Run&Gun
Veteran
Thank God I don't live in CA. I still get $400-$600 for my original C300 renting it out to someone.
C500: C500 Mark II: Observations from a C200 point of view
- Thread starter chris f
- Start date
Thank God I don't live in CA. I still get $400-$600 for my original C300 renting it out to someone.
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I'm just picturing someone asking for a three day rental, so $1500. Oh wait, they can buy the camera on Ebay for less than $1500. Good thing they don't know that, well, at least good for you. In any case, three rental days to pay off the current market value of the camera is remarkable. Reminds me of a co-worker who had a HVX200 way past its heyday and was still charging a few hundred for them when they were about a few hundred dollars on Ebay.
That said, I've sort of taken your advice and not dropped the rental rates on my C300 Mark II since it's gone down in price. I did start it out at $600 when I first got it, and dropped to $500 when it dropped from $16k to $12k, but from $12k to now $9k I've kept the same rates, and if it goes down to say $7k next I don't imagine I'd change the rates for it. Plus once I had upgraded my tripods I upped the rate as a package back up to $600 to get the same as I'd started out with, even if the shoot isn't using a tripod (though most do).
Run&Gun
Veteran
Yeah, not being a rental house, I don’t feel the need to match rates with them or those undercutting the market. It’s my gear that I bought for me to shoot with. Rentals are just gravy. Don’t get me wrong, if someone comes to me with a budget, I will try to work with them within reason, but I’m not going to just give it away. I’ve had people walk away on rentals, because I wouldn’t go bottom of the barrel. A crew came into town last year and wanted an F55 for a few days, so I rented mine to them. All they needed was the body, so I cut them a deal. Then they wanted to take it with them across the country to their next location for like a week or 10 days and asked for a written quote. I quoted them the rate they were getting times however many days it was gonna be, then the hemming & hawing and indignation really started and they threw out the ‘ole “we usually get 3-for-7” BS. I told them I’m not a rental house and they were already essentially getting free days, because of the discount on the normal rate. They kept on and on. Finally they called and said they had found one to rent where they were going and they’d drop mine off when they were done at the end of the day. I said fine, see you this evening. I make money shooting with my cameras, so if my camera isn’t going to be available for me to use then it’s going to be financially worth it for it to be gone. At the very least, it would have to cover a replacement rental if I needed it while it’s gone.
And someone really downvoted me for stating that I get a higher rental rate for my original C300 than someone else does for their C200? I’m just stating facts, not talking trash about someone’s Mom.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Maybe he or she was mad you thanked God for not living in California.
I get downvoted 5x a day...you'll be alright. lol
Liam Hall
Veteran
chris f
Veteran
I think $250 is the going rate for a rental of a mid level camera package that’s coming out with the operator (FS-7, C200, etc.) in San Diego. If it’s going out without the operator it’s $350/day with batteries and no lenses or support (which nobody ever bites on, ha).
San Diego is definitely an owner operator market - everyone owns their own camera so nobody besides out of town folk want to pay much for a rental because if it’s going to be a significant cost they’ll have you use the cam they already own instead of adding a big rental to the budget. (Or they’ll just go buy the camera themselves....)
I think most folks that charge more for their camera package in the area charge less for their labor so it all is pretty close to the same if it’s a package deal. However, I decided a long time ago that I’d rather charge a higher labor rate and a lower camera package rate so I’m always making good money that I’m happy about regardless of whether my gear gets on the shoot and then if they can afford to hire me it’s usually a no brainer for them to use my camera package cause it’s such a good deal. This also helps me serve the project better because I have less internal financial pressure to try to get my gear on a shoot when something else would be the better choice.
San Diego is definitely an owner operator market - everyone owns their own camera so nobody besides out of town folk want to pay much for a rental because if it’s going to be a significant cost they’ll have you use the cam they already own instead of adding a big rental to the budget. (Or they’ll just go buy the camera themselves....)
I think most folks that charge more for their camera package in the area charge less for their labor so it all is pretty close to the same if it’s a package deal. However, I decided a long time ago that I’d rather charge a higher labor rate and a lower camera package rate so I’m always making good money that I’m happy about regardless of whether my gear gets on the shoot and then if they can afford to hire me it’s usually a no brainer for them to use my camera package cause it’s such a good deal. This also helps me serve the project better because I have less internal financial pressure to try to get my gear on a shoot when something else would be the better choice.
