Well, operating margin is the number that matters.
Lensrentals is 80,000sq/ft and 300ish employees.
Upvote
0
The most rented gear at Lensrentals.com for 2024? #1 is a nice surprise
- Thread starter Richard CR
- Start date
Well, operating margin is the number that matters.
Lensrentals is 80,000sq/ft and 300ish employees.
I rented an R3 once for 4 days to try it out, but beyond that, I agree with you on this topic. I can see some short-term rentals making sense but overall one would be better off reading the reviews and just buying it unless it is a very niche item for a one-time specific use that you would likely never use again after that. The only thing I would consider renting is the 100-300 F2.8 just to try it out at a large track meet (state championship for example).
Upvote
0
The big white's make sense.... my 400 2.8 sits in the bag 45 weeks of the year. Which is the case with most non-professional use.
For the average person, renting from Lensrentals to try something can make sense, you can buy it and save the rental price. I get most of my gear from MPB now, I rarely buy new. R1's aside.. but I got one for "free".
For a pro that does events.. weddings.. corporate... real estate, whatever. Don't own your stuff and reap the benefits when you do your year end. When I did that stuff, I actually had "equipment" on the invoice. Lots of other industries do that, so I did it. No one cared. Input tax credits on the rental, full write-off under equipment, no insurance premiums, no depreciation of goods, I owned a camera body and a 50, I rented everything else based on the venue.
That sort of stuff is the proverbial meat and potatoes of the rental industry.
Upvote
0
I rented the 28-70 f2 for a day before buying it, used it for a candlelight procession to test out it's limits and feel the weight. Really happy to have done that, and the 55$ were well worth it. 2.4% of what I paid afterwards for a new one.
Returning stuff used is not a thing where I live, and selling a lens even in as-new condition is not easy either without a major loss. People in the market for L-lenses often prefer to buy new.
Upvote
0
I'm not surprised seeing the 24-70 on there, that thing is a workhorse and a real champion
After having rented the EF 11-24mm F/4 lens when Canon first released it, I fell in love with it. But at the time, it was far more than I can afford.
I finally picked up a pristine, but used, copy for $1,000 a couple weeks ago as a present to myself.
After having rented the EF 11-24mm F/4 lens when Canon first released it, I fell in love with it. But at the time, it was far more than I can afford.
I finally picked up a pristine, but used, copy for $1,000 a couple weeks ago as a present to myself.
Upvote
0
1) I was speaking personally, for myself. Note the profligate use of the pronoun, 'I', in my post.
2) Read some of the Roger / Lensrentals blog posts about some of the messed up stuff that happens to some of their rental gear. If you'd honestly be happy buying something that had been used by a succession of people as a tool they didn't own and weren't planning to keep or use again, even at a discount, then putting the rental price* toward the purchase price might make sense for you. It's not likely to be a 'pristine, but used' copy you'll be buying from Lensrentals. I would not do it, any more than I'd buy a used rental car from Hertz or Rent-A-Wreck.
* note that the fine print of the offer is 'take up to 7 days of rental fees off the purchase price,' and in my case, I specifically mentioned a 3-week rental, meaning I'd only get 33% of the rental+shipping fees I'd paid applied to the purchase price, in the above example. If you're going to talk about facts and not ignoring them, at least please try to get the facts correct.
Upvote
0
Just looked at their prices on used gear and the 28-70 f2 they're selling is more expensive than what I paid new. Doesn't seem like a good deal.
My local shop refunds up to 2 weeks rental if you buy a new one afterwards. But then they didn't have the 28-70 in stock so the offer was useless to me.
Now buying a rental car - that's a special form of stupid altogether.
Upvote
0
If a new lens like an RF 24-70 f/2 gets introduced some day, I'll do what I always do with unproven gear.
I will not rely solely on the rare reviews, which are often a bit superficial, like shooting charts or showing MTFs wide open. I will ask my favourite store to let me test the lens outside half an hour -beautiful cathedral in proximity-, bring the lens back after shooting 100-200 pictures.
