Your collection of lenses would be much more effective on the full frame body.
You're 18 to 135 would in affect still be 18 to 135 instead of a 27 to roughly 200. Why add another system which would require buying new lenses?
I have the Canon 16-35, the 25-105 and the 100-400 and I'm a happy camper. They cover ALL my requirements. I have a Canon Powershot 110s as my carry around camera. You'd be better off finding a clean used Canon 5D Mk Ii or a 6D. You'll be amazed at the improved quality of images.

Hi David,

We're all different....

But if I had your kit I'd first get the Canon EF-S 10-22mm. Wide angle takes some practice, but once you learn what you can accomplish with them, can be a lot of fun. There are cheaper options (Sigma, Tokina, Tamron) but the 10-22mm is the best of the ultrawide bunch for use on Canon cameras.

Next thing I'd do is upgrade from the 50/1.8 "thrifty fifty". A lens I'd recommend is the Tamron 60/2.0... which I'm currently experimenting with. It is a very good macro lens, plus an excellent portrait lens. No other macro lens offers an f2.0 aperture (well, except for a manual focus 100mm Zeiss). It's not got Tamron's relatively new "USD" drive, so isn't fast focusing, and can't really serve for sports/action... but is fine for macro and portraits. Really shouldn't be a problem replacing a 50/1.8, though, since that's not only slow focusing, it's also hit-and-miss in ffocus accuracy and noisy. The Tamron is internal focusing (doesn't grow longer when focused closer), which is nice when shooting macro. And the front barrel doesn't rotate when shooting (which is nice if using a polarizing filter). I got mine on sale for $400 not too long ago. The Canon EF-S 60/2.8 is also a great mscro lens, has better USM focus, but is only f2.8... The f2.0 of the Tamron is nicer for portraiture or other types of photography where you want a particularly shallow depth of field or need to shoot in lower light.

I agree, the EF-S 15-85mm would be an excellent upgrade from your 18-135mm (though the later, STM version of that is supposedly pretty darned good).

If you didn't have the 50/1.8 (or a Tamron 60/2.0), I'd suggest the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS instead. But since you have a fast prime, there's probably no need to go to a more expensive and focal range limited f2.8 walk-around zoom.

Speaking of faster primes, I also carry a Canon EF 28/1.8 and like it as a slightly wide "normal" lens on my crop cameras. It's very compact, even with it's matched lens hood. I might try the new EF 24/2.8 IS sometime, for it's slightly wider angle of view on a crop camera. But it's slightly larger, more expensive and f2.8 instead of f1.8. An alternative "fast normal" lens is the crop only Sigma 30/1.4.

I disagree with the suggestion about a 70-200. You have a 100-400mm, so don't need a 70-200mm.

I also would not recommend going to a full frame camera unless wanting lower light capabilities or planning to make really large prints (5D "Classic" would be a step backward in many respects, don't settle for less than a 5DII or 6D). In fact "your collection of lenses" not only would be less effective on full frame, the EF-S 18-135 wouldn't even fit!

Switching to full frame is more than just buying the camera. You'd also have to replace any EF-S lenses completely with bigger, heavier more expensive full frame compatible lenses... In your case, that includes the 18-135 or 15-85mm (24-105 is a little more expensive, 24-70/2.8 is a whole lot more expensive and much bigger/heavier)... and, if you get it the 10-22mm (16-35 II is much more expensive, plus bigger and heavier, and actually isn't as sharp corner to corner)... plus your 100-400mm would also suddenly be "shorter", so you might find yourself looking for a 500mm or 600mm lens and a tripod to sit it on.

I know it's the latest fad and there are lots of full frame famboyz and fangirlz around... but many people don't actually need full frame. A crop camera system can be a lot cheaper, smaller, lighter and still meet or exceed all their needs. Unless you are shooting in moonlight or making 20x30" prints a lot, stick with your 60D (which has a better AF system than either 5D, 5DII or 6D, in all but the lowest light conditions).

I wouldn't go with a different brand for a compact point n shoot camera. What I might do is wait for the new Canon M2 "mirrorless", which apparently has only been released in Japan so far. While it uses M-specific lenses (EF-M), and there is a limited selection of those, there is an adapter available for it that would allow you to use any of the above EF/EF-S mount lenses on it, too.

Good advice. I used a EFS 15-85 and a EF 70-200 L is for several years. I began thinking that one day I might upgrade to full frame. With that in mind I bought a used EF 24-105 L is from Craigslist for $600 and would now recommend this + the EF 70-200 L is as being the best lenses I've had for general purpose photography. Although I had a 7D when I made the 24-105 my walk around lens I almost never took it off the camera. On a crop factor the 24mm end of the zoom really isn't quite wide enough sometimes but Photomerge takes care of that nicely and on the 6D I'm now using it's fine.
I would recommend these two 'cheap' L series lenses above anything else even if they are a bit of a stretch financially you'll just be saving yourself from trading and buying until you own them. The 15-85 isn't a great deal cheaper than the 24-105 but the difference in quality is significant. Get the 24-105 and learn how to use Photomerge.
A lot of people (like myself) buy the 24-105 in a kit, mine came with the 6D. This makes them cheap enough to resell on Craigslist new and unused for $700 - 750 and discount the cost of the body a little. (I resold my 'old' one and kept the new one instead).
The EF 70-200 L is is simply excellent. Unless you have lots of money and really need the speed get the f4. It's optically as good and light and easy enough to carry around easily. Check the reviews.

I would like some assistance determining which lens I should consider to add to my collection.

I own the 60D, 18-135mm kit lens, 100-400 zoom, 50 1.8 mm prime.

I was considering a wide 10-20 mm, but not sure how much use I would get out of it. Also maybe consider a better medium range zoom for image quality.

Also am considering the Olympus e-pl5 as a secondary walk around camera, Is this a smart buy?

Thanks in advance for your comments! I will get back to ya'll later this evening.

I would like some assistance determining which lens I should consider to add to my collection.

I own the 60D, 18-135mm kit lens, 100-400 zoom, 50 1.8 mm prime.

I was considering a wide 10-20 mm, but not sure how much use I would get out of it. Also maybe consider a better medium range zoom for image quality.

Also am considering the Olympus e-pl5 as a secondary walk around camera, Is this a smart buy?



Thanks in advance for your comments! I will get back to ya'll later this evening.