Need Lens advice:

I bought a canon 400mm f5.6 in February this year. I had dilussions of getting into bird photography. The lens is awesome, fast focus, hand-holdable, everything i could want out of a 400mm lens. The issue is i used for the first month, but dont have the time to go out birding.

Current gear:
xsi / 1.4 tc/ 2x tc/ Tokina 11-16/ Tamron 28-80 f3.5-5.6/Canon 50mm 1.8(only manual focus works now) / Canon 100mm macro/ canon 400mm f5.6.

I am thinking of selling the 400mm and getting either the 70-200f4 non IS and possibly a 50 1.4 or springing for the 70-200 f2.8 non IS. I would even consider thoughts on the tamron 70-200 2.8

My interests are landscape/ portrait/ sporting events/ wildlife/ etc. I have seen some awesome bird shots with the 70-200 2.8 cropped/used with TC.

My hangup is selling the lens i just bought for a $200+ hit, but i do know that it just isnt going to be a lens i use more than a couple times a year.

I feel like between the 11-16 and my 100f2.8, i dont have a good option, and between my 100f2.8 and the 400 i am lacking options as well......

If i sold 400mm f5.6, and got the 50mm 1.4 and 70-200f4, i would be left with a 50mm and 100mm for indoor/low light options, and the 70-200 for outdoors, etc.

Thoughts?

How about swapping the Tamron for the 17-50 2.8 (non-VC), selling the 400mm, and picking up the 70-200 2.8? Then you have a minimum of 2.8 across the board for your focal lengths, and you fill in the gap between the 16-28 that you currently have.

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #10500203
How about swapping the Tamron for the 17-50 2.8 (non-VC), selling the 400mm, and picking up the 70-200 2.8? Then you have a minimum of 2.8 across the board for your focal lengths, and you fill in the gap between the 16-28 that you currently have.

Thats a good idea. I wouldnt mind getting that 28-80 out of my bag. The 17-50 is a nice lens, my buddy has a copy.

After posting I realized that my suggestion would then open up a gap between 50-70, which depending on which focal lengths you use most often, may or may not be an issue. I personally have the same gap of coverage and never find myself wanting.

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #10500337
After posting I realized that my suggestion would then open up a gap between 50-70, which depending on which focal lengths you use most often, may or may not be an issue. I personally have the same gap of coverage and never find myself wanting.

Not too worried between 50-70 as i can fix that with moving around. What do people think about the sigma 70-200f2.8 or the tamron 70-200 2.8 in the $700 range vs the canon 70-200 f4 Non IS?