I recently posted a question asking which Canon 50 mm would be best to purchase. I received great advice and purchased the Canon 50mm 1.4. /The lens is an awesome lens and it is everything photo.net posters said it was. However, for the type of shooting I do I'm finding that the 50mm will put me a bit to far away from the subject. I mainly shoot from about mid thigh or just below the waiste up, depending on the size of the kid. I'm shooting with the 60D and I've decided the 35mm lens will probably be better for me, however, the only 35mm 1.4 made by Canon is the L series which is guite expensive. I found the f2 35mm from Canon but really wanted the wider aperture. How does the 35mm 1.4 or 2.0 compare to each other and to the canon 50mm 1.4 as far as picture quality , sharpness, bokeh etc? I'm also considering a canon standard Zoom but the 2.8 zoom is about the same price as the 35mm 1.4. I'd be losing out on the aperture with the zoom and I've been told that zoom is not going to be as sharp as a prime. I'm completely undecided at this point and could use some advice. Here's another thought. If my best bet is the 35mm 1.4L, I can keep the 50mm 1.4 and upgrade to a full frame Canon EOS 5D Mark II Digital Cam and spend about the same amount of money. I'm switching over from Nikon so the Canon 60D I just bought can be returned for a full refund. I've heard other photographers say that one should put their money into the lenses not so much the camera and the 5D is more camera than i"d need for what I do. However, if the 5D puts out better quality pics,I can certainly see going the full frame 50mm 1.4 route. what to do? what to do?