Once home, I will check the pictures and, if satisfied, order the lens from this particular store.
For lenses which have already been sold in numbers over the years, I tend to rely on hearsay and on "serious" reviews. If not happy with the lens, I can always send it back.
When I "need" a lens, I buy it so I don't have to take care of it like it were a raw egg (rentals!).
Upvote
0
I also bought lots of gear from MPB Europe, but no longer.
Sought after lenses and cameras can often be bought for less brand new, even from official brand retailers...
Even saving 400 Euros on an 8900 Euro Leica M11 doesn't make much sense. And you don't even get 2 years official Leica warranty, and often goodwill from Leica after warranty. Same with R3, R5 and RF 24-70 etc...
Upvote
0
aye same here, historically speaking price wise they were never amazing but not the worst. Every time I've checked them in recent history though the prices have been almost new rrp and often can get new on offer or grey market new for less. Plus that was often the lowest prices for beat up gear and the as new pristine stuff barely any saving over buying new and with the warranty and known history hard to see why folks would consider it.
Upvote
0
What I don't understand is why Europeans keep buying from them. An RF 100-500 costs in "like new" condition (still not new, of course) about 2500 Euros That's 300 more than what I bought brand-new from Panamoz, 3 years warranty! and only 200 Euros less than the Canon Winter promotion from an official Canon seller.
I guess MPB USA could have a more reasonable pricing policy.
PS: What I find really disgusting is that they sell fungus affected lenses, often declared as in "excellent optical condition" to naive unknowing customers.
Fungus usually keeps growing, which means eventually death-penalty for the lens, unless thoroughly disassembled and professionally cleaned. At a very high cost!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Data is just a bunch of numbers. The nuance is to find the correlations/causality to interpret the data.
The post with Roger's comments on type of renter certainly helps with the "are renters representative of the general market" question.
Of course, the data is still only relevant for renters within US/Canada which is one region - big but not a global view.
Unfortunately, "rental" needs volume but a lot of countries don't have that volume to support that usage.
The try-before-you-buy makes sense but it seems like the US has a generous returns policy (hence the Canon USA refurb program) so what would be the difference between rental and buy-return?
Upvote
0
For a 2 week safari, I would agree!
Australia generally is too expensive for rental of consumer equipment eg Digidirect has a minimum 6 month "rental" period which may fall into your scenario above ie charging daily opex rather than worry about capex issues but not useful for try-buy renters.
It does seem to be worthwhile for cinema equipment for specific projects/movies though.
Canon Australia tried to facilitate a peer-to-peer sharing of equipment called Kyōyū which they covered the platform/insurance but still wasn't successful.
https://www.australianphotography.com/news/canon-launch-new-camera-gear-hire-and-sharing-platform
I will be in New York for 4 days in January and thought it could be fun to rent a TS-E17 for architecture but the pain of delivery and returns to hotel and weekends made it not worthwhile. I'm unlikely to justify even a second hand TS-E purchase and I haven't seen one for sale second hand in any case. Buyers tend to keep them despite not using them.
Upvote
0
It's very hard to interpret data, especially specific or country-related data.
And it gets even worse if one tries to make personal "data" relevant of the global situation. When I was in the Dolomites last spring, I noticed to my surprise that (no kidding!) 80-90% of the PRC visitors I saw used FF Canon cameras. According to the "all my friends " logic, I could now state that Canon cameras dominate the Chinese market. Absolutely silly, isn't it?
Upvote
0
Hey, guess how much I care if you were speaking personally or not?
1) I don't
2) That wasn't the point anyway, now was it?
3) Their used gear has grades and they generally refurbish stuff before it goes out, unless you think they built their reputation on renting out broken equipment.
* note: I wasn't aware they changed their rental/ purchasing policy in the 5ish year's since I've had to rent from them. But hey, keep being a dick about it? Werido
Upvote
0
Similar threads
