Determining a price on a used lens

A forum member expressed interest in a lens I own, but I'm having a great deal of trouble finding online info for this exact model lens. I already looked through ebay's ended sales, but most of those are not this particular model. If anyone has any other suggestions on determining prices, please let me know.

It is a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 (constant aperture). It is an AF-D lens although that isn't stamped on the lens. I bought it around 1997. The filter size is 72mm. There is a newer version that is an AF-D lens that is listed as EX DG with a filter of 77mm, but it isn't that lens.

The only listing I could find is this completed listing from ebay: Sigma AF 28 70mm F 2 8 for Nikon with w Sample Images Fair Condition | eBay

I will try to take some photos of the lens either later today or tomorrow to post in the Marketplace (I'm not trying to bypass the selling rules although some people may not agree). For the person who is interested, here are some SOOC jpegs only resized for the forum--taken on a D610 because that's what the member uses (all images taken with a CP filter, too). All images set to Standard. Sharpening set to 7. Everything else is set to 0.


1. SOOC--I forgot to turn off the Active-D lighting for this first shot so it was set to the highest amount (which means the least amount of contrast).




2. SOOC--Active-D lighting turned off.




3. These last two were taken at f/2.8 for the purpose of showing the bokeh. My current Sigma 24-70mm has the onion circle bokeh, but an advantage of this model is that the bokeh offers a nicer effect.




4. SOOC--another shot at f/2.8 for the bokeh effect.

hark, it's ironic you mention your lens since i just sold mine just last week. Mine was the 28-70 2.8 D EX. Bought it new somewhere around 2000 or 2001 for about 375 if i remember correct. It's a good lens, little soft wide open on the long end, but has some sweet spots.
I had listed it several times over the years - even though i didn't have a dslr or shoot film anymore, but always took my listing down because i just couldn't let go of it knowing i would someday get back into photography. Well, when i got back into photography the beginning of this year i found the range not very useful for me anymore - especially with the 18-140 and it's IQ.
I listed it on CL and had interest in a few days. Sold it for asking price of $200. He was an interesting guy who is a photo nut like most of us. Had a truckload of lenses with him and was out shooting that day. 50-500, 70-200 2.8, 17-50, D750, D7100, D90, you name it he had it with him, all sigma lenses and said he preferred them over all else. We had a good visit, he checked it out, took some shots and viewed on his laptop, never asked for a lower price and handed me the money.
I may have taken 175 but really didn't want to go that low. It was in perfect condition and always had a filter on it from day one.
If i remember right i think your earlier version had better IQ.

cbay said:

hark, it's ironic you mention your lens since i just sold mine just last week. Mine was the 28-70 2.8 D EX. Bought it new somewhere around 2000 or 2001 for about 375 if i remember correct. It's a good lens, little soft wide open on the long end, but has some sweet spots.
I had listed it several times over the years - even though i didn't have a dslr or shoot film anymore, but always took my listing down because i just couldn't let go of it knowing i would someday get back into photography. Well, when i got back into photography the beginning of this year i found the range not very useful for me anymore - especially with the 18-140 and it's IQ.
I listed it on CL and had interest in a few days. Sold it for asking price of $200. He was an interesting guy who is a photo nut like most of us. Had a truckload of lenses with him and was out shooting that day. 50-500, 70-200 2.8, 17-50, D750, D7100, D90, you name it he had it with him, all sigma lenses and said he preferred them over all else. We had a good visit, he checked it out, took some shots and viewed on his laptop, never asked for a lower price and handed me the money.
I would have taken 175 but really didn't want to go that low. It was in perfect condition and always had a filter on it from day one.
If i remember right i think your earlier version had better IQ.


View attachment 152309

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info; however, yours was an EX and mine isn't. Yours is the one I keep finding info on so obviously yours was a more popular lens. Your model has that butterfly hood, but mine is simply the regular style hood. Your pricing info does help a little though because I'm sure mine will have to be lower as it is the previous model of your lens.

I get most of my information from Fred Miranda's Sale Forum. Coincidentally that is where I sold my gear this week too.

cbay said:

hark, it's ironic you mention your lens since i just sold mine just last week. Mine was the 28-70 2.8 D EX. Bought it new somewhere around 2000 or 2001 for about 375 if i remember correct. It's a good lens, little soft wide open on the long end, but has some sweet spots.
I had listed it several times over the years - even though i didn't have a dslr or shoot film anymore, but always took my listing down because i just couldn't let go of it knowing i would someday get back into photography. Well, when i got back into photography the beginning of this year i found the range not very useful for me anymore - especially with the 18-140 and it's IQ.
I listed it on CL and had interest in a few days. Sold it for asking price of $200. He was an interesting guy who is a photo nut like most of us. Had a truckload of lenses with him and was out shooting that day. 50-500, 70-200 2.8, 17-50, D750, D7100, D90, you name it he had it with him, all sigma lenses and said he preferred them over all else. We had a good visit, he checked it out, took some shots and viewed on his laptop, never asked for a lower price and handed me the money.
I may have taken 175 but really didn't want to go that low. It was in perfect condition and always had a filter on it from day one.
If i remember right i think your earlier version had better IQ.


View attachment 152309

Click to expand...

woah! my first "pro" lens! actually my first sigma lens was the 28-105 2.8-4. then quickly sold that and got the 28-70 EX. I didnt understand why nikon charged $1300 for their 28-70 AFS and thought id rather buy the 28-70 EX for the same price more or less you did. I was shooting 2 years with the gear and thought the IQ was fine from it. till someone asked me if I want to buy an 85 1.4 AIS for cheap. I took it to test. it looked like hell. I shot with it and saw the results and I became very depressed. I now realized what mediocre lenses were sitting in my bag till that moment.

this is something many photographers will go through when learning. at first youll learn about compositions and light and then your ego kicks in thinking youre great till something happens (when I got my 85 1,4 AIS or when a pro will tell you your works sucks A** and shows u his work) and youll come down a few notches and reassess your whole situation in photography. then your drive kicks in and the climb to be better goes up again. and so forth.

sigma, NEVER, even to this date, has ever made a 24/28-70 2.8 that was a great performer. they all lacked contrast/sharpness wide open. you had to stop it down to 4.5-5 to really get contrasty sharp images and that defeats the purpose for a 2.8 really.

the 70-200 2.8 EX HSM was something else. it was sharp from 3.5. the 17-35 2.8-4 was like the 28-70 EX 2.8. soft as hell. I sold mine about 4 years ago. good bye good riddance.
today though it isnt the case (well wit some of sigmas lenses) those art lenses really are fabulous.

I had the sigma 28-70 2.8 EX 4/10 build 5/10
I had the tokina 28-80 2.8 ATX 6/10 build 8/10
I have the tamron 28-75 7/10 build 5/10
I have the nikon 28-70 AFS 8/10 build 7/10

I rate this on sharpness first. even the nikon isnt that sharp wide open. but at 4 its razor sharp. the others were not razor sharp at f/4 but acceptable.
then color and then bokeh. AF speed was bearable on all and all have issues in low light situations. the nikkor is the best and the other 3 just a bit less. flare is not an issue. I like flare at times. CA is average with the top two.

Not sure why my lens didn't appear in eBay that I sold in Nov. I had the same lens, original owner in great shape with original box caps & filters I got $265 for it hope this helps a bit. It's a great lens and used it for many many years but my kids bought me the Nikon version for BD thus the sale was actually hoping to get $375 oh well


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk