Passable arsenal?

I have an extremely tight budget, and the wife doesn't like watching me spend too much on non-necessities. I can understand that. Like everyone, I'd love to have the best optics available, but that's not happening. As luck would have it, I buy and sell used equipment regularly. Every so often a lens passes my way that I bought so right, I question if I should resell it or keep it for myself.

I have Canon 28-85 kit lens, and a Canon 75-300 that I use for myself. I really dislike almost everything about the 28-85, but I live with it. The 75-300 is decent enough where I'm not complaining.

I have two lenses that I bought with the intention of reselling, but I'm really tempted to keep them.
One is a Sigma 180mm Macro 5.6 that is in great condition, and is a true macro. Only 'glitch' is that the AF won't work on the dslr, it was made for the older EOS film cameras. I don't really mind the MF though.
The other is a Canon 28-70 3.5-4.5, Mk I that I don't have in my possession yet. Everything I read regarding this lens ranks it's IQ as 'excellent'. I'd like to get some opinions of this lens from anyone who has/has had this lens. I'm expecting it to way outperform the kit lens.

Would the 3 lenses, 28-70, 75-300, and 180 Macro be a good arsenal for someone who really just can't afford the L lenses, or even a new lens?

KirkS518 wrote in post #14653733
The other is a Canon 28-70 3.5-4.5, Mk I that I don't have in my possession yet. Everything I read regarding this lens ranks it's IQ as 'excellent'.....

Are you certain that the reviews you're reading are of the 28-70 3.5-4.5 MkI and not the 28-70 2.8L (the older version of the 24-70 2.8L)

Bob

Yes, here is one of the tests/reviews, and it seems to perform well. http://www.photozone.d​e …45-ii-test-report--review

That review appears to be of the Mark II version. If you can live with the lenses, then they will be good enough. Is a rechip for the Sigma possible? I'm not familiar with them.

Yes, that's the one (later version though). I only asked as it can sometimes be mis-leading when there are two lenses with the same range but different apertures. The f/2.8L is the one most likely to get the plaudits.

Bob

Albert Nam wrote in post #14653799
That review appears to be of the Mark II version. If you can live with the lenses, then they will be good enough. Is a rechip for the Sigma possible? I'm not familiar with them.

When I got the 180mm a few weeks ago, I called Sigma to find out if this was possible. The tech's words were; 'Sigma doesn't re-chip lenses, that's an internet rumor'. So no.

I'm 99% sure I'm going to keep the 180mm, as it is a true macro, and the MF doesn't bother me.