Last edited:
Run&Gun
Veteran
I guess part of it may be different market segments(i.e: narrative & commercial vs. TV, etc.). Most of my clients are on the "TV" side where it's all a package rate, regardless of camera(one of them does pay more for Amira/Alexa, though), so it's not really a factor trying to get the camera "rental" price down. I've seen some producers bring rental cameras in, because they "know someone" and got an incredible deal on the rental, but I haven't really seen someone lose out on using their gear, because they couldn't match "rental" prices. And when someone wants to ship rental gear in, a lot of guys charge a "prep day" fee for having to deal with it on the front and back end.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
True but that's where the lensrentals.com of the world have completely leveled the playing field. I haven't rented from a local rental house in ages simply because I have to waste a total of about a full day, driving to LA to pickup, then driving to LA to return
or spend extra money to have a PA or courier do it. It's nice to have someone knock on your door and hand a you an expensive camera and dropping it off at the local FedEx is so quick and easy. I'm afraid for a lot of small, especially single camera shoots,
there is little reason to drive 120 miles RT and waste all of that time. If I am renting grip and lighting or multiple cameras, I still make the drive to LA but for most single day, single cameras where I want to shoot with an Arri or RED, lensrentals.com has been
superb.
Of course, if the camera goes down, then you are in trouble and a local house is better. Ironically, the last time I had a camera go down, it was a RED and RED Hollywood had to send me a new camera with a courier. When renting, I always have a spare camera with
me, of course, so it rental cam goes down, the shoot will go on.
G
Guest
Guest
That is why i say being up to date is over rated. I can get a much higher ratio for the camera day rate on lower specc’d or older gear.
What kind of companies do you work for?
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Thanks Chris, I guess that is a San Diego versus LA market thing. I also notice, I get hammered on rental costs a lot more when I am hired by production companies, ad agencies, PR agencies and even a few healthcare providers.
When I am hired by clients where I am the production company, they generally ask me which camera we should use, I tell them the price and we go for it. I am 100% honest and if their needs are for a small mirrorless, I am not
going to tell them we need an Alexa and vice versa. Most jobs I do are happy with either FS7, C300 MKII or C200. But a few go higher or lower.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Based upon what I've seen and experienced, if your clients shoot a lot and are a little bit of a techno nerd, they care about and want to shoot on RED, Arri, etc. because they know that's what Hollywood uses. If your clients never have or rarely are involved in production, they generally don't care what you shoot on.
I have a few like Hallmark Channel where they will only hire you if you own a certain camera. I also agree, the curve is waaaay behind what is new and state of the art. There still plenty of clients who are very happy with the C300 MKI. I have one client who owns
five of them in house (healthcare) so when they hire me, we usually shoot with their C300 MKIs. VERY few clients will be asking for an FX9 or C500 MKII for a long time IMHO.
G
Guest
Guest
A friend of mine says, s35 - FF35 isn’t the same transition as 2/3” - s35 was. For some segments, maybe AF is/will be.
The Fs7 and C300mk1 were “game changer” cameras, and there is little reason to jump on the next update. Just not a lot of return for clients.
As a shooter, i love all updates. I love good cameras. But clients can’t and won’t benefit or pay for an Fx9 for me.
The question isn’t whether a camera meets my needs, but does the camera do what clients pay for.
For personal use, i’ve owned the 1DC, F35, and Red Gemini.... i don’t use them for work, because clients don’t need it. They don’t ask for it. And they don’t pay for it. But i’d rather shoot with a nice camera than own some car.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I've owned some nice cars. To me, the nicest cars are the ones that are paid off. I'd rather have a paid off Honda
than a Lamborghini or Jaguar with a $2,500.00 per month payment. And I'd rather have a Honda or Toyota paid off
and a nice camera or two also. Cars lose you money, cameras can make you money at least.
G
Guest
Guest
That’s true. Occasionally the ‘nice’ cameras get me a passion project with some cool or fun people, and sometimes it pays for itself. But for work, my camera choices are much more practical, because the camera isn’t for me, it is for them.
Last edited:
Run&Gun
Veteran
Largely network or production companies serving networks.
Yeah, they're not quite as hung-up on the "latest and greatest".
G
Guest
Guest
Yeah, networks seem like the only thing that both pays well and is somewhat interesting. NC didn’t have much of a creative industry when i was out there. Pretty place though. I liked the quality of life quite a bit.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Used to have a LOT of production. Now, not so much. Partially because of the last governor doing away with the film tax credits. But yes, it’s a nice place to live. I have mountains only about an hour/hour and a half to my west, the beach and ocean a few hours to the east and lakes, trees and woods all around. Not to mention a fairly affordable cost of living. Oh yeah, and an international airport hub about 20-25 minutes away and all four seasons(if you can stand the humidity in the summer). So yeah, quality of life is good here. The “bad” thing, everyone else has figured it out, too and there has been a big influx of people over the last several years and it is causing the same problems that other popular areas of the country have: increased traffic, climbing real estate prices and housing shortages.