Originally Posted by heliphoto 
Here I'm gonna disagree with axl and Lowell... I just traded my 24-60/2.8 for a 18-50/2.8, which will soon be replaced with a *16-50.
this just goes to show that there is more than one way to "skin a cat
IMHO, once you get a K20D, you can crop 50mm to 60 or 70mm without significant loss, but at 24mm you'll have to stitch a few frames together to get the field of view of an 18mm lens.
which is why I suggested getting a 10-20 or 12-24, because once you start shooting you dind 18 or 16 is not wide enough
For me at least, having the added wide end makes up for the loss of the long end... and of course that's what it comes down to here, personal use and taste. For me, 18mm is plenty wide for travel,
I totally disagree, if yoou are doing landscapes fine, but just try travelling through old europeen cities and getting shots of a cathedral, let alone interior shots
though I'll get a ultra-wide rectilinear someday just to cover the range.
I think your plan sounds reasonable. I'd hesitate to call the *50-135 a replacement for the range of the 75-210, but if you find yourself mostly in the lower end of that range I'm sure it'll blow doors on the promaster.
Order wise I'd probably do it as you have listed... Camera first, then the short end, finally the long end, but that's just me.
it's not just you, but everyone
I think some of the problem is that every person has their own approach to building a lens system, and the real issue is planning out the whole thing from the onset. A lot of people, myself included, might not end up with the same lenses if we started over today from scratch,
BUT one thing is for certain.
you need to plan eventually to cover from 10mm to 200mm, with the focal lengths from the mid 20mm range of that being F2.8
How you get there, and what you are willing to carry is an individual decision some of it based upon whether you still use film or not.