Must have lenses for Crop Cameras?

Please help! I'm trying to pick a new lens to add to my collection...

I shoot mostly family photos- kids Football, Baseball, Basketball, Plays, Recitals, Lots of Portraits. Can spend up to about $1300

Have: T2i, 430EX flash, 18-55 is kit, Sigma 30 1.4, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 70-200 f4/is

Options:
1. UWA- environmental portraits (10-22?) or 11-16
2. Upgrade kit- tried Sigma 17-50 but wasn't impressed... would rather shoot
30 1.4. Maybe 15-85?
3. Medium range- Tamron 28-75, Canon 24-105
4. Long Range- Sigma 120-400?
5. Prime- 135L? 200 2.8? 400 5.6? (redundant with 85 1.8?)

Obviously all over the place. Anyone else have a similar kit?

As you say, that's a pretty diverse list so you need to approach this question from a different angle: what shots do you most want to take but can't at present?

With your budget on a crop sensor I can't imagine anyone advising against the 17-55 IS

24-70/2.8? or what about the 17-50/2.8 from Sigma and Tamron...

You could try the sigma/tamron/canon 17-5x f2.8's...

Does anyone recommend the 135L or 200 L on a crop or is that too redundant given that I already have an 85 1.8?

Whether it's redundant or not is dependent on what you want to do with it.
For tightly framed portraits, a 135mm would work nicely.

I shoot mostly portraits and sports so I'm probably missing:

- at wide end- environmental portraits... I'm wondering if the 10-22 would be more suited for these types of shots (I know UWA aren't flattering for portraits)

- at longer end could probably use something that could double as a good portrait and sports lens (the 85 1.8 does well for both... probably could use 135mm or 200mm 2.8 for night football?)

Sigma 10-20 3.5 is nice.

I'm not sure, but would you need to go into the UWA just to get environmental portraits?

85 f1.8 or 100 f2 would work for those.
or you if you want an increase in image quality the 85 f1.2 or 135 f2 could work.

For tight portraits and sports you are already good with 85 f1.8 and 70-200 f4
For family photos indoors, you are already good with 30 f1.4
You can just upgrade the kit lens if you like, you can go with the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 for your budget
Or you can go for the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and add to it the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 still in your budget
UW is not really needed for family and group photos, 17mm is more than enough for me.

Bendel wrote in post #12204601
With your budget on a crop sensor I can't imagine anyone advising against the 17-55 IS

I second this!

With the options you've given you seem to be concerned that you don't have every focal length covered. I don't think a "medium range" is necessary, it's fine to have gaps in your covered focal lengths, and pointless when the lens that fills that in has lots of focal length cross-coverage with your other lenses.

What is it that you didn't like about the Sigma 17-50mm? Just trying to get an idea of what would better fit you. If you don't care about a constant f/2.8, the 15-85mm and Sigma 30mm combo works out well for me.

Instead of getting a "long range lens" why not get a 1.4x teleconverter? It would save money and space but would take your constant aperture from f/4 to f/5.6 on your 70-200mm.

I wouldn't suggest an ultra-wide for portraits unless you plan on doing barrel distortion correction in post-processing.

1) UWA Tokina PRO 11-16 F 2.8
2) All Purpose Walk About EFS 15-85 IS
3) Outdoor Sports/Wildlife 100-400 IS L

My only real suggestion is for an UWA--I'd highly recommend the Tokina 11-16, the Sigma 8-16mm, or the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm. Different beasts for different needs. The others out there are either overpriced or underperforming, in my opinion.