OK, say I've got $~700 burning a hole in my pocket. To save everyone a click on my gear link, here's the current lineup:

Bodies:
5D & 1D
Zooms:
Sigma 12~24mm EX DG | Canon 24~70mm L | Sigma 70~200mm EX DG
Primes:
Canon 45mm TS-E | Canon 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 90mm TS-E

Wanted:
Canon 24mm TS-E L $1100
Canon 28mm f/1.8 $399
Canon 85mm f/1.8 $339
Canon 17~40mm L $679

Eventually I want to also go the L prime route with the 14L, 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L... But they're all so expensive, I'm figuring I'd rather get the 2 USM (28 and 85) versions first as I can get them now, versus in years.

Out of those four lenses on my wanted list, would you buy the 2 primes together (are they even worth it, or should I slowly save for the Ls and skip them?), save up a while longer to complete the TS-E trilogy, or go for the 17~40mm L now? Temptations are a bitch!

I love my 17-40L but that is on a 1.6 sensor. I imagine it is even better on a FF.


Scott

Yeah, that's the last zoom on my list (except maybe a 100~400 way down the road). Plus it's either that or the sigma IMHO, I won't keep both. I just feel I need to take the 17~40 for an extended test drive...
But the 24mm is the last TS-E....
then I could pick off the 2 USM non L primes and finish that list....

Damn it, I'm starting to be a collector... I honestly thing I'm going to end up with all primes. I just can't sell my zooms until I know the primes work for me, and I can't afford them w/o selling the zooms. Catch 22, so instead I'm left wondering what to do and making all these weird sales/trades/whatever....

I need to remember to buy a lottery ticket tonight. Nothing would be more fun than to quit work, walk into a camera store, and order one of EVERYTHING.... Then be able to go play all day and sort out what I really want...

I need to start renting gear so I can at least play with the things I think I want so I can narrow down my list to what I realistically want...

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

or go for the 17~40mm L now? Temptations are a bitch!

I used my 17-40 for the first time yesterday in a long time. I think I'll have a newfound love for it with the 5D. Out of all your choices it's definitely the most versatile (obviously, being the only zoom). Fantastic for landscapes, around town, hell, product photography even.

The problem with primes is once you get one, you'll find yourself in situations where you'll convince yourself you need the next focal range up/down. It's a never ending vicious cycle until you're broke. Then again, their IQ may just be worth it since there's less glass to them.

Oh, and I think you really want the T/S just so you can complete your collection.

Originally Posted by tardypizza

I used my 17-40 for the first time yesterday in a long time. I think I'll have a newfound love for it with the 5D. Out of all your choices it's definitely the most versatile (obviously, being the only zoom). Fantastic for landscapes, around town, hell, product photography even.

That's the thing. It's a quality zoom that I know I'll like. I admit I overuse the 12mm of the 12~24mm, and the colors can be a bit weird at times. I feel the 17~40L is a better zoom for me overall, but I don't want to sell the 12~24mm until I can play with a 17~40L... I'm thinking eventually a 17~40L and 15mm fish or 14mm will be the answer, so I have a wacky fisheye for when I really want to exaggerate that effect, then a better zoom for the rest of the time....

Originally Posted by tardypizza

The problem with primes is once you get one, you'll find yourself in situations where you'll convince yourself you need the next focal range up/down. It's a never ending vicious cycle until you're broke. Then again, their IQ may just be worth it since there's less glass to them.

Yep.
I've been in a sharpness kick lately so that's why I'm wanting the primes all of a sudden... Also I tend to use zooms at one end or the other and rarely in between their ranges, so I think primes might be better for me... I also love their low light abilities... The TS-E are what turned me on to primes again, since they only come as primes. I just seem to take much better images with them... Partially because I'm forced to use my tripod though... Also because I have to work harder because they're primes.

Originally Posted by tardypizza

Oh, and I think you really want the T/S just so you can complete your collection.

Yes, but the 24mm is a better fit for me than the 90mm anyway. I should see if I can figure out a way to "trade" it for the 24mm... I rarely use the 90mm these days, and I know I'd use the 24mm a lot. I would love to have all 3 at some point, but for now if I have 2, the 24mm and 45mm make more sense.... But I found a wicked good deal on my 90mm, so that's why I have it. It's banged up cosmetically, so I got it for $800... But that makes a trade much harder to sort out because a lot of people are hesitant with it because of the cosmetic flaws (it has paint chips... )

~$700? If it were mine I'd spend it on an ABR800, Vagabond II, and some modifiers

I don't see anything on your "wanted" list that's hugely useful. The 24 TS-E gets poor reviews, you already have a 70-200, which covers the "Trinity" 135mm prime fairly well... what about selling the Sigma 70-200 and getting the 70-200 f/4 IS L, or maybe even the f/2.8 IS L? What about the 135mm f/2 L? Last but not least, how about a Hartblei Super Rotator?

What do you do for a living?

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

so I think primes might be better for me... I also love their low light abilities...

Although you will lose out on the long end you may want to think of a 16-35mm f/2.8L USM which I have read great reviews of but they go for a few hundred more than you have to spend.

Scott

What is a "whole in my pocket"?

As for what to buy, I've got no idea, you already have way more stuff than I can imagine.

Why not buy your own spyder2express?

Originally Posted by jblaze5779

What do you do for a living?

Computer crap.

and apparently I collect camera gear...

So I went by the camera store on my way home tonight. It was a recon mission to check out camera bags actually. Crumpler 6 and 7 million dollar homes to be precise. Neither were perfect, but they're close. I'll have to think about it though.

