Hi, I've been shooting events, portraits, and sports for a few years, but never really had the money to upgrade to good glass. I know a good camera without good glass isn't exactly great, but I've succeeded in proper exposures and good composition in order to make my clients happy, rather than spend money on glass.

I've found myself at a bit of a loss as to how I should progress in getting my first L-series lens, as there's simply too many options, and no single lens covers every single thing I need; meaning that I'll have to compromise somewhere and save up for any future lenses after this. My issue, however, is simply deciding where to start.

My current set up:
  • Canon 60D
  • 17-85mm USM IS F/4-5.6(Not a great lens, but I've done my best to make up for it; it's my general walk around lens right now.)
  • 50mm F/1.8 II
  • EF-S 55-250mm IS II
  • 580EX II


Naturally, due to the nature of the events I shoot(inside of gyms, community centers, schools), I find myself using the 17-85mm the most, since 50mm on a crop sensor can be a bit narrow for indoor events. However, when I find myself in outdoor events, especially sports, I normally end up using the longer ranges. The 50mm II has done a lot for me as a portrait lens, and I'm very happy with the creative results; plus, it lets in a lot of light when I need it for the more creative, no-flash shots.

The lenses that I'm looking at(and are in my budget) are these:
  • Canon 17-40mm F/4L (Good range and price, not sure about the F/4)
  • Canon 70-200mm F/4L (My telephoto pick, but f/4 seems a bit narrow for portraits; not bad for daylight sports and airshows(I usually find my shutter at about 800+ during these events, no real need for IS), and a bit better than my 55-250mm for night sports. Also, who can resist a white lens?)
  • Canon 24-105mm F/4L(Not very wide, but I like the range as it reduces much need to swap to my 55-250 during a event. F/4 is worrying at walkaround)
  • Canon 28-70mm F/2.8L(Not wide either, but the long end + F/2.8 would be good for portraits, and seems like a decent walkaround and indoor event lens, since I could always "zoom" to 18mm with my feet. Seems rather old though, no IS but fill-flash would make the main subject in focus even at a lower shutter speed.)
  • Canon 16-35mm F/2.8L(This might be an ideal range for me in general event photography, it doesn't really need IS at that wide of a focal length, and good F/2.8 for indoors. Issue is, it's at the far end of my budget range, and I would need to make a lot more than I was originally planning in order to get it. I'd like to know if anyone thinks the positives of it make up for the price.)
  • Canon 17-55mm EF-S F/2.8(I'd like to say this is a perfect lens, but the reality is that I may very well end up with a full-frame camera within a year, and I wouldn't want to spend $800 on a lens that I can't even use on the camera!)



The part where this gets iffy, however, is that I'm very torn between the variety of lenses and options I could get. I'm partly feeling like I want to get a mid-range lens to use for most general purpose situations(and possibly portraits if it goes past 50mm), but most L-lenses seem to be a little long for that range. I also do end up doing sport and airshow photography, which leads me to wonder if it's worth more to invest in a good mid-telephoto lens, as it would probably vastly improve the image quality(mainly contrast, which is dismal on the 55-250) at the telephoto range.

The other thing is aperture, as many of the lenses I like the range of have the aperture of F/4. My 60D does produce acceptable(in my standard) shots at ISO 3200, and if there's no other way, ISO 5000 is not absolutely horrifying. That has been my savior with the F/4-5.6 17-85mm, as its aperture is horrific indoors. Flash, although it makes up for a lot of light in small and portrait situations, does not make up for large gym environments; and I normally find myself pushing my ISO up higher than I would really want(Ideally, I want it to stay below 800)

Now, my budget is limited-- I could maybe get 600 in spare cash, and then sell the lenses that fall under that general focal range to get maybe 800 bucks, but even that might be a bit of a stretch.

I figure this is a pretty weirdly worded question, but I'd really like to hear some input on what people think would be an appropriate lens for me to start my L-series collection with. Bear in mind, I will be unlikely to find the money for another lens for around six months-- so this is a pretty important decision to me.

Any thoughts? I'm open to discussing or explaining myself more, I'm just in a rut to figure out what to buy; everything seems to be a compromise in one way or another.