Which Lens to buy

[LBphotography]

Hi every one. I am regular visitor of canon rumor website since 1 year but this is my first post. Little bit about me, i am Sydney based photographer. Currently shooting for fun but soon going to start my own photography business. I shoot portraits, wildlife, landscapes and macros. Please have a look at my website to see what kind photography i do. www.ladybug-photography.com
Now come to the point, i currently have EOS 1DX and EOS M camera and have 24-105 L, 24-70 2.8 L II, 70-200 2.8 L II, 35 1.4 L, 40 STM pancake, 50 1.4, 85 1.2 L II, 100 2.8 L IS, 300 4 L IS, EF-M 18-55 STM and EF-M 22 lenses. Since i bought 24-70 2.8 L II i hardly used my 24-105. Now i am thinking to sell my 24-105. I will able to get 700-750 for this lens easily. I am also thinking to sell EOS M with kit lenses. I will have around 1300-1400 cash and i am thinking to spend this cash on camera gears.
Dilemma is i am confuse what to buy, i am confused between 17-40 L and 200 2.8 II lenses. My reason to get 17-40 to get wider than 24mm for landscape and for 200 2.8 II for its light weight to carry around. I am also thinking to get 6D instead of lenses as my 2nd camera. Just confused, help me out what should i do. MY Budget is around 1500 AUD.

*********UPDATE***********
I am thinking to add 2nd camera because i am going to start my photography business and the 2nd camera will be backup camera for me also i need something lighter than my 1DX. But I don't consider any other brand than canon. I am full frame user and I am looking for full frame camera only. Some people Suggested Olympus OM-D and Sony RX-1, if i have buy to these small cameras i will better keep my EOS M. I like the quality of EOS M but it is just limited with STM lenses and with any other EF lenses it is dead slow plus i have buy adapter to use my EF lenses on it.

 

[Random Orbits]

I'd skip the 200 2.8 II because you already have the 70-200 II. Unless you know you are going to be using a prime of specific length, the bag full of primes will take up space and weight similar to the 70-200L II.

I'd suggest getting a second body first, then an ultrawide for landscapes.

 

[charlesa]

Second body maybe, and then either 8-15 mm if you want a speciality lens, or a 24 mm TS-E II. Or just go Nikon and get a D800E and a 14-24 f/2.8 goddess of a lens!

 

[RGF]

Are there photos you can not get due to equipment limitations? That will help you decide where to spend your next dollar.


BTW I did not see a flash mentioned, tho you mentioned lenses

 

[LBphotography]

Thanks every one for your kind reply.
@ Random Orbits. I was thinking 200 2.8 II because most of the time with my 70-200 2.8 II L i always use 200mm focal length but i think i better get 2nd body as backup first. thanks for your kind reply.

@ charlesa. I have used 8-15mm many times before, i liked this lens but this is specialty lens as you mentioned i think it won't be very useful for me. 24 mm TS-E II is good option but i already have this focal and this lensis
best for architecture stuff and also out of my budget. Just for 14-24 focal length i don't wanna go to Nikon. i better have EF14 2.8 if i need 14mm focal length. thanks for your suggestion.

@ RGF. you have given really good advise. i think i never feel that i miss any focal length. i have focal length covered from 24mm to 300mm and it covers all my needs. I forgot to mentioned flash, i have 600EX RT and 270 EX II flashes and also have 2X III extender.

 

[sdsr]

How often do you wish you had a wider lens? If once or twice a month, or more, it would make sense to buy a 17-40. If you want a 200mm for convenience, I would suggest that you consider a 70-300 L instead - given what you shoot you don't really need speed, in lower light your camera performs well at the required higher ISOs (it works superbly in low light on my 6D in terms of focus accuracy and speed and I imagine it does at least as well on your camera), the range is more convenient than the 200mm prime, the image quality isn't significantly different, and it doesn't weigh much more. (All that's true of the 70-200 f/4 L IS, but it might seem a bit odd owning two lenses with exactly the same focal length.)

