My two most used lenses are probably the Canon 50/1.8 and the Sigma 18-125 OS. Both good lenses, both very inexpensive, by camera standards. They're supplemented by a Tamron 70-300VC, a Canon 85/1.8. The body I have now is a 60d.
Unfortunately, at some point in December the Sigma began the process of failing... right now there's an odd point at about the 20mm mark where one of the elements moves out of place with a very audible "click". It still works fine other than that, but two different camera repair people have told me that yes, it's going to get worse, and sooner or later it will stop working. That means I need to start thinking about finding a replacement.
Most of my photography recently has been functional shots of woodworking I'm doing, but I've started taking pictures of my nephews (who are, of course, unnecessarily cute). Historically, the majority of my photos have been landscape or wildlife photography, with almost no portraiture. At the moment, I'm looking at two possible paths, and I'm looking for input.
Option 1: Buy an inexpensive super-zoom (Sigma 18-250, most likely, since there's a sale on one locally) as a walk-around lens, then start saving for high quality lenses. On the plus side, it gives me a single lens that covers basically the entire range I'm likely to want, which is convenient. That would mean I could sell the 70-300 to make back a little of the cash, and still keep the primes for places where quality really counts. On the minus side, it means I'm buying a lens I basically consider disposable, since its eventual use would be places I was afraid to bring more expensive gear. That's a nice thing to have, but extends the time I have to wait before getting something high quality.
Option 2: Start buying the better lenses now. Right now it looks like I can pick up a white-box 24-105 f/4 L for around $650 on Amazon. That covers most of the range of the 18-125, and certainly the range I use most often. I'd still have the 18-125 (until it broke) if I needed the extra at the bottom, and the 70-300 if I needed more length. After that I'd look for dedicated wide angle lenses and, probably, a 70-200 L.
Obviously having better lenses is, well, better. The big question in my mind is, will I regret reducing the range of my primary walk-around lens at both ends more or less than I'll regret having a primary lens that's not as sharp or fast as it could be?
Right now I'm pretty much on the fence... has anyone else been in a similar situation? What did you decide? Why?
)
