Been thinking of changing my lens lineup

I travel a good amount, I walk around with my camera and my zoom attached. I shoot college sports, events, portraits, and of course street. I also try to approach my photography with a photojournalistic style (if this matters). I shoot with a 7D

I always considered the 24-105 the perfect walk-around and travel lens. It has great range, IS, light weight. Its a nice lens. My problem is that I only find myself using this lens outside in day light. I shoot college indoor sports, and think that having a zoom with that is wider than my primes could give me some nice shots. Granted the volleyball gym I shoot in, f/2.8 won't be fast enough, so maybe its a lost cause.

My 50 f/1.4 is a nice little lens. I usually take it everywhere because its tiny, light and fast. I've come to realize that this lens is neither long enough for indoor sports or wide enough for indoor people shots.

My 135L is perfect.
______

What I've been thinking is that I can replace my 24-105 with the 24-70L for daily use and it can also double as a indoor lens for parties, etc. Its a little heavier, but I think I'll get over the added weight while traveling.

Trade my 50 f/1.4 for an 85 f/1.8. This will give me the extra reach I need for sports and also be a go to lens for portraits (even on crop). I won't have any overlap in my lens lineup, but I think each lens will get more use and serve their purpose better.


Comments, suggestions, flaws in my thinking?

Instead of the 24-70L, you could add the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS if you are concerned about weight. You also get a wider focal length and IS.

Scott M wrote in post #11002543
Instead of the 24-70L, you could add the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS if you are concerned about weight. You also get a wider focal length and IS.

I see that recommendation and often recommend that lens to crop shooters a lot, but I don't need that wide. I find 24mm wide enough for me most of the time. Having the tele end at 55 would be too short for me. Thanks for the suggestion.

f/2.8 with no IS is not going to be fast enough for indoors, I kinda don't think that's going to be any more useful than your 24-105. You gain 1 stop but lose at least 2 stops due to no IS, and lose range too. I think in either case you're not going to survive w/o the flash.

Staszek wrote in post #11002916
I see that recommendation and often recommend that lens to crop shooters a lot, but I don't need that wide. I find 24mm wide enough for me most of the time. Having the tele end at 55 would be too short for me. Thanks for the suggestion.

Then maybe add a Canon 28mm f/1.8 or Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for the indoor parties?

Could you live with shooting with primes only or are you wanting just zooms?

+1 for the Sigma 30/1.4 on a 7d is great! Agree to switch the 50 for a 85. Great indoor sports lens.

85/1.8 is an obvious choice. 100/2 is also a solid lens as well. Maybe a 35L as a walkaround too.

Brennan.M wrote in post #11006695
Could you live with shooting with primes only or are you wanting just zooms?

I like having a mixtures of the two. Sometimes you just need the versitility of a zoom.

Travel with a 7D: EF 70-200/4 L IS, EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS, monopod, 12mm ext. tube, 1.4x TC.

I use the 24-70 2.8 to shoot indoor sports all the time. No issues. Great lens, but as you said it is heavy.

These things are always very personal, so I'll just say what I used on crop format before moving to full frame - 10-22, 17-55 2.8, 70-200L 4 IS. For me, that had everything covered perfectly in terms of range.

I also had a Sigma 30 1.4 to fill the low-f/number gap, and thought about geting an 85 1.8, but the reality was that I shot 75% of everything with the 17-55 - fantastic lens.

Harleypugs wrote in post #11009435
I use the 24-70 2.8 to shoot indoor sports all the time. No issues. Great lens, but as you said it is heavy.

The 24-70 is heavy, but its not too heavy. The weight is not preventing me from thinking of making the change.