If your ultimate dream is a 35mm sensor, then why are you going to drop more than half the cost of a new body on a single lens when you barely shoot that focal length range as it is? And then in the same post you say that you need to invest in lenses. You keep sending us conflicting messages.


You could get a 5DmkII for $2700. If you bought a $1400 EF 16-35/2.8L, you could have spent that money on half of the 5D body, and as Daniel rightly points out, on an APS-C sensor, you're basically paying a lot of extra cash for an image circle you're not fully utilizing, and you *won't* utilize until you get a 35mm sensor.


Honestly, if I were in your position, I'd hold off on buying anything new. Save it up and keep shooting and USE what you already have. If I didn't have the money to spend, I wouldn't be dropping $$$$ on L glass. And if you're dead set on getting the best possible image quality, then stop looking at zooms. I'd buy some cheap EF primes that would still have decent resale value and are impeccably sharp, which will give you all the more reason to develop your technique.


Here's the thing. Investing in lenses is nearly always a better idea than investing in bodies. Bodies don't have a 10-15 year serviceable lifespan the way lenses so often do. The very popular 70-200/2.8L IS is a 9 year-old design and it is still selling like hotcakes. Its value has actually *increased* over time. Granted, not all lenses do this, and when Canon does update the design, the old model takes a hit. But it is unheard of for an EF lens to lose value in the way that a digital body does.


But all of that is irrelevant if you don't think in terms of "what are my photographic needs and what equipment should I have in order to satisfy those needs?" I could go out tomorrow and drop $7000 on a 400/2.8L IS. I have the means. It's a very, very nice lens and I guarantee you walking around with something like that would make a lot of heads turn. But what on Earth am I going to do with something like that? I'd feel nervous just touching it much less walk out the door with it. And I'm not a professional sports photographer, so it's a huge waste of money and a huge increase in risk. It might actually be an interesting financial investment--who knows, the lens might appreciate in value--but if I really wanted to think that way I'd be better off trading in securities instead of optical fluorite.


So do you see where I'm going with this? In my view, you have not yet demonstrated your ability to separate your desires from your needs. As such, it is unwise to approach the subject without first examining how each of your proposed purchases will bring you to the next level in your personal photographic development.