I started photography as a "serious" hobby about 2 years ago, and I have to admit at the start (and sometimes even now to a lesser degree) it was as much about gear as about the photography. I upgraded from an XSi to 60D to now a 6D. Although I violated the "glass before body" rule, the plan was eventually to add some nice L-lenses to my gear as well.
But I'm actually starting to pare down my lenses instead, I just sold off my only other L lens, the 70-200, because I just wasn't using it.
For what I shoot, I've been very happy with the pictures I've gotten from the 24-105 and the nifty fifty. Those 2 are my go to lenses. And I know I'm not maximizing the capability of those lenses yet because I've seen much better pictures from those lenses than I can take from other photographers. Plus if I want to just grab a camera for a non-photographic outing, I frequently just use my X100s now.
I also can't see myself adding any L glass in the near future, and if I do I think I'll add the more inexpensive "consumer grade" lenses instead - I've been dithering on an 85mm 1.8 for a while.
So ultimately my main Canon kit is the 6D with 24-105 and nifty fifty. A body and 2 lens. But if this is all I need at this point, am I kind of missing the point of owning a Canon? One of the biggest benefits of Canon seems to be the impressive lineup of awesome lenses. If I'm happy with just the body and 2 lenses, would I be better off going for another, maybe mirrorless system, like say Fuji or Sony?