I ran across a few refurbished cameras (from reputable sites) and my question is this:

Are refurbished cameras normally okay to buy? (Note: I am referring to DSLR cameras that are body plus one 18-55mm OEM Lens) I ask because there are some items that 90% of the time I will not buy refurbished. But I have no clue when it comes to cameras, and if this is a safe way to start, or if it is worth the extra 100-150 I would save to buy brand new.

One other note: I am not a professional and looking to get into the world of DSLRs with a basic entry to gain knowledge and experience using a DSLR, and of course save some money.

  • Where are these refurbished cameras sold?? Can i know some stores? Dec 8 '11 at 5:43
  • @vivek_jonam - Adorama, B&H Photo Video, Canon, are a couple places I have looked that are reputable. There are more sites that sale refurbished but follow the advice listed below for other sites. A simple Google search for refurbished DSLR cameras will come up with many choices.
    – L84
    Dec 8 '11 at 7:39

I bought my Canon XSi/450D refurbished from B&H about 3 years ago, and was very happy with it. I did eventually notice a bright red pixel on all of my pictures (although typically only visible in night shots). I don't blame B&H or the refurbished state of the camera for this; just the fact that pixels some times die.

When I replaced it about 4 months ago, I had settled on a T3i/600D, and I would gladly have gone with a refurbished unit again, but there weren't any available at the time from B&H. (I think I saw some refurbs on Amazon, but the price was almost the same as new.)

I think the main thing to consider when buying refurbished is the warranty it comes with. Not so much because you'll expect to use the warranty, but because how long and extensive the warranty is says a lot about how much the vendor believes in their refurbished equipment. If they only offer a 7-day warranty, they probably don't test their refurbished equipment sufficiently to stand behind it.


I have bought Canon refurbish lenses and some very expensive Canon refurbished binoculars and have been exceptionally happy. I don't know about the bodies though. The cheap bodies could really take a beating. Check out your local quality photo shop. Mine (Hunt's in Manchester, NH) has a great used section, had a Canon G10, a Yashica medium format, and I've picked used L-glass out of there also. At least this way you can play with it before buying.


Before buying, I suggest making sure there are:

  • a guarantee (preferably a year)
  • a no-questions return policy (30 days is reasonable)

As long as the shutter actuation count is relatively low compared to the design limits (say a few thousand for a consumer camera, up to a few tens of thousands for a professional model) you might as well be buying new.
But, as AJ points out, do insist on warranty and having a generous return/exchange policy, and insist there be no "restocking fee" or other hidden costs associated with it (those "fees" are a great way for some stores to make money on lemons they can't get rid of).


A factory refurbished model can be one of two things. It can be a used that was damaged and has been repaired by the factory to spec. Or it can be a merchant-returned copy that cannot be sold as new for some reason (a sales return, an open/damaged box, a sales demonstration model, etc.) but is to all intents and purposes new and unused. So, when you purchase refurbished, the risk is that you get the former and not the latter.

Some people might actually prefer to get a refurbished camera, because if they do snag a mostly-unused model, it will have actually gone through a factory test and adjustment, which most of the new cameras coming off the line do not. And such purchasers know that any potential issues have been caught. And in the USA, you can purchase a refurbished model directly from Canon on their website. Such models come with a warranty (and everything in the box) identical to those of new cameras.

Cameras refurbished by third parties, however, may not be put through as rigorous a testing or repair process or have had access to the same parts. So you have to know the source of the refurbishment.

Ultimately, whether or not it's worth it is up to you, your budget, the warranty that comes with the "white box" unit, and your own personal comfort level with entering a copy lottery.

Personal anecdotal data: I purchased both a 50D and 5DMkII refurbished from Canon via their "loyalty program". Both cameras are still in (very light as I mostly shoot MFT these days) use by me, about eight years later. Both had shutter actuation counts below 20 when they arrived.


Maybe, but I also don't think it's a big deal. Currently, Adorama has three refurbished camera bodies for sale, all from Nikon. These come with a 90-day warranty rather than the standard full year. The savings varies from $160 (for a lower-end model) to almost $300 for a mid-range one. This is less than you'd pay for almost any out-of-warranty repair. That's basically the bet you're making: if there's any failure, it'll happen sooner rather than later.

That's probably a good bet, so that comes down to your level of confidence. But, here's why I don't think it's important: your options in refurbished equipment are so narrow (3 bodies compared to... right now, 40 new body-only listings plus 87 used camera bodies) that it's not like you can make all your purchases this way, and the difference is basically going to be a drop in the bucket compared to what any serious or semi-serious photographer spends over the course of a few years. (At least, until you've got a hefty investment already.)

If it happens that you find a refurbished deal that matches exactly what you wanted to buy anyway, decide on whether the warranty thing is important to you.


I would suggest that acquiring dslr bodies could be very precarious, but "pre-owned" lenses is a different matter alltogether. As long as there is at least a day or so cooling off period, it should be possible to assertain the quality and viability of the lens.

  • 3
    Can you explain in a little more detail why these are different cases? Why would a "cooling off period" be helpful for lenses but insufficient for bodies?
    – mattdm
    Jan 11 '14 at 15:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.