Philosophically, how much is too much to spend on a lens?

[kdemas]

I read somewhere -- on Dante Stella's website, perhaps -- that you shouldn't spend more than a monthly car payment on a lens. That struck me as sensible advice for an amateur like myself, and I've followed it. It also incorporates the affordability principle that joe alluded to.

Interesting thought Steve. As I mentioned above I think the "affordability" of anything is so fluid, based on one's circumstances, values and needs.

Then again by a definition outlined further up the thread I am just a Vanity Purchaser, so what do I know 😉

Those lucky Veyron owners... they can buy any lens they want with the car payment principle!

 

[Al Patterson]

More than you can afford would be too much.

Now my most expensive lens is probably my Hexanon-50 in M mount, but YMMV...

 

[ferider]

I read somewhere -- on Dante Stella's website, perhaps -- that you shouldn't spend more than a monthly car payment on a lens. That struck me as sensible advice for an amateur like myself, and I've followed it. It also incorporates the affordability principle that joe alluded to.

You might check with Dante again. He got married in the mean-time. 🙂

 

[Nikon Bob]

With lenses, like any other purchase, don't buy anything you can't afford to replace if it is stolen, lost or damaged without any undue financial hardship or angst to yourself. To put it another way, don't buy what you can't afford in the first place.

Bob

 

[anu L ogy]

Easy. The lens that will allow you to express what you set out to express artistically is the lens you should get. One rule: no emotional attachment. If you arent happy, move on. Some people need that $10,000 lens to accomplish their vision, some accomplish it another way - but I say who cares so long as you are getting what you need to out of your photographs. Also, make sure you arent falling victim to some outside force - alot of people in the photo community fall into this: http://www.imx.nl/photo/Opinion/page111/page111.html


-Jim

 

[porktaco]

Philosophically? When you become more concerned with protecting the lens than using it.

thread over

 

[former member]

The answer will be different for a professional photographer, scientist/engineer, and amateur.

An amateur buys equipment for personal satisfaction. A professional photographer needs to make a living. A scientist/engineer needs to either procure optical equipment if available, or design and construct optics to meet project requirements. The latter is expensive. The most that I've spent on one lens is $25,000 to have it constructed, and more for the engineer to design it.

 

[mathomas]

I read somewhere -- on Dante Stella's website, perhaps -- that you shouldn't spend more than a monthly car payment on a lens. That struck me as sensible advice for an amateur like myself, and I've followed it. It also incorporates the affordability principle that joe alluded to.

How much is too much to spend on a car payment?

 

[Mcary]

I recall one person say "my camera-bag is worth more than my car". If the camera-bag contains a Leica M9, a Noctilux and a few other Summiluxes, it is easily 5-digits of value.

Oh man, if you were to forget the bag on the subway.

....Vick

Or maybe their car is a 1992 Honda Civic with 400,000 miles on it 🙂

 

[al1966]

I live by a simple premise that my gran would be proud of; save and buy never on the never never. I refuse to play their debt game so for a lens or a car or a sofa I will only buy what I have cash for. So my answer to the question is what I have spare in the bank after food etc. a years interest on a credit (should be debt) card loan is better in my pocket to buy another lens or pack of polaroid or a cd and so on.

But I dont have a car anymore, I got rid of that millstone and go by bus instead.

 

[Al Patterson]

This question shows up more often than you might think. Some people need to justify their purchases for some reason. I have this viewpoint that if you can afford a $5,000 lens, know yourdelf out. I'd rather by $500 worth of gear and spend the rest on a trip somewhere.

Too each their own said the old lady as she kissed the cow...

 

[Al Patterson]

How much is too much to spend on a car payment?

Hmmm. If I buy a $5,000 car for cash and no further payments, does that mean I can spend $5K for a lens, or zero, as I have no payments?

 

[pagpow]

Hmmm. If I buy a $5,000 car for cash and no further payments, does that mean I can spend $5K for a lens, or zero, as I have no payments?

Excellent capture of a practical problem in the application of philosophical principles, Al.

On the other hand, it didn't say, "Don't spend more on a lens than on your monthly car payment." It said, "than a monthly car payment."

A situalationalist might allow for the personal and situational variation in monthly car payments mentioned above.

A positivist might take the weighted population average of car payments.

A utilitarian might exclude car payments on luxury cars.

A hedonist might include only luxury car payments.

An existentialist...

Oh, I'm so confused. Maybe we should look at this question through another lens.😉

 

[gilpen123]

A 28, 35, 50 and 90 f2.0 and above and that's it. I have to admit though I have multiple 50s. What I do is each year is I put a budget depends on how much bonus and extra money earned from wherever I have at end of the year and give 50% to my wife, 20% to add to my savings and 30% to splurge for hobbies. There's no fix amount really. I just don't spend more than I earn but there are times that I do but seldom it happens. This year I spent $4K for gears and also sold some for upgrades (computer & software included).

 

[Al Patterson]

Excellent capture of a practical problem in the application of philosophical principles, Al.

On the other hand, it didn't say, "Don't spend more on a lens than on your monthly car payment." It said, "than a monthly car payment."

A situalationalist might allow for the personal and situational variation in monthly car payments mentioned above.

A positivist might take the weighted population average of car payments.

A utilitarian might exclude car payments on luxury cars.

A hedonist might include only luxury car payments.

An existentialist...

Oh, I'm so confused. Maybe we should look at this question through another lens.😉

Well, I *WAS* being a bit flip. If one can afford a $5,000 lens, either as a pro or hobbyist, why should they not buy it? Now, a pro can write this off over a few years as a business expense, and the rest of us can sell it for a decent percentage of the cost after a few years of use.

Why should *I*, a cheapskate, judge how anyone else chooses to allocate their funds?

 

[Tom A]

My philosophy as to the car versus lens is simple. No car shall cost more than I am willing to spend on a 50 mm lens!
Current, most expensive 50 mm is a Summilux Asph 50f1.4 and the car is a 1992 Jeep Grand Cherokee with 249800 km on the odometer!

When I was shooting for a living - I spent what was needed for the shots that paid the bills and allowed me to survive to a modest standard.

These days, i spend if the money is in my pocket and i dont need it for something else.

I have started to realize that it is not what you have - but what you can learn to do, with what you have!

 

[MCTuomey]

I have started to realize that it is not what you have - but what you can learn to do, with what you have!

Well put. Even better if well practiced.

 

[back alley]

a wise and beautiful woman once said to me...'sexy isn't what you've got, it's how you use it'...

 

[sper]

I might be alone in this, but I honestly feel like the prices Leica charges for their lenses is immoral. I feel like the M9 is priced right...but when it's close to five grand for a 50mm 1.4...who are they kidding? They've made their gear only available to the super rich. They've said a big eff you to the artists who would be using their gear. It's sickening what they ask. You do not get what you pay for in this case.

In answer to your question, max 2 grand. I just bought the Voigtlander 40mm f2 for canon for $450. I honestly think its better than the 50mm 1.2.

However I will say that when pro studios pay the big bucks for pro medium format systems it's a different thing. Comes down to the job, it's worth it if the work pays for it.

 

[Krosya]

Philosophically? When you become more concerned with protecting the lens than using it.

This says it all.

For me it's simple - if I really want something - I get it. After all - you only live once. If I dont have some lenses - it's because I dont want them bad enough. Maybe if I was a collector - I'd look at things differently. While I like to try different lenses/cameras, whenever I have too many and some dont see much use - they are sold. It's not about the cost to me. I like to use and enjoy things I own.