should i change my lens?

What about keeping the 85 and using the upgrade funds to add a cheaper 70-200 in budget,

Not sure the price difference between the sigma 85 and the 70-200 mkII is, but I think the 70-200 2.8 IS mk1 might be in range, if not the the non IS version or the IS f/4 version would be.

pyrojim wrote in post #13369271
The only lens that rivals the image quality of the 70-200 IS2 is.... Ohh the 70-200 IS2. The 100L macro is awefully close. But it will smoke anything inside of its focal range.

The IS2 is just too darn good.

I'm not sure is is true compared the 135L at f2.8. The 135L is amazing, of course it is a prime, and doesn't offer anything close to the versatility of the 70-200 IS mk II

It's good to have fast primes and the 35L and Sigma 85 are great primes. Start saving and add the 70-200 f2.8L ii to your existing lenses. If there is one lens you don't use anymore than sell it, other than that I think your off to a good start.

Selling the Sigma 85 will net you around $800 USD give or take; you will need to add another $1500.00 USD to finance the MK II

Unless you know exactly why you must have the Canon MK II why not keep the Siggy and use the $1,400.00 USD and purchase the Sigma 70-200 OS. You end up with 90% of the IQ of the Canon for about 60% of the cost.

I love mine

If you have funds for the 70-200 go for it!

70-200 is my most used lens. 85L is my least used lens. I would do it!