50mm f/1.8, 70-200mm f/2.8 II, and 28-75mm f/2.8, What next???

So currently I have the following lenses...

Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 II
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8

I thought about selling my 28-75 and then using that money to fund a 35mm and at the same time upgrade my 50mm to a f/1.4 version.

Any thoughts about this?

I currently shoot mainly human subjects, just to give everyone an idea what I'm more oriented towards.

What do you feel is lacking from your current set up?

Depends on what you shoot. Something wide would have you fully covered.

I also have the 70-200L like yours but I don't like to use it often for portraits. I'm a big fan of background bokeh, so in order to get that really good creamy background with that lens, I need to step back and zoom in to 200mm. I'd have to get really far to do a full body shot. So yeah, I prefer to stick to my Sigma 85mm f1.4. Shooting with a wider aperture gives me the creamy background while also being closer to the subject.

It's all up to your preference though. the 70-200 is still a beast of a lens.

JAE Photography wrote in post #16895952
What do you feel is lacking from your current set up?

It's not really much that I'm lacking but rather after using my 28-75 for over a year, I feel as though the IQ isn't as good. Especially on the wide end on some points. Which is why I was thinking about going to 35mm.

pdrober2 wrote in post #16895959
Depends on what you shoot. Something wide would have you fully covered.

My usual gigs range from settings such as concerts, weddings, portraits, and event photography.

Pretty much anything that involves people and expression.

En_code wrote in post #16895912
So currently I have the following lenses...

Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 II
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8

I thought about selling my 28-75 and then using that money to fund a 35mm and at the same time upgrade my 50mm to a f/1.4 version.

Any thoughts about this?

I currently shoot mainly human subjects, just to give everyone an idea what I'm more oriented towards.

Heya,

Given you have the 70-200 F2.8L II, you will constantly be wanting something better than the 50F1.8 and 28-75F2.8, wide open. You could get rid of those two lenses, and simply get a Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC and replace them both essentially. Or you could look to better primes.

I would suggest the Sigma 35 F1.4 ART, or wait around for the new Sigma 50 F1.4 ART if you want a 50mm lens. The Canon 50 f1.4 isn't worth it in my opinion, over the 50 F1.8, it's just not that much better to warrant costing 3 times as much (if it's not pretty sharp at F1.4, then it's not worth having).

If you want to be more budget friendly, the Canon EF 35mm F2 IS is a great way to go. The Canon 24/28mm F2.8 IS is also a fine lens for wide and fast, that is inexpensive.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #16896069
Heya,

Given you have the 70-200 F2.8L II, you will constantly be wanting something better than the 50F1.8 and 28-75F2.8, wide open. You could get rid of those two lenses, and simply get a Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC and replace them both essentially. Or you could look to better primes.

I would suggest the Sigma 35 F1.4 ART, or wait around for the new Sigma 50 F1.4 ART if you want a 50mm lens. The Canon 50 f1.4 isn't worth it in my opinion, over the 50 F1.8, it's just not that much better to warrant costing 3 times as much (if it's not pretty sharp at F1.4, then it's not worth having).

If you want to be more budget friendly, the Canon EF 35mm F2 IS is a great way to go. The Canon 24/28mm F2.8 IS is also a fine lens for wide and fast, that is inexpensive.

Very best,

Yea I was thinking about getting the Tamron 24-70 and yes it would lessen my load, lens wise. But of course it does makes sense to do that so I can still cover the standard focal range. The only thing that's really stopping me though is just the advantage of wider apertures with primes.

En_code wrote in post #16896077
Yea I was thinking about getting the Tamron 24-70 and yes it would lessen my load, lens wise. But of course it does makes sense to do that so I can still cover the standard focal range. The only thing that's really stopping me though is just the advantage of wider apertures with primes.

Heya,

Agreed, I'm a prime person myself. I only use zooms when it comes to telephoto lenses over 200mm.

So you say you do events, how are you with landing focus in low light with something with an aperture of F1.4 and F1.8? If no problems then maybe look into those fast primes that are modern. Sigma really has changed the prime game with their new ART series. Otherwise, Canon's mid-tier primes that they just released with IS are smashingly good. If you find you stop down for depth of field, or if you're manually focusing in the dark often, then you have a lot more options to look into.

I use an 85mm F1.4 that is razor sharp wide open, but it's a fully manual lens, and only cost $280 new. It all comes down to how you want to do things.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #16896097
Heya,

Agreed, I'm a prime person myself. I only use zooms when it comes to telephoto lenses over 200mm.

So you say you do events, how are you with landing focus in low light with something with an aperture of F1.4 and F1.8? If no problems then maybe look into those fast primes that are modern. Sigma really has changed the prime game with their new ART series. Otherwise, Canon's mid-tier primes that they just released with IS are smashingly good. If you find you stop down for depth of field, or if you're manually focusing in the dark often, then you have a lot more options to look into.

I use an 85mm F1.4 that is razor sharp wide open, but it's a fully manual lens, and only cost $280 new. It all comes down to how you want to do things.

Very best,

The Sigma 35mm Art would be my ideal lens to get but I can settle for Canon's new mid tier 35mm like you mentioned. And I pretty much had the same mentality as you, I only use zooms really in the telphoto focal lengths. But in terms of low lighting I've fairly done well with the focusing surprisingly.

I have similar gear. 6D, 35IS (way better lens than the 50 1.8), 28-75, and Sigma 70-200 OS. I am happy with the Sigma and 35 IS. My next upgrade will be a 24L II, when I win the lottery! Maybe Sigma can help. The 24 2.8 IS is just too slow.