I'm sorry, I know there are a ton of threads on lens recommendations, and I've read a lot of them, but I am looking for advice on my specific situation.
I'm a new hobby photographer, and I am lucky to make a good income at my day job, so I can afford the high camera equipment.
Here is what I currently own:
5D Mark III
70-200L f/2.8 IS II
Speedlite 220 EX
Speedlite 600 EX (I just order it)
Ideally, I'd like my next lens purchase to be flexible for a variety of situations, including low light, but still provide excellent image quality.
I shot mostly family photos, and also landscapes during vacations. From time to time, I take photos at sport events, such as baseball, hockey, and football. I'd also like to start shooting the nighttime sky, so a lens that is good in low light would be a plus.
Here are the lenses I am considering to compliment what I already own.
24L f/1.4 II - I've read nothing but good things about this lens, and it sounds like this lens would be good for low light sports, nighttime sky, low light indoors, plus excellent for landscapes. This focal length is wide enough for me 90% of the time, but it would be nice to have a wider lens for shooting the inside of a sports stadium or for tight spaces. Also, my thought is the IQ the 24L lens delivers would allow me to crop, therefore act as a zoom lens, if I need a tighter shot.
16-35L f/2.8 II - Obviously, based on what lenses I already own, this lens appears to make the most sense for the focal range that would be the best compliment to my current lenses. I've read mixed reviews about this lens, and 24mm is wide enough for most of my needs. Maybe I would be happy with getting a 17-40L later down the road, if I find I need it for those situations when the 24L f/1.4 II is not wide enough??? The only problem is the 17-40L is probably not that great for outdoor low light, but I could use the Speedlite 600 with it for indoor shots.
24-70L f/2.8 II - This lens isn't out yet, so I don't know how good the IQ will be, but assuming the IQ is much better than the 24-105L, it might make sense and it would be better in low light situations. The IQ of the II model would have to be significantly better than the current 24-105 for me to justify spending $2,300, otherwise I might as well get the prior 24-70L f/2.8 for half the price!
14-24L f2.8 - I'm in no hurry to purchase my next lens. Based on the rumor that this lens could be announced by year end, maybe I should wait to see what this lens has to offer. My guess is this lens will cost around $2,500, and I don't know if I want to spend that much on one lens, when I could get two quality lenses for the same price. Plus, I don't know if the focal length would fit my needs on a regular basis.
Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!