70-200 f/2.8L + 85mm f/1.8 or 70-200 f/2.8L-IS

Ok, so the budget will allow for about $1700 or so, and I'm debating between the above 2 choices. I currently have the 50mm f/1.8 and the kit lens with the XT. I am jumping into the semi-pro arena and need help with this selection. I have an interest in doing concert/sports photography but intend to pay the bills with portrait and wedding work. I know that the 70-200 and 85 are both stellar lenses, but I know the 85 is a great lens on a budget. Considering that I am jumping into L with between $1100-$1600 would I still have a need for the 85. I now that low-light sports will benefit from the extra 2/3 stop, but wedding and concert would benefit more from the IS. Give me your opinions please, and feel free to ask if I've left anything out.

Michael

I would go for the 70-200 f2.8 and the 85 f1.8. The 70-200 is still an L lens so will be excellent but you get the extra flexibility with the 85, I could have done with an 85 f1.8 today at a showjumping competition but used a 50mm f1.8.

Well - if you're doing wedding stuff where's your wide lens? I'm no wedding shooter but I know the 50, 85 and 70-200 wouldn't cut it. The 85 is a must have but I'd suggest a cheaper 70-200 2.8 so that you can get something else on the wide end.

Borderfox, thanx for your input, I know that the extra speed of the 1.8 would help in sports situations and I will probably pick one up later to add to my kit (for a second shooter on another rig in a wedding/event setting) I'm kinda answering my own question the more I think about it but I welcome anyone that has been down this road to chime in and let me know what you think.

Michael

Mr. Clean, I have some luck with flash with the kit lens stopped down, and have my eye on a Peleng 8mm fish for some creative shots. What would you recommend in the $300-400 range for the wide end? What selling point makes you say that the 85 is a must have, speed, bokeh? I gotta know what drives these opinions. I've never had my hands on either of these lenses, and am totally relying on reviews, and user comments.

Michael
ps: Mr. Clean, thanx for your time.

I just got me a 70-200 f2.8 L and I love it. If you have steady hands then save your money and buy something else instead of the IS version. It is so crisp and clean that I can not imagine the IS version to be much better.

i dont need IS =p

sigma and tamron both make a 17-50 (or thereabouts) which might help you on the wide end, they are also both 2.8 which would help with weddig work I'd imagine. If you can get away with not going as wide as 17 I would highly recommend the Tamron 28-75, I know a few folks on the boards use one for weddings.

ah sorry Michael. Speed, AF speed, AF accuracy and bokeh! Plus, the 85 1.8 gives you usable shots at 1.8. It's a must have if you're going to shoot in-gymnasium high school sports or potraits. And it is that good for that cheap! 300-400 bucks for the wide end might not give you a heck of a lot unless you went with a prime. But you say you want to do concert photography, how about the Canon 35mm f2 or the Sigma 30mm1.4? I have the later and it's everything my 85mm is, except for the focal length of course.

Hmmm... a lot to think about, and shop for...

Anyone else wanna let me hear their thoughts?

Michael

Save some cash and get the Sigma 70-200. I can't see any advantages over the 70-200L (of which I have owned both).

Only advantage: Sigma can't focus as close, a bit heavier too.

The latest version of the sigma is a macro, perhaps it can focus closer? With that going for about 800 and another 350 for the 28-70 or the 18-50 that's not a bad pair.

I think the 70-200 f2.8 non IS and 85 1.8

Well, with 1 body, having a prime lens becomes a slight disadvantage. If you have two bodies, then a fast, longer prime is nice. But if you will be limited in the fast paced situation with a prime like the 85 on a 1.6 cropped camera if you only have one body. Keep that in mind. Now of course, that depends on how important your wedding shooting is. If it's not high on the list, then that above stuff is not as big of a deal.

Thanks for your input guys, I've gone out on a limb with a little research on my own and came up with this alternative, 70-200 f/2.8 IS and the 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS. Like I said I do ok with the kit lens (this one is supposed to be even sharper) and IS will help with non-action lower-light scenarios. I'm currently using a Sigma flash that has almost all of the functions of the 580 (and some that it doesn't) I can more easily come up with $300 from time to time to afford the 85 f/1.8, or a wide/fast prime, better than I can scrape together $500-1600 to drop on a lens.

Any input on the above combination?

Thanks again,
Michael

ps: I do plan to get a 30D as the cashflow allows it...