Which lens to let go?

The situation:

Will be receiving the 17-55mm soon.
Have 28 1.8, 50 1.4, 70-300.

I really want to get into portraits starting Fall semester.

I really like my 28 1.8 (it's my 'fun' lens).
Haven't used the 50 1.4 for a while but I think if I start portrait, I will miss it.

I want the 85 1.8 but I don't know which one to let go...

OR
I can sell both the 50 1.4 AND the 28 1.8 and get the 85mm 1.8, and other things like a better flash (only have 420EX) and remote?

Help?

What is it about the 85 that appeals?
If it is only the focal length, just use the 50/1.4 and crop. Unless you are making huge prints, you'll be fine.

I don't think you will enjoy using 85mm on a crop, i find it far too long, my sweet-spot lies between 30 and 70 mm anything is too wide and distorts or too long so begins to flatten faces and bodies. Unless you are working with extreme distance i would keep your primes and save for a 70-200 variant (if this is an option for you)
hope it helps

Yeah, hmm I think I'll just stay with what I have for now.

Why not ditch the 17-40L and use that for the 85?

tkbslc wrote in post #8406314
Why not ditch the 17-40L and use that for the 85?

If he does that then he will have nothing in the wide range...

ditch the 70-300 and replace it with a 70-200, probably the finest portrait zoom in any flavour..

NPuter wrote in post #8406321
If he does that then he will have nothing in the wide range...

In the OP he said he just ordered a 17-55f2.8.

tkbslc wrote in post #8406314
Why not ditch the 17-40L and use that for the 85?

I have to update my sig, I just sold the 17-40L. It's the reason why I didn't include it in my first post.

bluefox9er wrote in post #8406327
ditch the 70-300 and replace it with a 70-200, probably the finest portrait zoom in any flavour..

I told myself I'd get the 2.8 version when I get this lens and I can't afford it yet

The 85 f1.8 is a nice lens along with the 17-55. I also love the 60 macro on crop for portraits. I would ditch the 28/50 after getting the 17-55.

jrscls wrote in post #8407226
I would ditch the 28/50 after getting the 17-55.

Really?

Anyone else agree? The 28 1.8 is so much fun..

bluefox9er wrote in post #8406327
...70-200, probably the finest portrait zoom in any flavour..

I know it's each to his/her own. But, I disagree. It's just too long on the OP's format. It will flatten perspective and look unnatural for portrait. I found the 24-70 zoom comfortable for portrait when I had a 20D, and find it near perfect with my 1D3 for portrait. It covers from group to full body to head and shoulders properly.