What's a good price to ask for the 70-200mm (as a seller)

[andnowimbroke]

It's actually a short story, but I suck at typing so it would take forever to get it out. What I've got isthe now discontinued70-200mm 2.8LIS USM that just came back from factory (still sealed up) that had it's IS replaced under warranty. I bought it newnear the end of last year and have all the goodies that came with it. The hood has about twenty little shiny marks on it about 1/4" long. Other than that, it's all great. I know what I'll be selling the 17-55mm forand know roughly whatthe Tamron 28-75 2.8 will be going for, but the 70-200mm I'm not real sure. "L" hold there value so long as there is a market, but how well? I'd like to sellthese by the end of the year. Any thoughts would be welcome.

[scalesusa]

$1500. I had no problem getting that for mine on ebay, it sold in 2 hours.

[Jon Ruyle]

$1500. I had no problem getting that for mine on ebay, it sold in 2 hours.


Lucky you. I can't seem to sell mine. Thought maybe I was holding out for too much money, but $1400 would make me happy at this point.

[Shea Design]

Also let one go for $1,500 on Craig's - 10/10 glass and body, and the usual minor scratches on the hood like yours. Basically went 300mm prime.


-Shea

[andnowimbroke]

I'm hoping to raise some money for my church by selling most of my stuff. Beings everything just came back from being tested, I thought it would be a good time to sell. Wish all the new lenses didn't come out though. It's happens I guess. Thanks for the prices. I didn't know if having the new IS would increase the value or ruin it.

[alexniedra]

I purchased mine for $1620 CAD, equivalent to $1530 USD, relatively new, some marks on the hood, and a mint body. Good luck with your sale!

[scalesusa]

Actually I've had five of them. All five sold for $1500 on ebay. I have a lot of good feedback, in the thousands with no negatives. It does make a big difference in getting my price. I am ultra careful when selling one of my lenses to be sure it is as advertised.


I could never warm up to that lens, my 70-200mm f/4 L ISmade it look fuzzy wide open, even though it was pretty darnsharp. I've now become addicted to primes when I need a wide aperture.


I did buy the MK II, but realized how thoroughly I have been converted to primes, so I reluctantly returned it. BTW, it is slightly better than my f/4L IS, and a lot heavier.