Amen brother.
As far as how important lighting is.... if you want that perfect sunset, a nice blue sky with white clouds, or those serious dramatic clouds, chances are, you're gonna end up metering too dark on your subject. It can be done without lights, it's done all the time without them. But if you can, why not? Meter on the whitest cloud in a blue sky about a stop or two to the left, and fill in on the subject. Or, on a completely overcast day, meter those clouds two or more stops dark, to really enhance them, but put them in the background where they need to be. Light, gotta have it.

^^This!^^
Normally I would suggest new glass because that's how I feed MY addiction...but honestly, Controlling Light is what we do as Photographers.
That skill is what allows us to turn an ordinary snapshot into a true Photograph! Looking at your portfolio I see some excellently framed images that simply seem a little flat to me.
Getting a light setup such as the one suggested above would allow you to begin to sculpt the light and make *it* do as *you* like, rather than for you to be at the mercy of the available bounced light and shade at your particular location.

Get the Lights!  Keep on Shooting!

===Steven===>>

Question 1: what do you want to accomplish that your current gear doesn't let you do?

Question 2: why doesn't it let you do so?

Without an answer to both of those, advice is kind of risky. Two photographers with identical gear and nominally similar subject can have wildly different goals, and each might well 'need' very different things: lighting tools (what kind?), education (in what?), lenses (which?), etc.

I think if the OP knew specifically they wouldnt be posing the open-ended question.  Its a tough process coming up with goals and self evaluating your work to get there.  Sometimes its an easy choice, like it was years ago when all kit lenses were shite and the only reliable triggers were PWs.  The answer was "both but only one was affordable".  Sometimes its not so clear and we need more experience to figure it out. Now kit lenses are fine, they just don't have 2.8 or 1.7 apertures to get a certain effect some of us like/want.

OTOH I'd be willing to bet that most of us have come to the point where have put in the the thought, know our goals, know several things could help our work and are trying to prioritize. And then there is 'like' and 'gearlust' that come into play.  If I had $$$ to play today I might be asking the question "better lightstands or better booms?"   Someone else might be asking "seamless or cloth?"  I know we often ask
"what are you trying to do?" and on the surface it seems the right question.  But sometimes it just makes things more confusing for the OP.

Now that I've wasted page space, I'm going to go with George's suggestion.  getting the flash off camera, simply because it's an inexpensive option that can be done for way less than 500$.   That way, if the OP finds they still need better glass they have a head start on saving for it.  If better glass doesn't turn out to help them, it will be more daunting thinking about saving up for the off-camera kit.

I like prime lenses I used to shoot them, but, for my work primes were not practical. They were to heavy bulky and made me carry extra camera bodies. My work through is location driven, be it photojournalism, event photography, sports, editorial or commercial. Because of that I carry my gear with me. I as far portraits I do a lot of EP work. I can also have a complete portable studio that I can set up in under 30 min.

Because of these needs I carry 3 basic zoom lenses, Prime Lens and one 1.4x Teleconvertor.

AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED
AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED
AT-X 300 AF PRO -TOKINA 300mm f/2.8

I think it really comes down to the type of work you do, and what you can afford. Based off of what you have posted so far I would lean towards a zoom. Mainly it will give you more flexibility and coverage for the dollar. If were talking more money and more lenses then a couple of primes makes more sense to me.

I love my EF 100mm f/2.0 for portraits. Others like the 85 1.8 or the 2.8 version of the 100mm. - all under your budget (half)

The Canon 85/1.8 is an awesome portrait lens on a crop frame camera.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon85mm/


Add a light stand, white shoot through umbrella, and a radio trigger and you're good to go.

You can learn a massive amount starting here:
http://strobist.blogspot.co.uk/2006/03/ … g-101.html

Don't buy too much stuff all at once - get a good minimalist kit and learn to use it well.

+1

Sounds to me that you use ambient light most of the time.  That suggests to me that you should get a lens -- in particular, a wide angle lens.  I love wide angle lens.