Lens selection - what would you keep/sell?

Hey everyone!

I am at quite a dilemma after picking up an 85mm F1.8 and a Sigma 50mm F2.8 Macro lens in the past week....I spent a bit of cash, but no where near what they are worth so I'm not too worried :P

So My question is, what would you keep, what would you sell. Consider IQ, focal length and Fstops as being the biggest concern

I shoot a t3i (for now, and probably for at least another year) and my subjects can be anything really. I just photograph stuff :P I need a lower F for wedding videography though


SO here's my lens list
Canon 50mm F1.8 Mk I
Canon 28-70mm F2.8 L
Canon 85mm F1.8
Sigma 50mm F2.8 Macro

There's a lot of overlap here and I feel like they aren't all needed...My thought process was to sell the 50mm F1.8 Mk I lens (As I have another 50 to replace it and the 85mm 1.8 to replace the 1.8) but I don't know if the IQ of the 85 is as good as the 50 1.8 or not

lol I need help

Assuming you want to do close up shots, then I would say the nifty fifty is redundant, but you won't get much for it.

The 28-70 is your walk around lens so you will need that, though personally would want something with IS.

The debatable one is the 85. I think it is one of the best bang per buck lenses out there. Really impressive IQ. But a little too long for indoor portrait work on a crop. I love mine, but it rarely gets used.

Your requirements are a little woolly so a bit difficult to advise. If you shoot everything, then you are missing some tele capability. Maybe swap out the nifty fifty for a 55-250 and that would give you a broader spectrum of lenses for little added cost.

Not saying it is perfect, but for a similar sort of budget to yours, I have a broader spectrum with a UWA and a telephoto. I am seriously considering swapping out the 85mm for that new Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art, which would probably be my only change till I go full frame.

Ok not entirely everyone, I don't use long range lenses. I've had my bosses 70-200mm F4 L for a while and I've used it once so that's not what I want. I have the macro because I didn't have a macro and it sounded good :P So I was thinking I would keep that. The 85 is VERY long for me :/ Could I even use it at a wedding for video? I already feel like I'm standing back while shooting with the 50mm outdoors so the 85 would only make it worse imo. The 50mm F1.8 Mk I is worth more than the standard one, I would hope to see $120-150 out of it so it's a bit. For IS, I don't really need it but I have a kit lens (18-55) to suffice

I have an 85 1.8 and it's great for portraits. Other than that and maybe some low light concerts, it doesn't get much use. I highly doubt you can use it for video as it's a 136mm equivalent and there's no IS. It would be extremely difficult for video indoors. I suggest a 24mm f/2.8 IS or 35mm f/2 IS for video as it has a low f stop and IS. Like already stated, the 50 1.8 won't get you much you should possibly consider selling the 85 1.8

Ok. We use very smooth heads on our tripods and a glidecam4000 so idk if that makes a difference. Well I'll consider selling hte 85mm then, I do portraits but the L lens is doing best for that right now. For video, we have more lenses, but they aren't mine so I didn't list them

We also have a 10-20mm Sigma, sigma 35mm F1.4 and the 24-105 F4 L

Here's my suggestion, FWIW. Sell the 85mm and the Sigma Macro, and get a 100mm Macro. I know it's longer then the 85, but IMO, it gives a better all around image, and gives you much better working distance for macro. It also has no CA issue like the 85 usually does, and I feel it gives better 'pop' then the 85.

I keep everything once I buy it. Keep until worn out.

Kirk, L or non L?

Frodge, I know I normally do too...but I don't need all of these lenses and I only picked up the 85mm 2 days ago because I got a smoking deal...similar to the 50mm F2.8 Macro...didn't need it, but it was one heck of a deal! I can easily make money back on these lenses (hopefully) and come out ahead.

Kirk I don't need a very zoomed in lens, they aren't useful really for me. I have a 70-200mm F4 here (my bosses) and I have touched it only once to try it out :P. I might use the 100mm Macro if it's great for filling the frame and if it's even useful on a crop body, but it doesn't hurt to try it out

Go for the non-L. Thee is a very small difference between the L and non L from everything I read. I have the oldest of the 100's, and even it is fantastic IMO. You can get the non-L USM version used for about $350. Sell the 85 for 275 or so, and the Sigma for (not up to date on those values), and its basically a free lens/even swap.

I personally don't see the practical use of a 100 on a crop given the OP's requirements. If the 85 is too long, then the 100 will be even worse with very limited application for portraiture, event work and weddings.

Xarik, I really think you need to be clearer in your own mind on your requirements, otherwise you will continue to be buying lenses on a scattergun approach (like your last two buys and the macro), and consequently end up with a lot of overlap. Given what you have told us, why would you want a 100?

You may want to consider something wider than your 24-70 and more competent than your kit lens for groups, inside churches and landscapes. Say the 10-22.

