newbie hobbiest asking help from similar on lenses

Hi all.
I wanted to get some advice from the hobbiests out there who are also parents....since I am not now nor will I ever be a professional photographer.

I have the 7d, canon 50 f1.8 and the tamron 28-75 f2.8, 430 exII and set of kenko extension tubes.

my main photography is my family (using the above lenses) and macro (using the above lenses reversed, and kenko extension tubes)

I have a small amount of money to invest: up to (that is, no more than) $800 - fixed. not negotiable. that's all.

The two areas that I thought about investing in was a macro dedicated lens or a 70-200 lens.

70-200: I was full of hope that the sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS would be within the budget, but as is known now - it isn't - though the version II with no OS is barely within. The canon 70-200 f4 non IS is also. I could always go very budget minded and get the 55-250, which is considered a good deal, but slower lens.

macro: all the ones I want are within the budget: the canon 100mm (non L non IS) and possibly a used sigma 150mm.

I have read many reviews and seen many examples on each of the 5 lenses listed above. All are considered very good (despite the fact that I am a bit worried about the lack of IS/OS on the 70-200 choices, excepting the 55-250 of course)
Most of my family pics could benefit from the addition of the 70-200 range.

my worries: I would regret getting a 70-200 non IS/OS (of whatever company), if indeed I got the 70-200 range (and in the case of the 55-250 would get inferior optics than the other choices) ...or I would be considered "selfish" (by myself, at the very least) if I got the macro lens (even though it can do portraits, capturing range in the kindergarten parties is more limiting by nature of the prime-ness) since it would be mostly for my interest...and I could always use the extension tubes and reverse lenses....

sorry for the rambling....
but for those of you who have an inkling about what I am talking about - I would appreciate any input.

Thanks

Hmmm...
I'm not a parent so I'm not allowed to help - hahaha

no offense meant to you personally philwillmedia - but you are also not a newbie hobbiest according to your signature. If you have some advice to offer, I would appreciate it.

What are you asking??

Father of 3 and never put a price tag on a peice of my art yet
I would get the 100 macro. It will give you great portraits with the f/2.8 aperture, especially on a cropper camera. not very selfish to buy a lens that will get the job done for all the portraiture and do macro, especially with the kenko's. Using a prime is not that much trouble, changing from prime to prime will make you crazy however.
for me, once I had the overall range I wanted to cover covered, the 100 macro would be the first specialty lens to get.
That 28-75 and the nifty fifty and the change from the 800 after buying a good used 100 macro might be enough to go looking for a good 24-70. Those two could be a great foundation for what you want to build, sounds like. have fun.

If you buy low to fair quality lenses, you stand to lose your investment due to a failure and will have a hard time getting fair resale prices, even if you take excellent care of them. Good glass on the other hand is almost a constant value here in the states. I had alot of fun buying and selling and adding some cash here and there and eventually finding the lenses I like out of about twenty different ones I have owned.
nothing selfish about a hobby thats all about finding the beauty in everything so you can share it with others.
Get good glass and if it gets to be an old hobby and you can't justify the cost anymore, you can get the money back.

bird from boat - thanks for the time you put into your answer and the message as well. Since starting a hobby (and especially photography) is a study in compromises, sometimes the various pulls on me (both "wants" and "shoulds") are confusing, to say the least. Thanks for the understanding.

So what pictures of your family are you not getting with the equipment you have? I think that is the question you need to answer first.

The Macro will give you very little in terms of family shots that you can't already get, but it will open up macro photography for you nicely. Is that what you need? Or do you need something wider to use at family events to do the "atmosphere" and group types of things that can be very nice?

A longer lens will allow family candids from more distance, and that can make some very nice portraits. It would also open up a new type of landscape photography for you. Is that what you need?

I think going slowly and basing your decision on what photographs you are not getting now due to equipment limitations is the way to go. Being on a budget makes correct choices very important. Breaking your budget limitations may actually be cheaper than buying the wrong lens and having it sit in the bag.

ceriltheblade wrote in post #10082547
no offense meant to you personally philwillmedia - but you are also not a newbie hobbiest according to your signature. If you have some advice to offer, I would appreciate it.

I found your post confusing and rambling. I think many of us really don't understand what it is that you are getting at.

440roadrunner wrote in post #10088882
I found your post confusing and rambling. I think many of us really don't understand what it is that you are getting at.

I'm still asking the question.. What is the OP asking??

I think the OP is asking for reassurance on his/her ideas about which lenses to get.

A medium/long telephoto zoom and a macro.

As for the macro, I picked up a pristine used Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro a couple of years ago and it is fantastic. A good option for you to keep in mind on that front perhaps.