I have a new 60D with the 18-55 IS kit lens, 50mm 1.8, and 70-300. A nice little set that covers basically all focal lengths I need.
I shoot primarily candids/ portraits both indoors and out.
Seems like the best lens for what I do and what would be a natural addition would be the 17-55.
That being said, I am also increasingly convinced that for the type of photography I enjoy doing, I want to jump to FF in the near future.
The reason I didn't just go for a 5D MK II now was because I was still looking at almost a $1700 price difference from the 60D body only. I felt the price differential, along with where I am skills-wise as a photographer didn't justify the 5D right now. At the same time, I felt the 60D was a worthy enough upgrade to my XSi, so I pulled the trigger.
Ideally towards the end of next year, I am thinking one of 3 things would have happened:
(1) I give up on this "hobby" and just keep the DSLR around to take pictures here and there, in which case the equipment I have now is more than enough and I'm thanking my lucky stars I didn't invest more money.
(2) I have improved as a photographer, I'm enjoying this hobby even more, and I'm ready to take the FF plunge. At that point I'll probably look at the new 6D or maybe jump to Nikon's D600. Hopefully either camera will be fully mature (with firmware updates and what not), reviewed thoroughly, and have some good deals by then.
(3) I will jump to mirrorless. The Nex systems looks promising, but that's another story.
So... there is a good chance that in about a year's time I will be looking to ditch the 60D and the EF-S lenses. So I'm thinking it might not be a wise move to put out $1000 or so for the 17-55.
In the interim, is the equipment I have good enough to take good pictures and continue growing as a photographer? Should I maybe consider adding a speedlite and/or a wider angle fairly inexpensive prime lens?