Is it worth owning a 60mm 2.8 Macro and a 50mm 1.4?

I have a 7D and a 50mm 1.4 incoming. Was that a smart buy considering I already own a 60mm 2.8 Macro? I've heard a lot of people with the 60mm have sold their 50.

If you need to shoot faster than f/2.8, then having both is good.
I have the 60mm, the 50 is low on my wish list.

Well, the 50mm is a full 2 stops faster, so that is a pretty big difference. They are similar focal lengths though, so it might make more sense to have a 100mm macro or the 85 1.8.

Well, once the 50 shows up, I'll make up my mind. I originally got the 50 for sharper images, but from what I've been told, the 60 is almost just as sharp. If the 60 is just as sharp, I may just stick with that.

nebulight wrote in post #10119934
Well, once the 50 shows up, I'll make up my mind. I originally got the 50 for sharper images, but from what I've been told, the 60 is almost just as sharp. If the 60 is just as sharp, I may just stick with that.

sharpness is completely the wrong reason to decide whether to keep a these lenses or not.

They are two totally different lenses with totally different purposes. There are things the 50 can do that the 60 cannot, and vice versa.

nebulight wrote in post #10119934
Well, once the 50 shows up, I'll make up my mind. I originally got the 50 for sharper images, but from what I've been told, the 60 is almost just as sharp. If the 60 is just as sharp, I may just stick with that.

In my experience the 60mm Macro is razor sharp and I actually sold my 100mm macro because I found it too long for my uses (on a 1.6x crop body) and i found it slightly sharper as well.

As pointed out, the 50 f/1.4 is two stops faster and would therefore be of more use in low light conditions. I can't comment on the focusing but the 50 may be faster??
However, the 50mm doesn't focus as close and give 1:1 macro capability...

I'd not worry about having both and just see how much you use them both and maybe sell one on later.

I ended up getting rid of the 1.4 when I got my 60 macro, but picked up the 1.8 just-in-case

The 60mm macro is very very sharp. It's a macro lens so it's slower to focus. But I'd take it any day over the 50mm f/1.4.

Get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 instead.

nebulight wrote in post #10119934
Well, once the 50 shows up, I'll make up my mind. I originally got the 50 for sharper images, but from what I've been told, the 60 is almost just as sharp. If the 60 is just as sharp, I may just stick with that.

If you think the 50mm will be sharper than the 60mm macro, you will be very disappointed! No offense meant to the 50mm, but the 60mm macro might be the sharpest lens I've ever used. There's several good reasons to get the 50mm 1.4 even if you have the 60mm, but "better sharpness" is not one of them.

crcal wrote in post #10120140
The 60mm macro is very very sharp. It's a macro lens so it's slower to focus. But I'd take it any day over the 50mm f/1.4.

Get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 instead.

x2. That's exactly what I did. Sigma 30mm + 60mm Macro. Yes the Canon is 2 stops faster, but I found the focal length to be too similar, and went with another f1.4 prime and am loving it!

Very interesting. I was under the impression that the 50mm was VERY sharp, but the 60mm macro wasn't as sharp. I guess I got some wrong info. Thanks everyone for your info! I was looking at the ISO12233 photos on some review site and here was the 60mm at 2.8:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'binary/octet-stream'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'binary/octet-stream'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'binary/octet-stream'

You are probably comparing a 1Dsmk3 camera crop to a 40D crop.

Something seems wrong, doesn't it? If anything, the 60mm image should be larger, all other things remaining equal.

Yeah, it's always fun to shoot f/2 and wider

My Macro sits in my bag all the time, and comes out when I need it. Otherwise, my 50 is on.

Well I think you can't beat the 1.4 aperture. I mean if I had to decide between getting a less sharp, perfectly exposed shot in low light or a super sharp really underexposed shot, I would take the 1.4. If you find that you aren't using your 60mm or 50mm that much you can always sell it. That's what I love about camera stuff, it holds it's value very well. You could always get the 100mm macro if macro is the only thing you find yourself using the 60mm for.