Currently, I own a Canon 400D with the kit lens and the 75 - 300mm telescopic lens. I want to purchase another lens but I don't have that much money at the moment.
I've had a look at the Canon 50mm f/18 lens which is pretty cheap and I've heard good things about it. But it has a cheap build (which is to be expected) and I'm not sure if it's what I really "need" in a lens.
The lens I would be happy with getting is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC lens which is about 3.5 times as much.
What I'm wondering is should I get the Canon lens and not get the Sigma for a while, or keep saving and eventually get the Sigma?
I generally tend to shoot a lot of different photo's, ranging from people to landscapes to macro and don't really have a special purpose. For long shots I'll whip out the 75 - 300 lens anyway, so I'm pretty much looking for a replacement for the kit lens.
I'm also aware that they're both prime lenses and don't have any zoom. Would this be a positive or a negative? Should I be looking at lenses that have zoom?
Thanks in advance.
I've had a look at the Canon 50mm f/18 lens which is pretty cheap and I've heard good things about it. But it has a cheap build (which is to be expected) and I'm not sure if it's what I really "need" in a lens.
The lens I would be happy with getting is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC lens which is about 3.5 times as much.
What I'm wondering is should I get the Canon lens and not get the Sigma for a while, or keep saving and eventually get the Sigma?
I generally tend to shoot a lot of different photo's, ranging from people to landscapes to macro and don't really have a special purpose. For long shots I'll whip out the 75 - 300 lens anyway, so I'm pretty much looking for a replacement for the kit lens.
I'm also aware that they're both prime lenses and don't have any zoom. Would this be a positive or a negative? Should I be looking at lenses that have zoom?
Thanks in advance.