I really can't think....

[Lonnie Utah]

of any other lenses to add to my kit.

Right now I have...

Sony CZ 16-35 f2.8 (my favorite)
Sigma 24-70 f2.8 (this might get the most use)
Sigma 70-200 f2.8
Minolta 50mm f1.7

(these are all for my A900)

I also have a DT 18-255 that pretty much lives on my A200.

I have been browsing the shops/ebay for other lenses and "Deals". I just can't find a reason to pull the trigger on anything.

What would you add/change?

[pakodominguez]

a Fish Eye!
A lensbaby could be fun
Otherwise, a 100mm 2.8 macro.
How about Flashes? I just got the 20AM (it was, or probably still is, on sale) and it is a nice little piece of gear. the 58AM is beauty...

happy shopping!

[KevinBarrett]

Hmmm, starting with Macro options....there are a couple of really good nine-bladed-aperture f/2.8 macro lenses out there for less dough than Sony's 100mm. The Tamron 90/2.8 is widely regarded as "the portrait macro," and the Sigma 70/2.8 is astoundingly sharp from wide open and never seems to reach any diffraction-limiting as you stop down all the way to f/22. I know you already have some glass at this speed in this range, but there's no replacement for a macro lens.

Or you could get some really fast lenses, an 85/1.4 for starters, or the 135/1.8 for just a bit more. You might go the other way and look at Sigma's wide-angle f/1.8 primes, but you've already got some VERY nice, reasonably fast zooms overlapping from 24-35mm (and they probably already beat those older Sigmas, anyway).

I am hesitant to suggest any zooms because a.) you've got your bases covered, and b.) I'm a prime guy myself. Have you considered a teleconverter?

[bossel]

If you want some reach, add a 70-400 or if you want a good prime, a 135/1.8 or 85/1.4, depending on your focal length preferences.

[PeterPhoto]

If I would have a FF in my camera bag, I sure would go find a diagonal fisheye lens. And since I'm used to the crop factor I'd be on the outlook for a some extra mm in zoom or fixed focal point (up to 300 or 400 mm). But first a fisheye

Best,
Peter

[Wes Gibbon]

If you're happy with what you have but feel the need to acquire more, then I'm afraid you have caught The Disease! (That's ULAA, or Unnecessary Lens Acquisition Addiction).

It can be a very enjoyable disease, but it will cost you...

Of course, it all depends on your photographic interests, but I agree that a 100mm macro would be a good addition, and I would want something longer than 200mm, so the 70-400 shoulod do justice to your A900, though you will not want to carry it around at the same time as the Sigma I believe they both weigh about 1500gm.

You probably won't get a great deal of 'serious' use out of a fisheye, or a lensbaby, but they should both be great fun!

And for portraits, the 85mm f1.4 will give you all the cntrol over depth of field that you could wish for.

[Lonnie Utah]

Of course, it all depends on your photographic interests, but I agree that a 100mm macro would be a good addition, and I would want something longer than 200mm, so the 70-400 shoulod do justice to your A900, though you will not want to carry it around at the same time as the Sigma I believe they both weigh about 1500gm.

Which is why I think a teleconverter might be a better situation, (since the siggy is already 2.8.) That would give me a 140-400 F4.....

[KevinBarrett]

Which is why I think a teleconverter might be a better situation, (since the siggy is already 2.8.) That would give me a 140-400 F4.....

I think you'll find it gives you a 140-400/5.6

[Lonnie Utah]

Which is why I think a teleconverter might be a better situation, (since the siggy is already 2.8.) That would give me a 140-400 F4.....

I think you'll find it gives you a 140-400/5.6

Either way, it's still easier than carrying 2 lenses....

(I might have gotten my wires crossed with the 1.4 tc (98-280 f4)