need help consolidating my lens collection

[akraj]

I currently have the following in my bag

10-22 f/3.5-4.5
35 f/1.4L
50 f/1.8
24-105 f/4L IS
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
70-300 f/4.5-5.6L IS

I recently upgraded to a 5DMIII but I'm planning on keeping my 7D as a backup body

I usually shoot portraits, candid portraits, street life with some landscapes as well.

any suggestions on how I should consolidate my lens collection ?

my current definitely keep list has these 4

35 f/1.4L
24-105 f/4L IS
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
70-300 f/4.5-5.6L IS

thanks in advance

 

[Loswr]

The 50/1.8 and 28-135 aren't really worth keeping in your collection, IMO. Your plan leaves you with no UWA lens - are you ok with that (how much do you shoot the 10-22mm between 10-15mm)?

The 70-200 II is great for portraits on FF, but you might consider a fast portrait prime (85/1.8, Sigma 85/1.4, 85L, 135L).

 

[bholliman]

The 50/1.8 and 28-135 aren't really worth keeping in your collection, IMO. Your plan leaves you with no UWA lens - are you ok with that (how much do you shoot the 10-22mm between 10-15mm)?

The 70-200 II is great for portraits on FF, but you might consider a fast portrait prime (85/1.8, Sigma 85/1.4, 85L, 135L).

+1 on both suggestions. The 50 and 28-135 are inferior to similar lenses in your kit. Sell 'em. You can use that money towards a portrait prime.

 

[pdirestajr]

Your current "keep" list is all of your L lenses- I think you have already figured out your plan.

 

[akraj]

The 50/1.8 and 28-135 aren't really worth keeping in your collection, IMO. Your plan leaves you with no UWA lens - are you ok with that (how much do you shoot the 10-22mm between 10-15mm)?

The 70-200 II is great for portraits on FF, but you might consider a fast portrait prime (85/1.8, Sigma 85/1.4, 85L, 135L).

+1 on both suggestions. The 50 and 28-135 are inferior to similar lenses in your kit. Sell 'em. You can use that money towards a portrait prime.

thanks everyone.. I went back and looked at my Lightroom catalog and noticed that I had used any of the non keep lens in the past 2 1/2 yrs.

I going to go ahead and sell the following

10-22 f/3.5-4.5
50 f/1.8
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS

 

[RGF]

The 50/1.8 and 28-135 aren't really worth keeping in your collection, IMO. Your plan leaves you with no UWA lens - are you ok with that (how much do you shoot the 10-22mm between 10-15mm)?

The 70-200 II is great for portraits on FF, but you might consider a fast portrait prime (85/1.8, Sigma 85/1.4, 85L, 135L).

+1 on both suggestions. The 50 and 28-135 are inferior to similar lenses in your kit. Sell 'em. You can use that money towards a portrait prime.

thanks everyone.. I went back and looked at my Lightroom catalog and noticed that I had used any of the non keep lens in the past 2 1/2 yrs.

I going to go ahead and sell the following

10-22 f/3.5-4.5
50 f/1.8
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS

I would be curious about which of the keep lenses you use most often.

 

[akraj]

The 50/1.8 and 28-135 aren't really worth keeping in your collection, IMO. Your plan leaves you with no UWA lens - are you ok with that (how much do you shoot the 10-22mm between 10-15mm)?

The 70-200 II is great for portraits on FF, but you might consider a fast portrait prime (85/1.8, Sigma 85/1.4, 85L, 135L).

+1 on both suggestions. The 50 and 28-135 are inferior to similar lenses in your kit. Sell 'em. You can use that money towards a portrait prime.

thanks everyone.. I went back and looked at my Lightroom catalog and noticed that I had used any of the non keep lens in the past 2 1/2 yrs.

I going to go ahead and sell the following

10-22 f/3.5-4.5
50 f/1.8
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS

I would be curious about which of the keep lenses you use most often.

I've been using the 35 1.4 the most followed by the 70-200. I seem to be using the 70-300 only on vacations for candid portraits

 

[tron]

I would keep the 10-22. Unless you plan to get a 16-35 or a 17-40 after you sell the lenses you mentioned.

The 50 1.8 has great value for money (at least I think so for my version 1 EF50mm 1.8 lens. Are you sure you do not want/need it?

 

[tiger82]

10-22 f/3.5-4.5
35 f/1.4L
50 f/1.8
24-105 f/4L IS
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
70-300 f/4.5-5.6L IS

'my current definitely keep list has these 4

35 f/1.4L
24-105 f/4L IS
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
70-300 f/4.5-5.6L IS

thanks in advance

Sell the 70-300 and get a 1.4x III TC, your 70-200 becomes a 98-280 f/4. You will get 200-280 at f/4 rather than f/5.6.

