Your thoughts / suggestions, thanks

Shooting w/ 50D, main interests are nature, landscapes, macro, sports, concerts, portraits. Current lenses are in my signature... with the Tokina 116 and the Canon 70-200 as my "quality" lenses, and the other two my "roughing it / secondary" lenses. So, am looking at the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM; for the image quality, speed, etc., and if can acquire it in the <$900 price point for a gently used, and that given my needs / style, is there any other higher quality zoom lens available, to fill the gap between the Tokina and the 70-200?

In future, next lens after this "mid" zoom will be (a) Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro [whenever she arrives], and (b) a fast prime, such as the 50 f/1.4 or 85 f/1.8. So, will be doing some research on these last two also... any comments / suggestions on these two or something else better would be appreciated.

Sell the 55-250 and the 28-135. Get a nice midrange zoom: Tamron 17-50 or the more expensive but wonderful ef-s 17-55/2.8 IS. Sigma 150 macro is a great choice. A 50/1.4 and/or an 85/1.8 is also wise.

ShadowCaver wrote in post #11392244
Shooting w/ 50D, main interests are nature, landscapes, macro, sports, concerts, portraits. Current lenses are in my signature... with the Tokina 116 and the Canon 70-200 as my "quality" lenses, and the other two my "roughing it / secondary" lenses. So, am looking at the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM; for the image quality, speed, etc., and if can acquire it in the <$900 price point for a gently used, and that given my needs / style, is there any other higher quality zoom lens available, to fill the gap between the Tokina and the 70-200?

In future, next lens after this "mid" zoom will be (a) Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro [whenever she arrives], and (b) a fast prime, such as the 50 f/1.4 or 85 f/1.8. So, will be doing some research on these last two also... any comments / suggestions on these two or something else better would be appreciated.

17-55mm is $989 new right now at amazon. i've seen them go for $850 here used on the wtb forums

gasrocks wrote in post #11393599
Sell the 55-250 and the 28-135. Get a nice midrange zoom: Tamron 17-50 or the more expensive but wonderful ef-s 17-55/2.8 IS. Sigma 150 macro is a great choice. A 50/1.4 and/or an 85/1.8 is also wise.

Yeap - that is plan, except backwards, somewhat Need to get the new lenses BEFORE I sell the others, as I need that range that these two bring me,,, plus the 55-250 is my only "macro" currently, and it also has a durn nice range, w/ decent IQ [again, for what it is]. Point being, need to get the other lenses, and then sell.

Of the two primes, since shooting with cropped camera and given what shared of my style, which would be recommended? I'm leaning slightly towards the 50... today.

For prime, I would personally go for the 30 1.4 but that's just me.

My preference on a crop is the Sigma 30mm 1.4
Since I bought it the 50mm has not made it back on the camera.

I have a large number of very-good to excellent lenses however, I shoot 90% of my imagery with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS on a pair of 1.6x cameras (I use the 30D and 40D).

If I were in your situation, I would get rid of the 28-135mm and 55-250mm lenses and get the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens.

I would also get a second body (another 50D, a 40D or even the newer 7D). Shooting with a pair of bodies is great. I never miss shots while changing lenses, never get dirt on my sensor changing lenses in the field and the second body is an insurance policy in the event of one camera failing. I broke my 40D on the first day of a 10 day Alaskan trip while climbing a slippery slope. However my 30D saved the day. Contrast this with a friend who fell on a tour to China in front of the Xi'an City Wall (you don't have to boonie tromp to break your camera). He did not have a backup and lost out on photo opportunities.

I easily carry my pair of cameras on an OPTECH Dual harness ( http://optechusa.com/d​ual-harness.html ).

My China portfolios shot with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses on 30D and 40D bodies are available at:
http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/

Thanks to all for the suggestions / comments, appreciate 'em much. Just one last bit of advice requested: is there any other lens that I should look at instead of the EF-S 17-55 that would have even better IQ and capabilities? Just want to make sure before I spend some more of the boy's inheritance... and the lady of the house wrings my neck even more. Thanks.

For a crop camera, you really can't do much better than the 17-55. I really wish it were full-frame compatible...

cskorik wrote in post #11465679
For a crop camera, you really can't do much better than the 17-55. I really wish it were full-frame compatible...

To me that is the problem with the 17-55. If you plan on shooting with 1.6 crop bodies for a long while it is a good choice. I prefer the 24-70L to pair up with the 70-200L. Sure it isn't as wide as the 17-55 but he has the Tokina for the UWA.

For some reason, Ken Rockwell doesn't like 17-55.

Personally if I could do it again, I wouldn't get any EF-S lens: just save the trouble for FF 'compatible' issue later on.

Why not get a 17-40L? It is cheaper than 17-55 anyway.

Well, as could not wait anymore, as have a concert coming up on the 22nd, ordered the 17-55 just now. Honestly, thanks to all for the recommendations and comments. I did look at many other choices - including the 24-70L [more expensive], the 17-40L [just a bit less $, but only f4], the 18-55 [much less coin, but quite slower], the Tokina [just a bit fewer dollars, also less range], and Tamron 17-50 [again not as much, but mixed reviews pulled it away IMHO]. As to the EF-S style, well the way my warped thinking is looking at this, as long as I've a cropped camera and/or until I pass this on to one of the boys or my lady, this will be an excellent lens for this type of camera. Terribly too high of a price, but... its ordered, and its hopefully on its way to Missouri soon.

BTW - the following, for what its worth, was one of the few reviews / articles that swayed me towards this lens also: http://www.wlcastleman​.com …ws/17-85compare/index.htm

Fudge... I hate buyer's remorse... and then also rechecking a note I just refound during lunch - "look at Sigma 17-50/2.8 EX DC OS HSM", including this review: http://photo.net/equip​ment/canon/efs17-55/ And now, day after ordering the Canon... grrrrrr... but, good to know that the Canon will 100% be good for any / all Canon bodies going forward, and it has excellent reputation. The comments in this thread also help: http://www.flickr.com …iscuss/72157625​273953843/

KR doesn't like most Canon products. Ignore him.