October Trip---Thoughts on Lens(es) to Rent?

[annnewjerz]

So I'm in a planning rut and decided I'd start seriously thinking about what lens(es) to rent for our short trip in October so I can get them reserved well enough in advance.

Here is what I plan on bringing of my own:
- Nikon 18-200mm VR
- Sigma 30mm f/1.4

I don't plan to bring my macro lens, or my nifty fifty.

Soooooo...what lens or lenses should I rent?

I've been looking into the Tokina 11-16 since this may be the next lens I want to purchase, as well as the 80-200 f/2.8 (mainly because it's less than 1/2 the price of the 70-200 to rent) and the Nikon 10.5 fisheye.

We'll only be there for 3 days and the plan is to do MK (for free on my birthday), Mickey's Not So Scary Halloween Party and Downtown Disney. We'll be staying at POP.

Thoughts???

[oogieboogieman]

Sigma 10-20 would be on my short list, since seeing Kyle's photos.

[annnewjerz]

Sigma 10-20 would be on my short list, since seeing Kyle's photos.

I like that the Sigma 10 is slightly wider than the Tokina 11-16, but the 11-16 is a constant 2.8, which I think I would prefer that over the extra 1mm on the wide end.

Also---for what it's worth, I put in a good word on your wife's TR about getting you the Sigma 30. I'm sure we would have heard about it if you got it for Father's Day---but maybe you'll get it for another occassion! :thumbsup2

[oogieboogieman]

According to my wife I don't have a snowballs chance in (well you know where). It kinda stinks! Then again it's a good bit of money.

[jackskellingtonsgirl]

According to my wife I don't have a snowballs chance in (well you know where). It kinda stinks! Then again it's a good bit of money.

Yep. My heart bleeds for you. :sad1: The poor boy who only has 4 dSLR bodies, a TON of lenses, flashes, bags, batteries, cords, cables, remotes, straps, memory cards...:rolleyes1

The boy who got a fabulous CAT for Father's Day, not to mention a 50 pt. add-on at AKV so you will have somewhere to go to take fabulous photos.

Yours is truly a tale of woe.:charac2:

Annnewjerz - I think you should rent whatever lens you like best. ;)

[handicap18]

I'd go with the wide, though I don't know if having the f/2.8 on the super wide angle is completely necessary unless traveling through Europe and seeing lots of Castles and Museums.

But then again, a creative mind can do wonders with it anywhere.

[Code]

I'd go wide too.. my Sigma 10-20 was my favorite lens on our last trip. Also not sure about needing f/2.8 but I'm used to my in-body stabilization and was able to get sharp shots at 3/4" handheld @ 10mm.

I think fisheye has a bit more learning curve so perhaps not the best rental (not that rectilinear UWA is easy to master.. I've got a long way to go).

[Todd_H]

I agree with Kyle and Code to go wide and go with the Sigma 10-20mm. You will be surprised at how often you'll find that wide angle on your camera in WDW. To have the additional speed of the f/2.8 would be nice, but how often do you think you would need it? I haven't compared the prices, but I would assume the Tokina carries a slightly heavier price tag (and much heavier weight) than the Sigma.

[WDWFigment]

I am going to buck the trend and advise you to find something that you hadn't considered before that has an MSRP around $1,500 or higher, and rent that.

Renting a $500-800 lens is economically foolish, in my opinion. For the cost of renting it a couple times (depending on the lengths of rental), you could have just bought the lens. It only becomes begins to make economic sense to rent once you get into the more pricey lenses.

If you're not sure if you'll like a particular lens, and want to rent for that purpose, why not just buy it, try it, and resell it on eBay or Craigslist if you don't like it? You still come out ahead of renting that way.

[kaffinito]

I agree with pp's - I'd go with the Sigma 10-20 too. I left it in the room when we went to DHS and AK and kicked myself all day long for not having it with me. :mad:

The 18-200 is a really good walk around lens, so I don't know if you'll need the 80-200 at all. The Sigma 30mm is a really good choice for WDW! (I'm jealous that you have one) :)

[Todd_H]

I am going to buck the trend and advise you to find something that you hadn't considered before that has an MSRP around $1,500 or higher, and rent that.

Renting a $500-800 lens is economically foolish, in my opinion. For the cost of renting it a couple times (depending on the lengths of rental), you could have just bought the lens. It only becomes begins to make economic sense to rent once you get into the more pricey lenses.

If you're not sure if you'll like a particular lens, and want to rent for that purpose, why not just buy it, try it, and resell it on eBay or Craigslist if you don't like it? You still come out ahead of renting that way.

This is a very good point. It really comes down to how long you intend to rent the lens when deciding between renting vs purchasing. I did exactly what Tom says above when I had my 40D and I purchased a Canon 10-20 to take to France. The cost of renting the lens for two weeks was about 1/3 of the cost of purchasing the lens, but I gambled that I could sell it when I got back and recoup most of my money from the outright purchase (and still come out cheaper than renting). It worked. I think when all was said and done, the lens cost me $30 to have for about 2 months (once you calculate ebay and paypal fees for the sale).

[annnewjerz]

I am going to buck the trend and advise you to find something that you hadn't considered before that has an MSRP around $1,500 or higher, and rent that.

Renting a $500-800 lens is economically foolish, in my opinion. For the cost of renting it a couple times (depending on the lengths of rental), you could have just bought the lens. It only becomes begins to make economic sense to rent once you get into the more pricey lenses.

If you're not sure if you'll like a particular lens, and want to rent for that purpose, why not just buy it, try it, and resell it on eBay or Craigslist if you don't like it? You still come out ahead of renting that way.

