Need help spending money.
I currently own a canon 600d with Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 / Canon 50mm f1.8 + Kit Lenses
Trying to work out if i should get a (probably sigma) 17-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 24-70 f2.8 since i have a wide already. Thoughts?eed help spending money.
I currently own a canon 600d with Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 / Canon 50mm f1.8 + Kit Lenses
Trying to work out if i should get a (probably sigma) 17-50mm f2.8 or Tamron 24-70 f2.8 since i have a wide already. Thoughts?
I'm seeing double here. Four Krustys!
Well shiiiiit apparently ctrl+v is hard. Anyway i can edit?
Question still stands thoufh
a 50mm f/1.4 or 1.2 prime
stop being lazy and use your legs
>>2967033
>stop being lazy and use your legs
I did that once, fell off a cliff. Stop being a meme and use your brain
>>2966977
I would include the Tamron 17-50 instead of the Sigma
Really depends if you want a longer tele at the end. Or you can include a Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC for portrait and landscapes/nature
The tamron 28-75 2.8 goes for a quarter of the price of the new one and is excellent on crop, i picked one up for £100 and it's much better than the sigma 24-70 2.8 i have as well. I also managed to get a canon 70 200 l f4 for £200, this combo of lenses will serve you well even when you upgrade to full frame.
>>2967033
This is the dumbest of all the suggestions you could get.
>>2966977
18-35 Sigma Art, or another prime between 17 and 50mm.
At least that's what I'd buy.
>>2967043
There's nothing interesting to photograph off the edge of a cliff m8 apart from a rocky shore.
>>2967124
Yes, I can understand how someone bereft of an imagination might think that.