacture, they'll command higher original sale value, and used sets will command higher resale as a percentage of their new sale value.

So, in conclusion, if your business is NOT image making, but rather lens resale speculation, then I recommend you buy Angeniuex, Cooke or Zeiss lenses. Leica may be a good second tier.

Well, that and I also propose you choose some other venue in which to focus your investments.
Click to expand...

Off your horse Mr Ibrahim!

While i agree with maybe a little of what your saying, i don't with the majority. Gotta love forums were people just rant without much credence don't you...cough cough:) I suggest you re-read my statement without the presumption of knowing anything about myself, what i do, my 'investements' or anything about myself and look at the topic i suggested to dicuss. The first half of your post is just utter ranting and inaccurate to what point i was making...let alone the personal attack...but again, gotta love forums as the easy way for people to grow a set, become arrogant and righteous. Reduser is full of people who think they have a set because they can have a go at people at will over a keyboard. It's always a challenge to find the people who just want to discuss wihtout getting personal.
Can you let me know where you found out they were faulty lenses repaired please? And also to some top-tier theatrical productions using B speeds as well?? Personally and i don't know of anyone using or wanting them...but they still have decent value if you find someone who wants them.

Again, my whole main point is that i don't believe PL glass of any description should devalue this much immediately. I expect it with a lot of my other kit but things like glass, and other industry hardware traditionally holds value very well or at least for long periods and like anyone buying any gear for their profession it is an investment and should be aware of the value of their investment, the lifespan of it etc. This is just very unusual for this with lenses and as such as well as knowing the quality of these lenses it isn't worth selling them for so little and using them as they images from there are stunning. I tested all of RED's lenses bar the 17-50 at Panavision and even their tech was stunned at the images quality of them.

Personally i don't need to sell any, just not using my 300mmRPP so thought it would be worth putting the money elsewhere...after all i am in business.
 
I'm going to stir the pot here... speculate wildly, then take cover!

We *know* the future for RED; it's electronic. Electronic mount on EPIC. Focus & iris. In... a year's time?... that's what everyone will be getting excited about. There'll be electronic lenses in the store, and (given the hints that Jim has given) everyone will be raving about them. They'll be priced to sell and sharp as tacks. Will they put traditional cinematography and traditional lenses out of business? Hell no, of course not; people will be pulling focus on Zeiss & Cooke for a long time. But they *will* drive down the price of old non-electronic RED lenses. I *suspect* some people are factoring that into their pricing.

I'd *really* like to know if the RED electronic mount will be mechanically compatible with PL, and if the electronic lenses will be usable manually on standard non-electronic PL cameras. If RED have any sense the answers should be 'yes' & 'yes'; PL is an excellent strong mount, there's no need to reinvent the wheel or be different for the sake of it. And don't repeat the Nikon 'G' mistake!

Mike
 
In the interest of speculating wildly there's always the chance that RED will be RED and give early adopters their money back towards a set of electronic lenses if they so desire... speculating wildly...
 
Jake Bastian said:
In the interest of speculating wildly there's always the chance that RED will be RED and give early adopters their money back towards a set of electronic lenses if they so desire... speculating wildly...
Click to expand...

Maybe they'll also give me back the year-and-a-half I was with my last girlfriend so I can spend it with the next one... ;)
 
OptiTek said:
I personally think that Nikon "G" is brilliant:yesnod:
Click to expand...

I think that's the perfectly reasonable self-interest of a businessman speaking! :-)

Mike
 
I guess it all depends on what you mean by value. There is a lot of gear out there that would immediately "depreciate" were you to attempt to flip it, yet could still have a high "value" if it continued to generate income... The computer bought today loses "resale value" immediately upon purchase, but that doesn't prevent its owner from generating income from the use of that tool for years to come. If you own a lens, and are making money off that lens, seeing its resale value go down doesn't mean the images it captures are now "40% less good"...
 
Brigham Edgar said:
Off your horse Mr Ibrahim!

While i agree with maybe a little of what your saying, i don't with the majority. Gotta love forums were people just rant without much credence don't you...cough cough:) I suggest you re-read my statement without the presumption of knowing anything about myself, what i do, my 'investements' or anything about myself and look at the topic i suggested to dicuss. The first half of your post is just utter ranting and inaccurate to what point i was making...let alone the personal attack...but again, gotta love forums as the easy way for people to grow a set, become arrogant and righteous. Reduser is full of people who think they have a set because they can have a go at people at will over a keyboard. It's always a challenge to find the people who just want to discuss wihtout getting personal.
Can you let me know where you found out they were faulty lenses repaired please? And also to some top-tier theatrical productions using B speeds as well?? Personally and i don't know of anyone using or wanting them...but they still have decent value if you find someone who wants them.

