Looking for Lens Suggestions.

After years of pinching pennies to grow my camera selection, I've got some extra income and I'm excited to spend it, wisely.
What I currently have:
50 1.8
17-40L
60D

I've been looking into the sigma 50 1.4, I want a fast, sharp lens. Prime or zoom. Not looking for anything longer than 80mm~. I don't find anything lacking per se, just looking for new lenses. I haven't ever really played with my prime that much because it's so damn loud and slow. I don't have the best eyesight so I rely on auto focus as well.

I'd sell my 50 1.8 if I were to get a new 50, and I'm willing to sell the 17-40 as I'm not super impressed anymore. It's not exciting, and other than being fast(auto focus) and have mediocre sharpness, I'm not impressed by the colors or anything else. I have 500 cash, 80 from the 1.8,and 550 for the 17-40.

1150$ to spend, on what and why?

I'd like something for a 'walk around' and a prime.

Without knowing what you find lacking in your current selection, and what your primary interests are, I'll just suggest upgrading your 17-40L to a 17-55mm f/2.8. Greatest constant aperture lens for the 60D in my opinion. Keep the 50mm and use the rest of the funds to get a 55-250mm.

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15160053
Without knowing what you find lacking in your current selection, and what your primary interests are, I'll just suggest upgrading your 17-40L to a 17-55mm f/2.8. Greatest constant aperture lens for the 60D in my opinion. Keep the 50mm and use the rest of the funds to get a 55-250mm.

I'll add more info to the original post. I have no interest in anything longer than 80mm~.

How much of an upgrade is it from the 17-40 to the 17-55?

MuteGoose wrote in post #15160063
I'll add more info to the original post. I have no interest in anything longer than 80mm~.

How much of an upgrade is it from the 17-40 to the 17-55?

Pretty big. Its a stop faster and has IS. Its as sharp or sharper than the L. Basically a perfect walkaround lens for the crop bodies.

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #15160053
Without knowing what you find lacking in your current selection, and what your primary interests are, I'll just suggest upgrading your 17-40L to a 17-55mm f/2.8. Greatest constant aperture lens for the 60D in my opinion. Keep the 50mm and use the rest of the funds to get a 55-250mm.

I would agree, although you could grab a 5D classic and transform the 50 1.8 and 17-40 into whoole new beasts. The 17-40 would become dramatic and impressive and the 50 would become a good walk around, then you could use extra cash to get an 85 1.8 for a fast portrait lens a d youd have a sweet kit.

MuteGoose wrote in post #15160063
I'll add more info to the original post. I have no interest in anything longer than 80mm~.

In that case, I'd still go with the 17-55, and depending on what price you can find it for, you may be able to get a Sigma 50mm. However, I'd personally keep your 50mm and get a flash instead. Maybe a Yongnuo YN-568, or a Canon 580exii or 430exii. Flash will open a whole new world to you.

If your requirements are to have a standard zoom and a prime, then you can look at the Canon 15-85 and Canon 50mm f/1.4. You get a very wide range with the zoom, USM and IS. The prime gets you to f/1.4. And if you have funds leftover, a flash could be considered.

As a walkaround on a crop body something in the 30-35 range is a better proposition. When I only had a crop body I had a Sigma 30 f/1.4. I loved that lens, it was such a handy length on a crop. When I went full frame it had to go as I only wanted EF lenses. I now have a crop body as well as FF and have invested in a Canon 35L as it can be used on both. It has very quickly inserted itself as my most used, in fact it has not been off the camera since I brought it. I also have the Sigma 50 you are talking about (plus a Sigma 85) but still like the 35L better as a general purpose walkaround prime. It is just so versatile. If you think you'll never go full frame I'd recommend the Sigma 30, if you think one day you'll upgrade try to stretch the budget a bit further and get the 35L. That is provided you are sure you want a prime & not a zoom.

frugivore wrote in post #15160136
If your requirements are to have a standard zoom and a prime, then you can look at the Canon 15-85 and Canon 50mm f/1.4. You get a very wide range with the zoom, USM and IS. The prime gets you to f/1.4. And if you have funds leftover, a flash could be considered.

I don't require both really, I'm not opposed to keeping my 17-40. It's still a great lens, I just didn't know if there was something out there that was significantly better. I like the idea of the 17-55 2.8, but I don't think there's a big enough difference from several samples and reviews for me to spend the additional 400 on. I think if I keep my 17-40 and just get a really nice prime, I'll be happy.

I also already have a flash.

L.J.G. wrote in post #15160145
As a walkaround on a crop body something in the 30-35 range is a better proposition. When I only had a crop body I had a Sigma 30 f/1.4. I loved that lens, it was such a handy length on a crop. When I went full frame it had to go as I only wanted EF lenses. I now have a crop body as well as FF and have invested in a Canon 35L as it can be used on both. It has very quickly inserted itself as my most used, in fact it has not been off the camera since I brought it. I also have the Sigma 50 you are talking about (plus a Sigma 85) but still like the 35L better as a general purpose walkaround prime. It is just so versatile. If you think you'll never go full frame I'd recommend the Sigma 30, if you think one day you'll upgrade try to stretch the budget a bit further and get the 35L. That is provided you are sure you want a prime & not a zoom.

You're suggesting a 30 over a 50? BLASPHEMY. I haven't had my 60d for too long, I like it a lot and I don't think I'll upgrade until I have a reason or the unspent/unallocated resources. I'll look into a 30~.

Personally, I recommend a 50 over a 35/30 on APS-C. But then again, I have no problem with 85 on APS-C either for what I shoot. I really depends on what you mainly shoot and what kind of room you have to work with.

SoCalTiger wrote in post #15160324
Personally, I recommend a 50 over a 35/30 on APS-C. But then again, I have no problem with 85 on APS-C either for what I shoot. I really depends on what you mainly shoot and what kind of room you have to work with.

I think I want the challenge of a prime, I want to learn more about framing, zooming with my feet, etc. Sigma 50 1.4 still looking promising..

Primes rock! I used nothing but the Canon 50 f1.4 the first year I had my first DSLR.