I converted to digital last August with a 5D and 24-105L kit lens. I also bought a 50mm 1.4 to provide a basic starter kit with some low-light capability. Being semi-retired, I want to avoid the upgrade route and am happy to save for premier gear that'll substantially see me through until I die.
Premise - As a semi-detached journalist, grab-shot reportage is important, but I also photograph mountain landscapes, trains and planes, formal portraits, a few weddings and am currently being seduced by wildlife. So you can see that, if I'm fleshing out my lens inventory, there's an argument for both wide and telephoto. I'm instinctively inclined towards primes, but am not averse to a good zoom.
A recent windfall cheque means I have around £1300 to spend on glass with the estimable kerso (from whom I happily bought my 200 2.8L and 1.4 extender).
I obviously wish to avoid gratuitous overlap, but clearly cannot avoid it entirely, so current options are:
17-40L and 70-200 f4 IS
70-200 f2.8 IS and bits and pieces (filters, ballhead, etc)
300 f4 and 400 f5.6
85 f1.2
Outsiders include 35 1.4L and 135 f2L. The 24 1.4L seems little mentioned or rated. Anyone tell me why?
Given my interests, I'd be interested to read comments that may help me narrow down my options . . . the more I drool, the more confused I become!
That's why I want fresh opinions to jolt my mind-set.
) when you display such wide photographic interests. Maybe you need to focus first in order to make a satisfying choice. You can always rent a lens to see if it suits your shooting habits.

