Fair price for equipment?

[Gooberlx2]

While hiking, my friend indicated he wanted to upgrade from his P&S to a DSLR. I mentioned I wanted to upgrade or even switch to new equipment entirely. He then replied, in a serious tone, "I'll buy your shit".

So I'm trying to figure out a good price to sell my entire kit. I basically searched Craigslist for my stuff, and tried to piece together a "good friend" price.

So here's my kit. I arrived at $800 for the whole shebang. Any comments?

Kit...................................................CL price.................Friend price
Canon 300D.....................................$275......................$225
includes 18-55 + 50 f1.8

Quantaray tech10 70-300 macro.........$150......................$50
(tech10 = rebadged Sigma)
28-135 IS USM..................................$350.....................$300
Sigma EF-500 DG Super.....................$200.....................$150
Battery Grip......................................$125.....................$75

Also included: ND filter and circular polarizer (58mm), remote cable, memory card, sensor cleaning kit
All lenses have UV filters on them

Total: $800

 

[magomago]

ehhhh I feel 225 is a little expensive. Overall Iono if I would pay 800. I feel like I could do better - the only really think appealing is the 28-135 and the 500 DG super. However, when I was researching flashes i read some things about the DG super being a little cheap on the quality side, so I ended up no purchasing a sigma flash.

 

[jamesbond007]

I am late to the game, but I figured I'd chime in anyways. $225 is still on the higher side - for around $350 you can get a 30D body, which is infinitely better without costing you a whole lot more. The 28-135 is a crappy lens - along with the 70-300, but the 70-300 is a starter lens, so you gotta have something to put on there, right? Personally, I'd rather see someone in your situation have better luck taking photos with better glass and a nicer camera body. The 300D was my first digital SLR, but things have changed so much in the last couple years it's just mind boggling. Don't buy the 28-135 at all, if you do go with the kit he's offering. Get a Canon 50 f/1.8 first as it's a great starter lens for portraits and low-light photography. It won't blow your socks off, but you'll be light-years ahead of anyone shooting a Point-and-Shoot camera. It will set you back about $90-$100 new...

 

[Gooberlx2]

LOL, I'm offering the kit and wanted to make sure I wasn't pricing it too high, which it seems I am (though I think you overlooked the kit includes the 50 1.8 and kit-lens). I do appreciate the input though. My friend doesn't know the first thing about DSLRs and I certainly don't want to take advantage of him. I'll have to inform him of his options and price this kit accordingly for it to make any sense.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: jamesbond007
I am late to the game, but I figured I'd chime in anyways. $225 is still on the higher side - for around $350 you can get a 30D body, which is infinitely better without costing you a whole lot more. The 28-135 is a crappy lens - along with the 70-300, but the 70-300 is a starter lens, so you gotta have something to put on there, right? Personally, I'd rather see someone in your situation have better luck taking photos with better glass and a nicer camera body. The 300D was my first digital SLR, but things have changed so much in the last couple years it's just mind boggling. Don't buy the 28-135 at all, if you do go with the kit he's offering. Get a Canon 50 f/1.8 first as it's a great starter lens for portraits and low-light photography. It won't blow your socks off, but you'll be light-years ahead of anyone shooting a Point-and-Shoot camera. It will set you back about $90-$100 new...

had not idea that th 28-135 wasn't a great lens....

makes the whole package less appealing as I figures IS + USM lenses were desirable. Shows how much I know about canon

Yeah I'd rethink that 800 dollars....now i'm thinking 400 or less lol.

It may just be a better financial decision to sell things separately on CL.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: magomago
had not idea that th 28-135 wasn't a great lens....

makes the whole package less appealing as I figures IS + USM lenses were desirable. Shows how much I know about canon

One person's opinion doesn't make the lens a bad choice -- it's actually better than most consumer lenses, and if you look around on even this forum, you'll see the opposite opinion from users.

Here's a comparison against a lens above its class:

http://www.luminous-landscape....ws/lenses/24vs28.shtml

It's also FF compatible, unlike many current consumer lenses.

 

[996GT2]

I'd say 500-600 is closer to a fair price.

To give you an idea of what 800 can net you, I picked up a <2500 clicks 40D and Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for 800 a while back.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I'd say 500-600 is closer to a fair price.

To give you an idea of what 800 can net you, I picked up a <2500 clicks 40D and Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 for 800 a while back.

Yeah, after this thread and doing a little more research/comparison shopping myself, I'll price it somewhere in that range.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: magomago
had not idea that th 28-135 wasn't a great lens....

makes the whole package less appealing as I figures IS + USM lenses were desirable. Shows how much I know about canon

One person's opinion doesn't make the lens a bad choice -- it's actually better than most consumer lenses, and if you look around on even this forum, you'll see the opposite opinion from users.

Here's a comparison against a lens above its class:

http://www.luminous-landscape....ws/lenses/24vs28.shtml

It's also FF compatible, unlike many current consumer lenses.

I apologize once more