Lens Shakeup (too much time on my hands)

Hi all - I would like some input on a shakeup I'm considering for my lens lineup. I have recently added a 5D to my kit and working with one FF and one 1.6x camera has me thinking about making some changes.

Here is what I currently have:
bodies: 5D, 30D
zooms: 17-40, tamron 28-75, 70-200 F/2.8 IS
primes: 100 macro

What I am looking to accomplish:
1. I want a standard zoom with better IQ, my tamron is really disappointing at/near wide open
2. I want to move into a more portable telephoto situation - my F/2.8 IS is an amazing lens that doesn't disappoint, however I often leave it home due to the size/weight. It does not lend itself to any discretion.
3. I want to add some fast glass to my lineup
4. I want a kit more geared towards my personal work, that will also allow me to continue to take on commercial/wedding work as it comes along.

What I shoot:
Landscapes, urban exploration, environmental portraits, stock, abstracts, some commercial work, and some weddings (very busy last year, hardly any bookings this year). When using my 70-200 for anything other than weddings I am very rarely using it at F/2.8. For a better idea of what I shoot you can check my homepage or flickr in my signature.

The lineup I am considering for my 5D / 30D combo:
This would require selling my tamron 28-75 & 70-200 F/2.8 IS and putting in some cash from me end.

zooms: 17-40, 24-105 OR 24-70, 70-200 F/4 IS
primes: 35mm F/1.4, 100 macro, 135mm F/2

Here are my areas of concerns:

- The 70-200 F/4 would not be great for wedding work in terms of speed, this is really only necessary during ceremonies and speeches. I am thinking that the 135L on my 30D would provide the reach and could get me through when the lighting is tough.
- I've owned the 24-70 before and it really is a brick, especially if you are trying to bring the hood along. I worry that this would not be portable and would leave me in the same position as my current 70-200.
- If I opted for the 24-105 it could be too slow for wedding work.

For the shooting I enjoy the new lens lineup to me seems like a no brainer, however I worry that it would leave me unable to complete wedding work - let's be honest extra coin from that is very nice at times! I don't mean for this to be a rehash of the 70-200 or 24-70/24-105 debates that plague the forums - more of a debate on whether I'd be shooting myself in the foot or limiting myself by doing this change.

Any thoughts?

Cheers!

I think that as soon as you sell that 70-200 2.8 something will present itself where you will need it. I can't see myself ever parting with that lens.... well maybe if they came out with a 2.0 version.

I might opt for a 16-36mm 2.8 L at the wide end.

Good luck with your choices.

Jim

Dorman wrote in post #8202183
Hi all - I would like some input on a shakeup I'm considering for my lens lineup. I have recently added a 5D to my kit and working with one FF and one 1.6x camera has me thinking about making some changes.


1. I want a standard zoom with better IQ, my tamron is really disappointing at/near wide open
2. I want to move into a more portable telephoto situation - my F/2.8 IS is an amazing lens that doesn't disappoint, however I often leave it home due to the size/weight. It does not lend itself to any discretion.
3. I want to add some fast glass to my lineup
4. I want a kit more geared towards my personal work, that will also allow me to continue to take on commercial/wedding work as it comes along.

Any thoughts?

Cheers!

At one time I had both the 55-250IS and Sigma 70-200/2.8. If I was going out specifically for photos, I would take the bigger lens. Otherwise, I would take the smaller lens. Big lens for serious (amateur) photography, small lens for leisure. For a few hundred dollars for the 55-250IS, this could be something to try.

I agree with your own thoughts.. you're going to get left short for some wedding stuff. While a zoom would be convienant, perhaps you could add a 50mm (with some speed) to that mix and cover what you're missing in FL. I"m saying that as it sounds as if you don't want to do the 24-70 2.8.

Landscape stuff you seem to be already covered on.

Dude, just get some primes. You hate big lenses but you like fast and sharp lenses. So those are somewhat conflicting requirements if you stay with mostly zooms. Snag a 24-105L for general use and then get a nice Prime setup like 28 1.8,50 1.4, 100 2, 200 2.8 or something like that. Or 35L-85L-135L if you have the coin.

Even though you seem pretty set on a whole new set of lenses, another possibility is just to sell the Tamron and add a 50mm prime, like the 50mm f/1.2L or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4. Then you'd have all your focal lengths covered and you wouldn't be stuck with that Tamron you hate.

Dang, jcothron beat me to it!

Thanks for the feedback.

Jim - my thoughts are exactly that - I'll sell the 70-200 F/2.8 IS and then boom I'll get a job where it was needed, which wouldn't be cool at all. In terms of the 16-35, great lens, however the 17-40 @ F/4 is sufficient for my ultra-wide angle needs. I need to add something more in the normal range, whether it be a zoom or a couple primes.

Maxx - a 2nd telephoto is something I've thought about - truthfully I've thought about a telephoto prime like the 135L instead of a 2nd telephoto zoom.

Jcothron - I absolutely do not want to be caught short for wedding and event work. The 24-70 would be the best solution for a stand zoom. I've had one before and loved everything about it except the size/weight.

Austin - adding a fast 50 was a consideration but I would still like a standard zoom for general purpose. I'm not intent on a whole new set of lenses as all but my tamron are incredible performers, I'm just tossing around the ideas.

Tkbslc - you are right I'm not a fan of big heavy lenses - it is not conducive to taking everywhere. The 24-105 would be a tremendous general purpose lens for everything other than weddings & events. While I'd like some primes in the bag, I'm not prepared to move to a full on prime setup just yet - I do like the flexibility of zooms. Now the 24-105 plus a fast prime or two rather than the 24-70 is definitely something to consider.

Slow zooms with convenient focal range and IS, fast primes when needed.
I like the new line up., but that's me

sebr wrote in post #8207969
Slow zooms with convenient focal range and IS, fast primes when needed.
I like the new line up., but that's me

As do I. I'm already planning to add the 24-70 or 24-105 (probably the brick tho), the big debate is whether I can let the 70-200 2.8 IS go and work with the 70-200 F/4 IS & 135L. Therein lies the really debate.

I did some deep diving into my exif info and I really don't think I can let the 70-200 go. I think I will be better off finding a way to carry this more often, or by looking at secondary telephoto options as a compliment. Any suggestions on lighter more portable telephotos with high image quality?