 

[mingyuansung]

Sell the 70-300 and get a 1.4x III TC, your 70-200 becomes a 98-280 f/4. You will get 200-280 at f/4 rather than f/5.6.

Great suggestion.

 

[RGF]

Sell the 70-300 and get a 1.4x III TC, your 70-200 becomes a 98-280 f/4. You will get 200-280 at f/4 rather than f/5.6.

Downside is weight. 70-200 F2.8 is heavy to hold and heavy in the bag. 70-300 is much lighter

 

[RGF]

I've been using the 35 1.4 the most followed by the 70-200. I seem to be using the 70-300 only on vacations for candid portraits

Interesting. The 35 is covered by the 24-105 but is 3 stops faster. Do you shoot it F4 or wider? I find most of my work is at least F5.6 often F8 or 11.

 

[tiger82]

Weight wasn't an issue, in that case sell everything and buy an SL1 with the 18-200 IS lens.

 

[pj1974]

I have had the 28-13mm and 50mm f/1.8 lenses- bought them new when I purchased my first DSLR camera (several years ago, when the choice of lenses was much less than it is today). I have since sold both these lenses (and more) - while upgrading to better glass. While I had a decent copy of the 28-135mm - it's been superceded by the better Canon 15-85mm. Both copies of the 50mm f/1.8 I've owned weren't sharp enough wide open - and the focus and bokeh were not up to my standards.

Like has been suggested above, if I was in your shoes I would definitely keep the 10-22mm - as it's the only ultra wide angle (UWA) lens you have. But if you've determined that you haven't used it in the past 2.5 years... then I'm curious why you bought it in the first place.... I have the Sigma 10-20mm, and use it often - it really shines on my 7D for UWA shots - very sharp corner to corner. However yes, some people don't use UWA so much - and yes - I do a lot of landscape photography where UWA can be handy at times.

The previous 2 weekends I have been away and used my 7D with 15-85mm and 70-300mm L. This is such a great travel combination, top quality glass - very suited for the Australian outdoors where we get a lot of great light. When I want fast glass, I want and use primes. I'm still looking forward to Canon announcing (and selling) a new, improved 50mm prime - at least f/2 - sharp, contrasty with good bokeh wide open, solid, fast accurate autofocus (USM or STM) - and hopefully IS too.

Paul

 

[Zv]

Just a suggestion -

Sell 10-22, 50, 35L, 28-135, 24-105L

Buy 24-70 f/2.8L II

 

[tiger82]

Just a suggestion -

Sell 10-22, 50, 35L, 28-135, 24-105L

Buy 24-70 f/2.8L II

I'd like to hear what your reasoning is.

 

[Zv]

Just a suggestion -

Sell 10-22, 50, 35L, 28-135, 24-105L

Buy 24-70 f/2.8L II

I'd like to hear what your reasoning is.

My reasoning is that unless you really need to go wider than f/2.8 you can "consolidate" all your lenses for one lens that does pretty much all you want.

Don't need primes if you have the 24-70 II thus eliminating the need for the 35 and 50. Plus your 70-200 covers the rest. Keep the 70-300 for travel.

It depends on how important IS is for you at the 24-70 range. I find that I rarely shoot a static subject in poor light, and you can always crank up the ISO if needed (well you can on a 5D III maybe not so much on the 7D).

Not saying this is the solution but just something to consider.

 

[bwfishing]

I've been using the 35 1.4 the most followed by the 70-200. I seem to be using the 70-300 only on vacations for candid portraits

Keep the 3 lenses you are using and sell the rest. I think the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Standard Zoom lens would be a great option or maybe rent if only for vacations. I would also at least try the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM lens just because it is awesome and maybe add some prime lens balance with the wider 35mm 1.4 ;D

 

[akraj]

thanks for the suggestion, I did consider than but decided against it based on the weight. The 70-300L is pretty light weight and small to carry around when traveling

Sell the 70-300 and get a 1.4x III TC, your 70-200 becomes a 98-280 f/4. You will get 200-280 at f/4 rather than f/5.6.

Downside is weight. 70-200 F2.8 is heavy to hold and heavy in the bag. 70-300 is much lighter

 

[hawaiisunsetphoto]

Odds are that you're taking the 5D Mark III with you for travel. I'd jetison the 10-22 and pick up the 24-70mm f/2.8L II, which is incredibly sharp. I'd also recommend either the 14mm f/2.8L II or the 17mm f/4L TS-E for wide angle coverage -- for landscapes and/or architecture shots. Or, instead the 17-40mm f/4L, which is light..... You could also jetison the 35mm f/1.4L if you need to do so as that range is covered by the new zoom.