This is a very good point. It really comes down to how long you intend to rent the lens when deciding between renting vs purchasing. I did exactly what Tom says above when I had my 40D and I purchased a Canon 10-20 to take to France. The cost of renting the lens for two weeks was about 1/3 of the cost of purchasing the lens, but I gambled that I could sell it when I got back and recoup most of my money from the outright purchase (and still come out cheaper than renting). It worked. I think when all was said and done, the lens cost me $30 to have for about 2 months (once you calculate ebay and paypal fees for the sale).

Typically, I would agree with both of you hands down. I haven't rented a lens yet because my mindset was "why waste the money when I can put a few hundred more towards the lens?" Unfortunately for my two trips to WDW this year, buying the lens just isn't an option. I've already spent close to $2,000 this year on a new camera body and two lenses (which is probably a drop in the bucket for what some of you have spent, I'm sure---but unfortunately DH has me on a tight leash for the next 6 monts :rolleyes1) AND even in the event that I could convince DH I needed to just buy one last lens this year, the money is gone due to the fact that I convinced DH to take a short weekend trip to WDW for our anniversary/my birthday/MNSSHP in October. :goodvibes

It might be blasphemous, but I will jump on the opportunity to take an additional trip to WDW and hold off on a lens purchase any day of the week :eek: :eek:

For WDW, maybe I will just look into renting the Sigma 10-20 rather than the Tokina 11-16 just because I wasn't really considering weight. However ultimately when/if I purchase a UWA lens---the Tokina is the one I want. In the next few years we plan to take a 10-14 day trip over to Europe and while the constant 2.8 probably isn't completely necessary, I feel like it'll come in handy in places like Edinburgh castle and various other museums, etc.

I'll stick to a UWA lens for the trip in October and maybe save the 80-200 f/2.8 for December when I'll have 7 days to really put it to good use in places like Animal Kingdom or anywhere I might want just a little extra sharpness over my 18-200.

Thanks everyone!!! :thumbsup2

Ann

[KAT4DISNEY]

I agree that the wide angle zoom is a fun lens to use and out of the ones you listed it is the one I would take. But if you're absolutely convinced that the Tokina is the one you want to buy I would suggest you use the opportunity to rent it and see. Skip the Sigma if it really isn't an option for purchase.

[handicap18]

I agree that the wide angle zoom is a fun lens to use and out of the ones you listed it is the one I would take. But if you're absolutely convinced that the Tokina is the one you want to buy I would suggest you use the opportunity to rent it and see. Skip the Sigma if it really isn't an option for purchase.

agreed. Especially if your going to Europe. Try out the Tokina. For a 10 day rental its about $65. Not to bad for a $570 lens.

[WDWFigment]

This is a very good point. It really comes down to how long you intend to rent the lens when deciding between renting vs purchasing. I did exactly what Tom says above when I had my 40D and I purchased a Canon 10-20 to take to France. The cost of renting the lens for two weeks was about 1/3 of the cost of purchasing the lens, but I gambled that I could sell it when I got back and recoup most of my money from the outright purchase (and still come out cheaper than renting). It worked. I think when all was said and done, the lens cost me $30 to have for about 2 months (once you calculate ebay and paypal fees for the sale).

If you play your cards right, you can come out ahead by using eBay for lens "renting". The best method (if you have time) is to watch new listings like a hawk and buy via buy-it-now when someone lists below market value (which actually happens fairly often). Combine that with Bing.com cashback (and if you're lucky an eBay coupon...although those are more rare). Additionally, there is the option of buying a full set-up (which generally sell for less than the sum of their parts individually) and selling off the items you don't need individually. I prefer selling on CL if possible to avoid fees and the too-generous Paypal buyer protections.

Via these methods, I've gotten a D90 body & LowePro bag for $350, 18-200 VR for $265, and Tokina 11-16 for $473. I've also flipped a D40 for +$125 and a Nikon 12-24 for +$155. All for minimal legwork.

Typically, I would agree with both of you hands down. I haven't rented a lens yet because my mindset was "why waste the money when I can put a few hundred more towards the lens?" Unfortunately for my two trips to WDW this year, buying the lens just isn't an option. I've already spent close to $2,000 this year on a new camera body and two lenses (which is probably a drop in the bucket for what some of you have spent, I'm sure---but unfortunately DH has me on a tight leash for the next 6 monts :rolleyes1) AND even in the event that I could convince DH I needed to just buy one last lens this year, the money is gone due to the fact that I convinced DH to take a short weekend trip to WDW for our anniversary/my birthday/MNSSHP in October. :goodvibes

It might be blasphemous, but I will jump on the opportunity to take an additional trip to WDW and hold off on a lens purchase any day of the week :eek: :eek:



Why not follow the above method, pay with a credit card, and sell before the statement with the lens purchase becomes due?

[Coach]

I have the 18-200 VR for my D200 which I have always brought with me on my Disney World and Disney Cruise vacations. My Macro, Telephoto and my 50mm 1.8 always stay home.
There was many times that I wish I had and UWA for the beautiful sunsets on the cruise and for certain instances at WDW. Thankfully I was able to find and purchase the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8, (yesterday). After reading many reviews of this lens on the net and talking with fellow photographers I believe I made a good choice.
When I was at the photography store the salesmen showed me the new Nikon 10 to 24mm. I could not justify the $300.00 premium over the price of the Tokina. The Nikon 10 to 24mm would have to just about be the perfect lens for me to spend the extra $300.00.

Good luck making your decision.