The had the G9 there. Awesome little P&S, but I'm still not sure. 3:4 blows and the wide end is only 35mm effective which sucks. It's not out yet, but I didn't fall in love with it (although test shots are impressive to 800 ISO)...

They also had a 17~40mm L there. It's Fn NICE!!! I think that may be what I get. I test shot with it in the store. I need to check out the images when I can (Sunday, I'm on the laptop "watching a movie" with the wife right now). It's light, VERY light in my hands. Much smaller than the 12~24mm too. It's 500g -vs- the sigma's 615, but it felt much lighter, weird. Anyway, I'm thinking I might get that and sell the sigma. I shoot it at 12mm way too much,and no where else. I've also been noticing it produces some weird colors at times (like the other night on the beach)... Anyway, I'm thinking I could sell the sigma for the 17~40mm then maybe get the 15mm fish for when I want to get really wide/distorted. The advantage of that is that I won't use the fish when I shouldn't... Right now with the sigma I end up at 12mm when I shouldn't...

Who knows what I'll get. All I know is I'm finally happy with my bodies, so at least that's a start.
I've also been digging around on the FM "alternative" forums reading about adapters. Nikon has a 28mm PC that I could pick up for <$350 with an adapter....

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

So I went by the camera store on my way home tonight. It was a recon mission to check out camera bags actually. Crumpler 6 and 7 million dollar homes to be precise. Neither were perfect, but they're close. I'll have to think about it though.

Funny, I'm thinking of going by the camera store in Austin tomorrow to shop, yet again, for another bag. My Stealth Reporter is just not enough for all my gear. And I know I need the remote release and a new neckstrap for the 5D. I wonder what else I'll get sucked into?

The had the G9 there. Awesome little P&S, but I'm still not sure. 3:4 blows and the wide end is only 35mm effective which sucks. It's not out yet, but I didn't fall in love with it (although test shots are impressive to 800 ISO)...

I wouldn't even know where to start if I was shopping for a P&S these days. All my friends have little Canon something or others and are snap happy as can be, and producing some awesome shots too! They're completely oblivious and creative as hell. They can't understand why my cameras are so unwieldy and I'm always swapping lenses. Sometimes I wish I hadn't have learned everything I have about photography. NOT!

They also had a 17~40mm L there. It's Fn NICE!!! I think that may be what I get. I test shot with it in the store. I need to check out the images when I can (Sunday, I'm on the laptop "watching a movie" with the wife right now). It's light, VERY light in my hands. Much smaller than the 12~24mm too. It's 500g -vs- the sigma's 615, but it felt much lighter, weird. Anyway, I'm thinking I might get that and sell the sigma. I shoot it at 12mm way too much,and no where else. I've also been noticing it produces some weird colors at times (like the other night on the beach)... Anyway, I'm thinking I could sell the sigma for the 17~40mm then maybe get the 15mm fish for when I want to get really wide/distorted. The advantage of that is that I won't use the fish when I shouldn't... Right now with the sigma I end up at 12mm when I shouldn't...

Yes, the 17-40 is friggin nice! I'm surprised to hear that it's smaller and lighter than the sigma. I didn't expect that for such a robust lens. And I'll be interested to see you expand your repertoire away from the 12mm end of the spectrum, although I'll be shocked if you end up selling the lens itself.

Who knows what I'll get. All I know is I'm finally happy with my bodies, so at least that's a start.
I've also been digging around on the FM "alternative" forums reading about adapters. Nikon has a 28mm PC that I could pick up for <$350 with an adapter....

Yep, who knows what you'll get? But I'm putting money down that no matter what you get, you'll be window shopping for something else, new and shiny, inside of a month. This post is time stamped.

I'm just sayin'.

I know that I'm still giddy from having just bought my 10-20mm, but I think you'd regret selling the 12-24mm. I agree that you can get stuck on the wide end and use it when you shouldn't (UWAs are like crack!), but there are those times when you will REALLY want that UWA (I have wanted the 10-20 for a really long time and wish I'd bought it instead of some of the others lenses I bought first).

If you shot nothing but portraits or sports or wildlife, of course I wouldn't be saying this, but based on what I've seen you shoot, you'd miss it. Your WA farm pictures were the ones that finally pushed me over the edge to go ahead and buy my Sigma.

My 18-70 is probably still my most-used lens, and it has its place. But I think it should complement the wide lens, rather than replace it.

My 0.02

Well the one point is that 16~17mm on a full frame is still considered very wide... 12mm is just insane. It's not that's I'd give up UWA, it's that I'd go to a lens with less distortion at it's widest, then have something CRAZY wide with intentional distortions when I need/want to go that wide... My only issue I'm having is as I look at all the 12mm pictures I have, the edges/corners are a bit wacky and if I had shot them at 17mm and taken a step back, I'd have a better shot for most of them. Then the few where I really needed to be that wide, a 15mm would be fine...

I think I'm going to see if I can rent the pair in Boston this week and try them out in practice before I spend the $$$.

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I think I'm going to see if I can rent the pair in Boston this week and try them out in practice before I spend the $$$.

Thats what I did when I was deciding between the 10-22 and the 17-40. I still want the 10-22 though some day down the road. By rent the pair do you mean 17-40 or the 16-35?


Scott

rent the pair = rent the 17~40mm and 15mm fish.

OK, just did a quick comparison of 5 shots from the photo store, 1 at 12mm, one from each at 17mm and one from each at 24mm. The 17~40mm L does have very slightly better contrast and sharpness, but both are very good. You have to look at the images at 100% to even pick up on it and it's still very subtle.

Not sure what I want to do now... I'll see if I can post up some sample images later so everyone can look/comment.