Again, my whole main point is that i don't believe PL glass of any description should devalue this much immediately. I expect it with a lot of my other kit but things like glass, and other industry hardware traditionally holds value very well or at least for long periods and like anyone buying any gear for their profession it is an investment and should be aware of the value of their investment, the lifespan of it etc. This is just very unusual for this with lenses and as such as well as knowing the quality of these lenses it isn't worth selling them for so little and using them as they images from there are stunning. I tested all of RED's lenses bar the 17-50 at Panavision and even their tech was stunned at the images quality of them.

Personally i don't need to sell any, just not using my 300mmRPP so thought it would be worth putting the money elsewhere...after all i am in business.
Click to expand...

First off, unless I am deeply mistaken you started this thread complaining about the price of used Red lenses on the Red store. Your concern indicates to me that you are considering the re sale value of your lenses- in other words their investment value.

I am sorry that this observation offended you, and that you took it personally. I didn't mean it that way, and frankly still can not see anything personal in the statements I made.

I do note however that you did manage to question my truthfulness. I can't see why you would do that other than our disagreement. You also called me "ranting", "inaccurate", "arrogant", and "righteous." I can't see how you would expect this to influence the discussion other than to personally besmirch me. That isn't going to work, and frankly doesn't lend any strength to your original argument.

Again, I don't think that concerning yourself with the resale value of lenses is a valid way to look at lens purchases. You buy lenses because you are a rental house or because you are a photographer/cinematographer. I buy lenses after consideration only because I intend to make good and profitable use of them. It is their use where profit is to be derived. (Either your use directly, or the use of your customers if you are a rental house.)

Frankly, your whole concern smacks of someone who bought when they should have rented complaining about their own short sightedness. If I can't see a use for a lens for at least 5 years I don't consider it. They just cost too much for me to consider them in shorter timespans. No Red lens has been out there that long.

To answer some of your questions:

I don't actually know for a fact where "Battle Tested" gear comes from ... but I've never seen Red advertising that they'd purchase lenses from customers. I do know that they are a very customer oriented company with a good sense of customer service. It strikes me as likely that Red would take a defective lens in exchange for a new one from a customer. Then, not being poor businessmen, they'd try and re-sell the lens they got back, most likely after reconditioning it.

I apologize if you took that as fact, but I intended to state only a reasonable probability.

As to the use of older lenses in "top tier" films: Kaminsky used older lenses with the coatings stripped off in Saving Private Ryan. Deakins uses a Varotal regularly- and frequently says its his favorite lens. I'm fairly sure I saw a picture of it mounted up for True Grit. As to Zeiss MK 1 t/1.4 lenses ... I can't say specifically. They are great lenses though - so I expect that you could in fact use them in a major feature. There are circumstances under which they'd be preferable to modern lenses. I was actually considering them for a reboot of "Wild Wild West."

As for people wanting them - I'd take some B speeds if the price is right. Especially if they are usable - even if they do need service. If the lenses needed reconditioning simply to be used at all, i.e. if they were broken, I'd have to pass unless the price was frankly incredible. I'd ask Duclos to make that determination on my behalf.

What you believe the lenses should devalue doesn't mean a thing in the market.

Red has a very poor reputation for lens manufacture. This is why your Panavision tech was "stunned." A lot of people frankly think that Red lenses are garbage. They are wrong, but that's the common conceit - most often held by people who have never used the lenses. The lenses typically rent infrequently and at lower prices.

Note that reputation isn't necessarily related to quality - they are in fact entirely separate features. Hence the current circumstance regarding Red lenses.

I for one believe that the quality of Red lenses will prove their worth over time because, aside from questionable focus markings, they are fantastic. Its entirely possible that when this is recognized in the community at large, we'll see resale values go up ... but I wouldn't invest with that as a concern.

If you still find the lens useful then I don't think that selling it and buying it again later is smart. Its not a ton of money. Keep the lens would be my advice. If you really just don't use the 300mm, well then that's another matter entirely.

For myself, I am thankful to Red for the Battle Tested lenses, and as a buyer I am happy to snatch those great deals. I expect I'll buy several BT lenses and other Red BT gear in the coming years.
 
Last edited:
Hmm, I don't see anything for sale in this thread :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top