As for getting a back-up body, I'm a big fan of the 6D, but how often do you wish you had a back-up? It's a nice idea if you have a spouse etc. you like to go on photo expeditions with so you can share/fight over lenses, and it's nice to have two bodies to minimize lens swapping.

Or to further your implied pursuit of less weight you could replace your M with an Olympus OM-D - for your $1500 you could buy one of those and a few superb but very lightweight Olympus & Panasonic lenses; I recently did so (I spent rather more than that, though...) am constantly astonished by how little the bag containing it all weighs compared to my FF camera gear - my 70-300L weighs more than all of it combined.

 

[Random Orbits]

Thanks every one for your kind reply.
@ Random Orbits. I was thinking 200 2.8 II because most of the time with my 70-200 2.8 II L i always use 200mm focal length but i think i better get 2nd body as backup first. thanks for your kind reply.

@ charlesa. I have used 8-15mm many times before, i liked this lens but this is specialty lens as you mentioned i think it won't be very useful for me. 24 mm TS-E II is good option but i already have this focal and this lensis
best for architecture stuff and also out of my budget. Just for 14-24 focal length i don't wanna go to Nikon. i better have EF14 2.8 if i need 14mm focal length. thanks for your suggestion.

@ RGF. you have given really good advise. i think i never feel that i miss any focal length. i have focal length covered from 24mm to 300mm and it covers all my needs. I forgot to mentioned flash, i have 600EX RT and 270 EX II flashes and also have 2X III extender.

It also depends on whether or not you'd miss the IS on the 200L f/2.8 II.

 

[wickidwombat]

what about the 135 f2L?

i have the 70-200 f2.8L II as well but i also have the 135f2L

the 135 can also be used with teleconverters

 

[LBphotography]

@ sdsr. Frankly speaking i never felt that i am really missing very wide focal length but just thinking to add on ultra wide zoom lens to my kit. I was thinking to get 200 2.8 II because of its light wait but still it have 2.8 aperture. i shoot wildlife and most of the time in low light so i need 2.8 lenses only. 70-300 L is a good lens but it is not for me because at 200mm it become f/5 which will be really really slow even with High ISO of 1DX and if i need 300mm i already have 300 F/4 L IS lens. I always wish for 2nd body when going away with my family because 1dx is really big and heavy camera and it is not easy to carry around this camera with toddlers. I am looking for light weight just for convenience but i can't compromise with image quality i rather hang with my 1dx for the whole day than buying Olympus OM-D or may be better to have 6D which is full frame and have awesome quality otherwise keep my EOS M instead of OM-D. Much appreciate for your kind suggestion.

@ wickidwombat. 135L is also a good option, i might consider this lens as well.

@ Random Orbits. I don't mind if the lens doesn't have IS. Most of my lenses doesn't have IS.

 

[jasonsim]

If you really must have a lighter DSLR to travel with or just as a back-up, the 6D would be it. But learn about it's weaknesses, before you buy.

If you want something lighter, that gives DSLR quality output, I'd consider the Sony RX100. The images and dynamic range coming from that camera are truly excellent. It can also slip into a shirt pocket.

Kind regards,
Jason

 

[Ladislav]

If you are going to start your own photography business the second body can be helpful just because it is backup. If anything goes wrong with your primary body when working on contract you still have a backup.

I would not invest into 200 f/2.8 if you already have 70-200 f/2.8. 17-40 f/4 is lens I'm considering myself but reviews I have read so far didn't convinced me yet. Reviews usually considers its wide end quite weak in corners on FF. Perhaps looking for some wide prime (even Samyang) would be more interesting if you want wide angle lens for landscapes.

 

[bholliman]

I enjoyed you portfolio of pictures on your website! Some really nice compositions.

My advice would be to pick up a 17-40mm lens since it expands you range of available focal lengths. Having a second body or 200mm lens would be nice, but doesn't really allow you to make shots you can't today. I have also been looking at adding a UWA zoom or prime at some point.

That said, since you are starting a photography business, adding a second body as "insurance" will be a good idea at some point.