Worth it or Not

So my question to all of you is, Should I get rid of my Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 for the Sigma 18-35 F/1.8. I have a 70D and also have the Sigma 50mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.8. Would it be worth it to swap it? The only other thing is, That I'm thinking of getting a FF next year. Should I stick with what I got or just invest in a lens that will be made for FF? Let me know what you think or what u would do. Thanks!!

Nightfire wrote in post #17341201
So my question to all of you is, Should I get rid of my Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 for the Sigma 18-35 F/1.8. I have a 70D and also have the Sigma 50mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.8. Would it be worth it to swap it? The only other thing is, That I'm thinking of getting a FF next year. Should I stick with what I got or just invest in a lens that will be made for FF? Let me know what you think or what u would do. Thanks!!

If you're thinking of selling the 70D for a full frame body then don't get any more glass that isn't going to migrate over to full frame. Personally I would be looking into something that would work on both platforms. If your planning to keep a crop sensor camera around then the 18-35 is a great lens just remember that it wont be usable on both bodies when you upgrade.

Why are you even asking the question if (IF) you intend to change format within the next year? All your purchases should always fit into your long term plans.

Guess i should have been a little clearer on that. I doubt I would get rid of the 70D due to fact I like to do some wildlife and Birding. But with that said I do agree on that I should be looking for glass for both formats. I was looking at the 24-105 Sigma but when I get the FF I might just get it with the Canon one.

Nightfire wrote in post #17341289
Guess i should have been a little clearer on that. I doubt I would get rid of the 70D due to fact I like to do some wildlife and Birding. But with that said I do agree on that I should be looking for glass for both formats. I was looking at the 24-105 Sigma but when I get the FF I might just get it with the Canon one.

In that case get something that adds to what you have. One is a lens that can be used on both bodies. Another is a lens that you could not get the same for the FF like a Sigma 8-16mm. Or a long telephoto that can be used on both, but gives a FOV of seemingly longer on a crop. Etc....

That said - If what you have now is not limiting you (or gives you what you want/need for photography), then just wait until you go full frame.

the 18-35mm can be used on FF at 35mm...so it could just be your 35mm prime on a FF camera

I have both the 17-50 OS and the 30/1.4 non art and I have thought about selling both of them for the 18-35, but the lack of stabilization puts me off because the 17-50 makes up a good portion of my video work. Plus I am planning on going FF soon so I'm just sticking with what I have for now.

jimewall wrote in post #17341309
Another is a lens that you could not get the same for the FF like a Sigma 8-16mm. .

Wouldn't the Sigma 12-24 II fill this role on FF?

Unless you have to have F1.8, what's the point of spending money on wide angle lenses for a crop camera if you plan to get an FF? The 24mm end of the 24-105 on a FF offers the same angle and perspective as the 15mm on a crop. But you will taking that shot with a better camera.

I got the 6D recently, and I put all my crop lenses for sale. The only lens that I need for a crop is my Sigma 120-400 for birding.

I'm gonna second what some others have said. Don't invest in wide-angle anything if you intend to go FF, because your FF is going to do it better. Buy a telephoto that will work on both. The 1.6x of the 70D would give you killer reach for when you need it and something like a 70-200 would be a killer portrait/general telephoto on your FF. I upgraded from a T4i to a 6D a few months back and the only ef-s lens I still have is my 55-250 stm. It's nice to have just incase I need the reach, but I really wish it worked on my 6D.