I've reached the end of my lens road map . . .

When I moved from crop to 6D a couple of years ago, I had a 100L and a 70-200 2.8 IS II that fit, plus some vintage MF lenses for fun. After moving to FF, I eventually sold off my 600D and crop lenses - 15-85 and Sigma 30 1.4.

I like having a standard zoom, so I bought a Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, since replaced with an EF 24-70 2.8 II.

My basic lens plan after that was about as focussed as this - something wide, something long, something fast.

I tried the EF 50 1.4, didn't really love it, and sold it when someone offered me more than I paid for it. I have a Super-Takumar 50 1.4, so that served my fast 50 needs for a while, especially after I added an Eg-S focussing screen to my 6D.

I picked up a 35 F2 IS when I took my crop and 15-85 on their last outing - a trek in Nepal. It's a great lens, and a nice focal length for both crop and FF. That 15-85 is a great travel lens, too.

For long, I tried a 1.4x III on my 70-200. The combo works quite well, but I discovered that there is less difference between 200 and 280 than I expected. This made me rethink my plan to get a 70-300L as a travel lens, and start waiting for an upgrade to the 100-400. I borrowed a 100-400 version 1 for a trip to Kakadu (lots of birds), and this confirmed my thinking that 400 was the minimum focal length I wanted in a longer lens.

In the meantime, I picked up a Samyang (well, Pro-Optics branded, but it's all the same) 14 2.8 as a cheap wide lens with good IQ, to see how I like ultra wide. I'm still getting used to this focal length, and what I can do with it. Landscape and astro are both good, and some interesting dog photos, but not too much success with people yet - so much perspective distortion . . .

None of the 50 1.4 offerings seemed to be compelling, until the announcement of the Sigma 50 Art. I put it on my potentials list, and waited to see the reports from people actually using it.

The 100-400 II was announced, but unavailable. In the meantime, I came across a 135L at a good price and bought it on a whim. What a delightful lens this is - I have taken some special photos with it. It also works well as a travel lens, especially urban travel.

A few months ago, I wandered into my local camera shop (as you do) to take a peek at the brand new 11-24 (hefty), and there was a 100-400 II on the shelf. It was everything that I wanted it to be - fast and accurate AF, sharp wide open, good IQ, ridiculous MFD, in a (relatively) compact package. It's on my camera most weekends.

My gear lust sated for a while (apart from a new camera bag, but who's counting those?), the 50A sat on my road map as the only lens I was kind of sort of looking at, if the right deal came up, but no hurry etc.

Last week, my camera shop had a 10% sale, and the Sigmas are quite nicely priced here (Australia) anyway, so I bought the 50A for AU$781 - just about cheaper than used. First impressions are good.

So, I'm left in the position where I'm not currently considering any lens purchases. It's a strange (but liberating) experience in my photographic journey so far. I'm not sure how long it wil last. I just hope that I can resist following the gear changing path forged by Talley . . .

You don't have a macro.

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

bumpintheroad wrote in post #17607007
You don't have a macro.

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

Actually, I do have a 100L - it's in the first line of my long and rambling post, so I completely understand you missing it . . .

dodgyexposure wrote in post #17606955
When I moved from crop to 6D a couple of years ago, I had a 100L and a 70-200 2.8 IS II that fit, plus some vintage MF lenses for fun. After moving to FF, I eventually sold off my 60D and crop lenses - 15-85 and Sigma 30 1.4...............

bumpintheroad wrote in post #17607007
You don't have a macro.

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

I assume he still has the 100L.

I would say he's got everything covered very well.

Ah, missed that. Then you're all set for glass. :thumbsup:

What a great feeling. Wish I was there.
I'm pretty happy with my lineup. I rented the 100-400 II and really liked it. If I had it and the 24-70 2.8 (selling the 28-70) I think I'd be done.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #17607029
What a great feeling. Wish I was there.
I'm pretty happy with my lineup. I rented the 100-400 II and really liked it. If I had it and the 24-70 2.8 (selling the 28-70) I think I'd be done.

I have very carefully avoided that statement, as I fear it would come back to haunt me.

So true. It's been two years now of serious photography (as an amateur) and I'm content with my stable.

The 100-400 is a luxury that I would not use that much but would be very nice to have in a pinch. The IS alone is just fast and so damned accurate. The five days I had it was really fun.

My 28-70 is a great lens... been contemplating on stepping up but I really love the new Canon IS lenses. Im in no hurry to spend $1,500+.

Time to get out and shoot! GAS is a disease.

I know the feeling, OP. I need to sell some stuff. I've barely touched my macro gear, for example.

The dead end I've reached is defined by the huge jump in cost to a super zoom. I'd love a 500mm f4, but that price tag is just a killer. I did pick up a Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 Sport and it's working well with the Sigma 2x TC as a super zoom. But I still lust for a 500mm f4.

what you're experiencing is new gear satisfaction.... it'll last a good week or so

Those of us with true GAS, know that this alleged map, has no clear ending, just a mirage. Havent even heard of the "too heavy" phase, or the "zeiss" phase, or the "1.2" phase. And then there is the bag phase, the lee foundation kit phase, and the strap phase..... the 5Dsr phase, the mirroless phase.... you've got a long way to go.

so you have a 14mm f2.8, 35IS, 50A, 100L, 135L, 24-70VC, 70-200ISII, and a 100-400II?

you clearly need a fisheye

DreDaze wrote in post #17607258
so you have a 14mm f2.8, 35IS, 50A, 100L, 135L, 24-70VC, 70-200ISII, and a 100-400II?

you clearly need a fisheye

I wish my 24-70 II had VC, but your list is otherwise correct. Apart from the vintage lenses . . .

I thought about a fisheye, but I reckon I would use it once or twice for novelty, then put it away forever. Not my thing.

dodgyexposure wrote in post #17607272
I wish my 24-70 II had VC, but your list is otherwise correct. Apart from the vintage lenses . . .

I thought about a fisheye, but I reckon I would use it once or twice for novelty, then put it away forever. Not my thing.

ah, yeah...i missed the upgrade part...i understand the fisheye connection, i bought a broken one, fixed it...maybe i've used it twice since...

you should try the mp-e 65mm

Charlie wrote in post #17607241
what you're experiencing is new gear satisfaction.... it'll last a good week or so

Those of us with true GAS, know that this alleged map, has no clear ending, just a mirage. Havent even heard of the "too heavy" phase, or the "zeiss" phase, or the "1.2" phase. And then there is the bag phase, the lee foundation kit phase, and the strap phase..... the 5Dsr phase, the mirroless phase.... you've got a long way to go.

You may well be right. I have sampled the dangerous waters of bags and straps, but have come out relatively unscathed. so far. As for the others, I have my hands over my ears so that I can't hear the siren song of those other phases.

I do several types of photography and I also need some different lenses. It's still a long way for me though.

For now I am changing my equipment as I was working on crop body earlier, now I bought-in the 6D for the lineup.

1. 6D is now my primary portrait camera equipped with 24/1.8, 50/1.4, 58/2 (old russian lens I use from time to time for it's cool swirly bokeh), and soon 85LmkII (on it's way at USPS ). I just need to get 35L and I'll be satisfied with this setup.
2. My old 550D will now be used as an airshow body equipped with 70-300vc. What I need for this setup is to change the tamron into 100-400LII some day, and to buy 500/4Lis (sooome later day too...) And eventually change the 550D into some newer body when the '10 oldie one disintegrate