Advice on which lens to upgrade/replace/add

[killswitch]

Saved up enough for a 70-200 f2.8L IS II. Initially I thought I would replace my current 70-200 f2.8L (non IS) with the mark II. But now I am confused which lens to upgrade/replace/consolidate. I like to travel light, and given my travel habit (with family most of the time) I usually take around 2 lenses, a medium tripod, 1x ND filter and a remote trigger.

Travel kit (these two lens combination worked really well for me so far)
16-35 f2.8L II - Landscape
70-200 f2.8L - Landscape/portrait

Family & friends events kit
24-70 f2.8L (have not tried any other lens combination yet)
580 EX II

General walk-around
24-70 f2.8L
50 1.8 II

I would say all my lenses get almost equal amount of usage in a year, and I am pretty happy with these glasses. I guess I am trying to find out which one to upgrade first, or maybe add a prime. At one point I was thinking maybe get the 70-200 f2.8L IS II and a 1.4x Extender first. So my question is, if you were to upgrade one glass from the list, which one would you replace first. Also, if you were to add a glass (for e.g. travel, family events, walk-around, indoor portrait) to the list, then which would one would you consider? Hope I made sense, and thank you for your recommendation and advice.

 

[Harry Muff]

Upgrade the 24-70 2.8L to the Mk II version.


Spend the money you make by selling the Mk I on a EF135 2.0L




You've now got an awesome mid-range zoom and an awesome telephoto.




And, probably, change to spend on other goodies.

 

[privatebydesign]

I have all three MkI f2.8 zooms and I have no intention of "upgrading" them. I spend glass money on specialty lenses that do something completely different, you never know where you might find interesting subjects. The 15mm fisheye is fantastic as a novelty and an ultra-wide rectilinear, the 17 or 24 TS-E lenses add new dimensions and capabilities to your photography and the 100mm L Macro is a wonderful portrait lens with amazing IS (Canon's only mid tele prime with IS) and, of course, macro capabilities that can open whole new fields of photographic enjoyment.

The best thing about these four lenses, they have very low depreciation, get any of them, try them out and, if you don't like them, sell them and get 90% of your money back.

I am currently in the Caribbean working with the 15 fisheye, the 50 f1.4 and the 100 macro, it gives me a very high quality diverse kit with some extreme capabilities that just are not possible without three zooms, tubes and the accompanying weight.

 

[Dylan777]

85L II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II are my fav for indoor portrait.

24-70 II + 135L is not a bad combo at all. Photo below was taken with 135L @ wide open.

 

[alexanderferdinand]

Upgrade the 24-70.
Give the 135L a try (I love mine....)
Are you a strobist? Take a look on a pair of 600rt's.

Choices. Have more fun than headache!

 

[killswitch]

Interesting thoughts. The 3 primes (85, 100 and 135) did cross my mind several times. Perhaps its a good idea to buy used but in good condition and try them out, and sell it off later if not used much.

85L II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II are my fav for indoor portrait.

24-70 II + 135L is not a bad combo at all. Photo below was taken with 135L @ wide open.

Dylan, beautiful photo! I know you recently bought the 135, and you also have the 85. Right off the bat, what did you like most about the 135 over the 85?

The recent thread regarding the 14-24 and 16-50 lenses got me all excited, though it's still a rumor. I know I will definitely jump for the 16-50 (prefer non bulbous front element) if it's released and as stellar as the new 24-70 II or if it's mid frame is substantially better than the 16-35 II. Till then 16-35 II stays. Upgrading to 24-70 II just got more confusing if 16-50 is indeed in the works.

Upgrade the 24-70.
Give the 135L a try (I love mine....)
Are you a strobist? Take a look on a pair of 600rt's.

Choices. Have more fun than headache!

I am no strobist but I am trying to learn the art whenever I get the chance. Have not yet experimented with multiple flash.

 

[mwh1964]

Think you are well covered. Save your money.

 

[Dylan777]

Dylan, beautiful photo! I know you recently bought the 135, and you also have the 85. Right off the bat, what did you like most about the 135 over the 85?

AF speed, weight and focal lenght. I used to carry 24-70 and 70-200, but now just 24-70 + 135L

 

[bholliman]

Upgrade the 24-70 2.8L to the Mk II version.

Spend the money you make by selling the Mk I on a EF135 2.0L

You've now got an awesome mid-range zoom and an awesome telephoto.

And, probably, change to spend on other goodies.

+1 I added the 135L in February and love it! The 24-70 2,8 II is next on my list.

 

[symmar22]

You have excellent lenses, who don't really need upgrade, I would keep my money here. The improved sharpness of the 24-70mm II will cost you 2000$ and won't bring you "better" or "different" pictures; show them around, no one will see the difference. The only lens I would replace is the 50 f1.8, for the better ergonomics and USM of the 1.4, but if you're happy with the 1.8, just keep it.
I would as other said, buy a lens that allow you something different : close focusing (100mm macro, 90mm TS-E + macro tubes), perspective correction (24 TS-E II / 17 TS-E), wide aperture (24 / 35 f1.4, 85 f1.2 / 1.8 ), very long focal (400 f5.6), or even the 8-15 fisheye, all depending on what are you favourite subjects. As an alternative, a converter 1.4 vIII, would add a bit of reach to your excellent 70-200mm for relatively cheap.

 

[chas1113]

You have a great kit that most people would love to have. Your 2.8 zooms are as good as it gets, but heavier than their f/4 counterparts. If you're looking to lighten the load and add IS for travel, you could "downgrade" to either the 24-70 f/4 IS or 24-105 f/4 IS. Questionable decision. Same thing with the 70-200 2.8: you could add IS and drop some weight by going with either the 70-200 f/4 IS or the 70-300L IS. Still questionable.

If you need to change anything, I'd upgrade the 50 1.8 to either the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8 for portraits....