[RikWriter]

Okay, here is my situation.
Most of my photography is wildlife...birds, to be exact. Wildlife pics make up about 70% of what I do with my camera. The rest is about 25% landscape and 5% family photos and my son doing swimming or Tae Kwan Do (not so much the latter anymore since I am taking it too, now and don't have the opportunity).
So the most important things to me right now are wildlife and landscapes.
Right now, my kit consists of what's in my sigline.
I am at a point where I have the money to make a couple purchases but I find myself at a loss as to WHAT to purchase.
I've thought about getting a 100-400 but I've come to the conclusion that I simply like my 400mm f5.6L too much to get rid of it and I am frankly not sure how much I need the 100-399 part of the range. Also, I have a 1.4X TC I can use with my 70-200 if I really need the 300 area.
I COULD use a 500mm f4L, but that's just too much money right now...I can't swing ~$5000. Believe me, I've THOUGHT about it, but I want to stay married.
As for the landscape part of the spectrum, I think I have that covered with my 10-22 Canon and the Sigma 24-70 f2.8. I suppose I could drop a grand into a Canon 24-70L but I am pretty happy with my Sigma so far and don't feel the need to do so.
Leaving lenses, I have plenty of memory and a light laptop with a DVD burner for storage, so that is not an area of need either.
I also have a nice tripod (although I might consider getting another head for it).
I don't do much portrait stuff and no formal studio type work, so I don't need lighting equipment.
The last area I've considered is the camera itself...I've thought about upgrading to a 1DMKII or a used 1Ds (I can't afford a 1DsMKII...again, the desire to stay married intervenes when I go over $3000 or so) or possibly getting the 5D. But I am pretty happy with my 20D so far, and given that I am not a sports photographer I don't need the frame rate of the 1DMKII. The weather sealing is attractive for when I go hiking, but the weight is not. Also, I don't really know if I want to go full frame anymore. If I did, I would wind up buying a 16-35 or 17-40L and my 10-22 already covers that territory and is a very nice lens. Plus I would wind up needing a longer telephoto for bird shots.
OTOH, the larger image size is attractive as I do like to blow up some landscapes for wallhangers. I've blown up pics from my DRebel, 10D and now 20D to 16x20 with very very nice results and if I had a 1Ds, I could get some truly BIG enlargements.

So, given what I've laid out as my needs, interests and budget, what's the prevailing wisdom? Should I give in to my spending itch and buy something and what? Am I good to go or do I simply not know what I am missing?

[Toad]

Hmmm.

If you can't think of a "must have" item to buy, and your current equipment serves you well, why spend the money on equipment? Trust me - something will come along that you really want to buy eventually.

In the meantime, why not spend the money travelling to somewhere you have not been before to take landscape and nature pictures with your existing equipment? It might prove to be inspirational.

Just my $.02

[Rufus]

Toad wisdom.......... Cant disagree at all.

I guess if I really felt the money burning a hole in my pocket, (and I was a wildlife photog), I'd buy I.R. triggering gadgets to catch the critters unawares , and rest my trigger finger.

That's just an idea.

It may not be a useful one...... :|

Nor interesting............ :/

Nor practical..................... :o

[Irma]

While reading your post I was thinking the same as Toad mentioned in his post... I think a photo safari would be great!! There are excursions with profesional photographers for few days.... Africa, South America... so many place to go....

[RikWriter]

While reading your post I was thinking the same as Toad mentioned in his post... I think a photo safari would be great!! There are excursions with profesional photographers for few days.... Africa, South America... so many place to go....

As a matter of fact, I AM travelling out west (Arizona and Utah) next month for some photography...by myself, unfortunately, my wife couldn't get off work any more this year. Africa, South America, etc are a bit out of my price range, I'd think.

[Don Schaeffer]

Buy a good TV. That's my dream.

--Don

[RikWriter]

Buy a good TV. That's my dream.

--Don

Got that.

[Schellamo]

Buy your wife something purdy, then next time when you find some thing you MUST have she'll already be butttered up and won't mind so much!

[Petographer]

I also think Toad's idea is the way to go. I can't disagree with Schell either though. Here's something I am going to do with my wife only she doesn't know it yet. I am booking a Champagne Balloon Flight for next summer. It has to be booked this early as they fill up fast. It isn't cheap but it will be worth the photos and the experience. The wife will be floored.

[shuttertalk]

Wow, sounds like you've got a great kit so far... most focal lengths from ultra wide up to tele are covered.

My thoughts would be along something supplementary - fisheye lens maybe? how about a longer mirror lens? or a set of filters?

Another thought - looking at your lineup, the thing that stands out is the sigma - maybe replace that with a canon equivalent? if you're happy with that one, though, i think the saying goes "if it ain't broke, dont' fix it".

[Don Schaeffer]

How about joining one of those high end photo expedition workshops advertised in Pop Photo?

[Wedding Shooter]

You could try a tilt/shift lens - very good for landscapes.

Otherwise I would recommend selling the 20D and 10-22 and buying a 5D and a 17-40. Full frame is great for landscapes and the greater resolution would probably make up for the shorter focal length on your telephoto.

Cheers,

Chris

[RikWriter]

You could try a tilt/shift lens - very good for landscapes.

Otherwise I would recommend selling the 20D and 10-22 and buying a 5D and a 17-40. Full frame is great for landscapes and the greater resolution would probably make up for the shorter focal length on your telephoto.

Cheers,

Chris

I've been thinking about that. But I want to wait a bit and see reviews of the 5D to make sure there are no bugs to be worked out. I've also considered getting a used 1Ds, which can be had for around the same price as a new 5D.

[Peted]

I have been umming and arring about some new gear, I would really like something with more reach but find that hard to justify because I am not using my 55-200mm at full stretch very often. I am doing quite a bit of close up/macro so am going to get a Tamron 90mm F2.8 and that should make me happy for quite some time I think. Maybe a ring flash to go with that.

[guitarman]

Hmmm.

If you can't think of a "must have" item to buy, and your current equipment serves you well, why spend the money on equipment? Trust me - something will come along that you really want to buy eventually.

In the meantime, why not spend the money travelling to somewhere you have not been before to take landscape and nature pictures with your existing equipment? It might prove to be inspirational.

Just my $.02

That was going to be my advice exactly. What is more important in photography? How much gear in your bag, or how many beautiful pictures you've shot with the gear you have?

[RikWriter]

Hmmm.

If you can't think of a "must have" item to buy, and your current equipment serves you well, why spend the money on equipment? Trust me - something will come along that you really want to buy eventually.

In the meantime, why not spend the money travelling to somewhere you have not been before to take landscape and nature pictures with your existing equipment? It might prove to be inspirational.

Just my $.02

That was going to be my advice exactly. What is more important in photography? How much gear in your bag, or how many beautiful pictures you've shot with the gear you have?

I am already going on the trips that I have the time for and can afford. That's not part of the financial equation in question.