Lens Advice: 2 Mid-Level Primes or 1 L-Series Wide Angle Zoom

YardYeti wrote:

You suggest primes for telephoto. Does anyone else agree? I like the idea of the 10-22, 15-85, and 70-300better. But I really want feedback. I'm sold on the first two lenses already, although if I can get 17-55 I will, just discussing the telePhoto.

That sounds like a fairly solid plan.

You may find the 15-85 is wide enough that the 10-22 is fairly redundant, depending on you subject matter.  Framing interesting pictures at wider than 24 equivalent (15mm) takes a lot more thought than the more moderate ranges.

I got the 10-22 before I got a 17-55, and even with the 17-55 I find I use it a lot less than when I had the kit zoom.  The 10-22 is better than the kit by a long shot, but not better than the 17-55 in the overlap.

I would start with the 15-85 in your situation, use it for 6 months, and then see what I was missing.  If you miss the long end right away get the 55-250 to see how much real telephoto enthusiasm you have.  I had done very little telephoto, got the 55-250, and within a year upgraded to a 100-400, but if it had only gotten moderate use, it would have satisfied me.  I still have it for a lightweight kit, so even if you go beyond, it is not wasted.

If you find you would like to develop portraits more, then a 50, 60, 70 or 85 prime might be an option to investigate.  One of the third parties makes a 70mm f2.0 macro that could fill both fast portrait and macro lens.