24-70 f2.8 & 50 f1.8 Do I need Both?

CalKidd

I have decided to purchase a Sigma 20-70 f/2.8 and sell my Tamron 28-300 f3.5-6.3 (Too slow). My question is should I also buy the 50 f/1.8? I was thinking the 50 would be good for photos of friends and family primarily during social events indoors and out, but will the 20-70 do just as well? Again I am as amateur and inexperienced as they get.

My photography will primarily consist of personal photos of family and friends with an occasional sporting shots of my kids. I am also going to try my hand in motorcycle racing from the grandstands and fields. This I am looking at the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 or the 50-500, but that's another subject.

I can't afford Canon L glass.(period)

Bob Bell

CalKidd wrote:

I have decided to purchase a Sigma 20-70 f/2.8 and sell my Tamron 28-300 f3.5-6.3 (Too slow). My question is should I also buy the 50 f/1.8? I was thinking the 50 would be good for photos of friends and family primarily during social events indoors and out, but will the 20-70 do just as well? Again I am as amateur and inexperienced as they get.

My photography will primarily consist of personal photos of family and friends with an occasional sporting shots of my kids. I am also going to try my hand in motorcycle racing from the grandstands and fields. This I am looking at the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 or the 50-500, but that's another subject.

I can't afford Canon L glass.(period)

I have a 28-70L and keep a couple 50mm around because they are fast to AF and the aperture is handy inside. For $70 bux or whatever they are now, they are too cheap to not have 1.

TristanP

I would say yes. It's hard to pass up the low light capabilities of the 50, plus it's so cheap, not getting one is almost a crime.