Lens/Body consolidation question

I have decided that I will be upgrading to a 5d mkII in the next couple of months and of course want to consolidate my current lens lineup to better maximize the change to FF.

Current lineup consists of:
40d
Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 *SOLD already
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Canon 50 f/1.8
Canon 85 f/1.8
Canon 28-135 IS f/3.5-5.6
Canon 70-200 f/4L
Canon 100 macro f/2.8

Here is where I need some assistance. Would I be better off doing the following to get a better lineup?

Sell the 10-20, the 17-50 and the 28-135 IS and put that towards a 24-70 f/2.8?
If I do that then my lineup would be:

5d mkII
Canon 17-40 f/4L (just picked it up locally)
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 (Decided to go the 24-105 route instead)
Canon 70-200 f/4L
Canon 50 f/1.8
Canon 85 f/1.8
Canon 100 macro f/2.8

Would this be the way to go? Any other suggestions instead? My shooting style is landscape and urban shooting as well as getting into different macro styles. Not much sport or portrait shooting at this time.

Would really like some feedback as I would like to start the ball rolling on selling the gear to help fund the upgrade.

Much appreciated.

If you shoot landscape - I would think that you would want wider than 24mm.
I'd look at the 17-40mm or if you want the 2.8 - either the Tokina 16-28mm or EF 16-35mm

Let me ask this, being that the 5d2 has a better ISO rating, do I really need to worry about the f/2.8 range? Would a f/4 lens work just as well by bumping up the ISO instead?

If that is the case, then a lineup of 17-40 + 24-105 + 70-200 would be better right?

Mr. Bill wrote in post #11519612
Let me ask this, being that the 5d2 has a better ISO rating, do I really need to worry about the f/2.8 range? Would a f/4 lens work just as well by bumping up the ISO instead?

If that is the case, then a lineup of 17-40 + 24-105 + 70-200 would be better right?

Yes - but also, if you're doing landscape work - you'll be stopping the lens down to around f/8 anyway. If you don't need the 2.8 - get the 17-40mm (you'll save a lot of money). If you're going to be doing a lot of indoor shooting or want the shallow DOF - the 2.8 will come in handy.

I am actually in a similar position as you - over the past few months - I have sold many lenses and am setting up to go FF in the near future (maybe when the next iteration of the 5D comes out).

Another thing - it's novice to think that you need to fill in EVERY FL gap. How often do you use the 40-70mm range now? I have a gap from 40-70 and don't miss it at all. I had primes that filled the gap - but I sold them because I just never used it. Just a thought is all. If that's a focal length that's useful for you, by all means, just disregard what I said.

hieu1004 wrote in post #11519691
Yes - but also, if you're doing landscape work - you'll be stopping the lens down to around f/8 anyway. If you don't need the 2.8 - get the 17-40mm (you'll save a lot of money). If you're going to be doing a lot of indoor shooting or want the shallow DOF - the 2.8 will come in handy.

I am actually in a similar position as you - over the past few months - I have sold many lenses and am setting up to go FF in the near future (maybe when the next iteration of the 5D comes out).

Another thing - it's novice to think that you need to fill in EVERY FL gap. How often do you use the 40-70mm range now? I have a gap from 40-70 and don't miss it at all. I had primes that filled the gap - but I sold them because I just never used it. Just a thought is all. If that's a focal length that's useful for you, by all means, just disregard what I said.

Those are some good points Hieu.
Maybe I should go 17-40L, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 (save money here too) and then my 70-200 f/4L. That should cover all my bases and save me some $$ too. This would give me a very good 3 lens lineup then. Plus would save me some shoulder pain.

I'd change that 24-70 sigma to the 24-105L. Even though you have the long end of the range of the middle lens covered with the 70-200 ,the 24-105 is very useful as a walkaround urban lens. It allows you to do more with one lens from wide to decent street candid length all in one lens. Having to take the full 3 lens kit on a downtown walk can be cumbersome.

The 5D is the body to beat, and all your lenses work full-frame. It is one of the best pixel-per-buck and feature-per-buck cameras out there. I'd sacrifice two lenses you mention to get the 5D. You have lots of redundancy in your lens choices that can be handled by the superb Canon 24-105L lens, which is as sharp or sharper than many primes in that range. You won't want to fool with changing lots of lenses (dust and all that), so get a good zoom and the 5D...

Thanks for all the recommendations.

One last question though, I have a chance to get both the 17-40L ($450) and a 24-105L ($750) for a total of $1200. Does this sound like a good deal or not?

Mr. Bill wrote in post #11557316
Thanks for all the recommendations.

One last question though, I have a chance to get both the 17-40L ($450) and a 24-105L ($750) for a total of $1200. Does this sound like a good deal or not?

Obviously prices vary by locale, but the 17-40 runs at least $500-550 on craigslist in the St. Louis Area. The 24-105 usually goes for around $850 or so, sounds like a good deal on both.

I just picked up the Canon 17-40 f/4L here locally. The 24-105 deal fell thru so I guess it's back to the drawing board and time to scour the "for sale" areas again. Really want to have one for when the 5d shows up this week.

Mr. Bill wrote in post #11519485
5d mkII
Canon 17-40 f/4L (just picked it up locally)
Canon 24-70 f/2.8 (Decided to go the 24-105 route instead)
Canon 70-200 f/4L
Canon 50 f/1.8
Canon 85 f/1.8
Canon 100 macro f/2.8

I think you could ditch 2 more lenses if you wanted. Keep the 17-40 and get either the 24-105 or the 70-200 depending on how you like to shoot your landscapes - you don't need necessarily need both. Go with the 28/1.8 and 100mm macro primes and forget about the other two. The 28 is good for environmental portraits and night time street scenes while the 100mm f/2.8 can easily double as a portrait lens.

You end up with 17-40, 24-105 (my choice), 28/1.8, and 100/2.8. Grab a ND filter and a polarizer to go along with the zooms (the 17-40 & 70-200 f/4 can't share filters; the 17-40 & 24-105 can).