FF lens acquisition path

[hoousi]

Hi!

Since xmas a happy 5dII owner and contemplating my lens path.
I am a hobby photo/gear freak, main usage is family, several vacation/business trips in the next years with the usual suspect places as cities, safari (planned once), mountains and beach (good to live in the heart of europe) as well as a little street photography.
Until now I got:
Sigma 50 (rarely used), 16-35 II and my big love and long standing dream 85LII which is glued to my camera at present.
A must buy in the near future will be the 24L and I might sell the 16-35 and 50 to get a 14L.

I'm a prime type, means I can pass a whole vacation with just one or two focal lengths. Its my b-day soon and I have some bonus money itching in my pocket:
-everybody loves the 70-200 II and it would add a nice reach, but I keep salivating over the bigger primes though I don't want to spend 10000 on one lens and am looking for a prime alternative. I really frame badly with zoom, one thing too much to think about but I'll probably have to learn it one day

-How would you spend my money in order to get some classy reach and stay below 4000 dollars? If I get the 70-200 I'll add TCs for the times I need more reach? Shall I get the 135 and wait and hope a 400/4 may come out some day?

I must add that after years of cutting edges with my family I am at present heavily investing in my photo gear and only want high quality lenses without too many compromises (as long as it makes kind of sense and will be used frequently enough to somehow explain the expense).

Thanks, Andreas

 

[ecka]

Some say that 14L isn't worth the money, and many confirmed that. Therefore I'm thinking about buying Samyang 14/2.8 which is praised by a lot of FF users. However, 17L TS-E could be a good idea. As you can see I don't have any L glass in my collection at the moment, but I'm more into photography than collecting lenses . If I had to spend your money I would get 17L, 35L, 70-200/2.8LII and maybe 100-400L for safari. Do you really need that 135L? I think that 85L + 70-200/2.8LII would cover that range/DoF nicely.

 

[psolberg]

70-200II isn't worth the money over the prior one for the improvement you're getting. Is it good? yeah. Is it good value? no. If you're a smart buyer, use the difference to get yourself more glass. If money is no object, knock yourself out with all the latest.

 

[D.Sim]

personally I think you've got a pretty good set already... Would not sell any of what you have - the 16-35 versatility would come in really handy - but perhaps you could be asking yourself what you yourself find you're lacking?

Do you find yourself wishing you could zoom in a bit more a lot? 70-200 2.8 L IS II.

Do you find yourself itching for a fast prime, but with a bit more length? 135mm f/2

You don't shoot macro, so I wouldnt suggest that, but if you were to review your shots, wonder whats missing, perhaps oyu could find out what you need?

 

[hoousi]

Thanks for your comments, after looking through the photos of the last weeks I'm longing for outdoor opportunities. It was just unbelievably cold january/february. For the spring/summer time it's more reach I'm looking for, I believe the 70-200 makes most sense as the 100-400 is (forever) due for an update. It's awful how expensive the tele primes are...

The 24 will be important from next winter on for available light indoor wide, that's where the 16-35 is lacking (I think I'll love this lens outdoor and on city trips and forget about the 14).
Afterwards it's more about lighting that I must learn, must look for a good book or course for that matter, and then just go on shooting and no more care about gear too much.
About the macro I'm phobic to insects, a friend biologist loves to run around the house (always used my d90/tamron 90) and got me some very nice shots, so maybe for that and the from time to time food photos I'll get a macro if it isn't too expensive.

On preview there is a nice list about different types of forum characters, I definitely fall into the gear head category...

 

[bycostello]

24-70 and 70-200 covers most things for me... but on vacation, no way would i want to carry around the 70-200