BTW no offense intended, if this sounds too critical.

Try shooting with the 85 for a while, it's great. Don't use it for tighter shots, instead use it for full length shots and put some distance between yourself and your subject, get yourself a heap of subject isolation and experiment a bit.

I would get rid of both 50mm lenses. If you still need macro then get some cheap tubes for the 85. I would then consider pairing it with a ~30-35mm fast prime - the 35 F/2 IS obviously being good for video but there are other nice lenses in that range, and the old Sigma 30mm can be found quite cheap if staying with APS-C.

I don't do video, but it seems most of what I've read the shooters like stabilization on their lenses. If that is true then I'd say keep the 50 (macro) for macro, and sell the rest to get a Tamron 24-70 VC or some other f/2.8 (*more crop oriented) with stabilization. *Though I liked a zoom that started at 24mm when I only used a crop.

Though you said you don't need stabilization, or you'd use your 18-55. In that case either be satisfied with what you have, or sell the MK1 and 85mm and get a f/1.4 50mm Canon or Sigma. Though I really like the 85mm so I'd keep it.

Though if it were me, I like KirkS518's idea - but with the 100L.

No one is offending me by giving opinions lol. Kirk I see where you are coming, the 100mm Macro will be a very sharp lens and give me distance for macro shots (needed to reduce shadows from the shooter). But it is extremely long IMO. It's going to be rarely used and wouldn't work for weddings because of it's lack of versatility. My boss has a 70-200mm F4 for that work

Kirth, if you take a look at my flickr, you will see things I'm happy with shooting. I like shooting natural light photos of couples, people and building mostly. I have found myself doing a bunch of panoramas to get high detail shots of buildings and cars and such. I have shot the 10-20mm Sigma lens and it's just not ideal for me...I haven't tried the Canon version yet

Phreeky, I already feel separated from my subject with the 50mm 1.8 if I sell my 50's then I will only have my 28-70mm F2.8 for indoor work and 2.8 isn't quite right for indoors, I need the extra stops I feel. The 85 would really set me back from my subject, I suppose I need to start shooting with it to see if it's going to be right for me. I love the sigma 30mm F1.4 lens, it's by far one of the best lenses I've ever shot. We have one for wedding work right now.

Perhaps I'm a little weary to just start trying lenses, I have plenty of lenses right now but nothing has really given me what I hope for. The 28-70mm F2.8 has been the best in my collection for sharpness, contrast, quality and versatility.

jimewall wrote in post #16618264
I don't do video, but it seems most of what I've read the shooters like stabilization on their lenses. If that is true then I'd say keep the 50 (macro) for macro, and sell the rest to get a Tamron 24-70 VC or some other f/2.8 (*more crop oriented) with stabilization. *Though I liked a zoom that started at 24mm when I only used a crop.

Though you said you don't need stabilization, or you'd use your 18-55. In that case either be satisfied with what you have, or sell the MK1 and 85mm and get a f/1.4 50mm Canon or Sigma. Though I really like the 85mm so I'd keep it.

Though if it were me, I like KirkS518's idea - but with the 100L.

We have a glidecam 4000 for steadycam shots and we have ultra smooth manfrotto heads and tripods. No real need for IS unless we are going handheld, in which case we are mostly using the 24-105 F4 L IS lens. The 24-70 F2.8 I have right now needs to be sent in for a full rebuild and a lens cleaning (it is delaminating) so maybe that will help me a lot with IQ. IS isn't much of an issue for me

Why don't you just keep all you've got for a while and shoot with it, be sure you are satisfied with everything before you make any changes?

Personally I prefer a longer focal length macro lens for many things. I do use a 45mm for small product shots and a compact 60mm macro/portrait, largely on a crop sensor camera like yours. But for most other purposes I use 90mm or longer macro lenses. However, depending upon your uses the 50mm might work fine.

I doubt the macro will replace the faster 50mm standard lens in your kit, though it's possible. They both are probably relatively slow focusing.

I'm pretty sure you'll be happy with the IQ of the 85mm... it's a nice lens and very fast focusing. But An f1.8 85mm does not replace an f1.8 50mm. On a crop camera such as yours, I use both 50mm and 85mm often for portraiture. I use the 50/1.4 instead of the 50/1.8, but the focal lengths of the two lenses - on crop camera - are an "ideal" or traditonal short tele/portrait and long tele/portrait pair. Eventually you might want to add a wider, fast lens... such as a 28/1.8 or 30/1.4... for couples and small groups... but you have to use some care with wider focal lengths for portraiture. Too close with a wider lens will give strong perspective distortions and putting a person too near the edge of the image will cause anamorphic distortions.

So, I'd suggest just shoot with things for a while, see how the new lenses work out, then make any decisions based upon that.