Im having Canon 550D for the past 2.5 years. I only have the kit lens and the 50mm F1.8 prime lens. I feel like I have come to the limit of these lenses (just my opinion, may be Im wrong., but Im getting bored with only these lenses).
So., considering an upgrade., I would like to know
a. if it is worth to upgrade to FF camera at this point of time.
b. if it is worth to switch to nikon.
c. if it is worth to buy new L lenses from canon.
For. a: I really do not know any compelling reason except for the urge to upgrade with the expectation that FF would enable me to take better pictures (than the current body).
For. b: I again do not have any compelling reason to switch to nikon for Im not able to clearly distinguish the real benefits of switching to nikon.
The only reasons to consider options a and b are because I have not invested much yet and have not locked myself into canon...so., is it worth trying these options now...
For. c: Im willing to cough out 2k. Im looking out for 2 lenses. 1. Telephoto lens. 2. Macro lens.
For telephoto lens:
-- 70-300mm L IS: Is it worth to go for this lens ? Or just settle down for the non-L version or even the cheaper non IS version?
--100-400mm: This size is so huge that Im very uncomfortable., and moreover Im not into wildlife photography.
For Macro lens:
--100mm F2.8L: I could not think of any other lens for the macro that is within the budget and decent in size (not large). The 180mm macro is quite big and also expensive.
Would these 2 (70-300mmL IS & 100mm F2.8 L Macro) be a good combination or should I go for a general purpose wide-angle lens - 17-40mm L lens ??
Pls. advise and thank you very much for all your time and response.