Would you bother with the 12mm F2, 17mm f1.8 or 45mm f1.8 if you had the 12-40 f2.8 Pro?

EyeMac wrote:

Sad but true, buying a new lens tends to get me motivated to go out and take more photographs!

I have the 12-40 f2.8 pro that stays on my camera pretty much full time. I have the 9-18 that I use occasionally. I also have the cheap Panasonic 25 f1.7 that I bought for $99, I'm not too fussed about this one so it might go but there are loads on the online markets so not worth much. I have the cheap 40-150 that gets occasional use. My last lens is the 75-300 which is rarely used and seems like a bit of a white elephant for me. I am tempted to sell the 75-300 to get either the 12, 17 or 45 but not convinced I will use it!

My last thought is that I should ditch the 9-18, 25, 40-150 and 75-300 and get the 40-150 f2.8 pro plus the teleconverter that is fore sale reasonably on an online trade site!

Would you put all your eggs in the two 'Pro' zoom basket?

I don't have the 12mm f/2 yet but have been considering it for astro (which I would rarely do ... but I like throwing all my money away).

I have the 7-14mm, 12-40mm, and 40-150mm PRO lenses and will take those whenever I'm going out specifically to shoot.  But I also have the 17mm, 25mm, and 45mm f/1.8 lenses which I typically use when I want to have a camera with me but I don't know if or how much I'll be shooting (or for street stuff).

All that said, I love having the fast primes because they're small, light, and inconspicuous.  The 45mm is a lot less obvious than the 12-40 at 40 or the 40-150 at anything when trying to get candid stuff.