[joolselliott]

I'm just trying to make you aware that you may be spending more time doing other things rather than actual photography. This is especially so if you are doing it on your own.

Is the 18-55 any good? I had one a few years ago and shot my first calendar cover shot with it. However, you can no beat decent glass and lenses are a wise investment. If you look at second hand lens prices against second hand body differences there is a marked difference. Good glass retains its value for a good reason.

As for full frame the it does depend on what you want to do. Pretty much all the pro-landscapers out there that you see in the mags have a full frame for a reason. One, there is the quality and two they are also doing other things with their images than being in mags. Those images you see in the mags get printed elsewhere as they in various libraries. And as I said earlier, there are some libraries that will not entertain you unless you have the equipment to back up your work.

If you want to do landscape then you must consider where you income is going to come from. Libraries is one. Magazine work. Commissioned work for magazines such as shooting the images to go with a writer's words. Doing the words and photography yourself. Workshops (very hard as there is market saturation) etc.

Geographical location can also help in getting you work. Because I am a Brit landscaper living in France I have a slight edge on some things as my portfolio extends to both Biritsh shores and French shores. I can capture those great landscapes that are available in the UK when I visit relatives and then the French stuff is on my doorstep. There are certain magazines who like where I live as it is quite central and means many locations are freely accesible. For example, I've recently shot the chateau at Chambord, been sent up to two different locations in Normandy and then been sent over to Burgundy to shoot a private chateau.