| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/27/2006 03:28:51 AM · #1 |
Which do you prefer, and why?
Personally I have prefered zooms becasue a lot of the time I don't want to be walking back and forth trying to get the proper framing but I'm thinking about going prime sometime soon for better 'out of the camera' results... |
|
|
|
03/27/2006 03:36:52 AM · #2 |
wide-angles: I prefer primes... I just can't get wide enough
telephotos: I like the versatility of the zoom |
|
|
|
03/27/2006 03:47:22 AM · #3 |
| Well.. there is a big difference between walking forward or backward and turning your zoom. You don't get the same results. Understanding those are key to creating a stronger composition |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 03:57:37 AM · #4 |
Bump
Originally posted by jsolsona:
Well.. there is a big difference between walking forward or backward and turning your zoom. You don't get the same results. Understanding those are key to creating a stronger composition |
Do you mean the way varying focal lengths have a different effect on expanding/contracting a scene? |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 04:06:12 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by bfox2:
Bump
Originally posted by jsolsona:
Well.. there is a big difference between walking forward or backward and turning your zoom. You don't get the same results. Understanding those are key to creating a stronger composition |
Do you mean the way varying focal lengths have a different effect on expanding/contracting a scene? |
With a prime, you aren't changing the quality of your photo by extending the distance between two or more pieces of glass as you are when you use a zoom, thus giving you a consistent optical quality when using a prime lens. The zoom affects quality because of that change in lens elements that affects different things. Primarily distortion. |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 04:34:08 AM · #6 |
True but the diffence in composition between, say a 10mm lense and a 22mm lens further back showing the same elements is not equivalent. The range of focal lenghts along a zooms possible distances changes the sense of intamacy, and the subject's backround with the backround.
While primes are no doubt better optically, zooms give you an editorial flexibility that you have to give up if you run prime only. I have three lenses that can take me from 500 to 10mm, if I tried to do that with primes by camera bag would be bigger than a mid size car, and twice as expensive. |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 04:35:25 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
True but the diffence in composition between, say a 10mm lense and a 22mm lens further back showing the same elements is not equivalent. The range of focal lenghts along a zooms possible distances changes the sense of intamacy, and the subject's backround with the backround.
While primes are no doubt better optically, zooms give you an editorial flexibility that you have to give up if you run prime only. I have three lenses that can take me from 500 to 10mm, if I tried to do that with primes by camera bag would be bigger than a mid size car, and twice as expensive. |
Right. Sorry, I focused exclusively on the one technical element. lol. |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 05:18:50 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
While primes are no doubt better optically, zooms give you an editorial flexibility that you have to give up if you run prime only. I have three lenses that can take me from 500 to 10mm, if I tried to do that with primes by camera bag would be bigger than a mid size car, and twice as expensive. |
I noticed your 3 highest rated shots here are shot with a prime. ;)
Coincidence or not ?
Anyway, to answer the OP I prefer primes for quality but also because it would've cost me more to get pro level zooms than the 12 x primes I own and use at the moment. Sure they're not as convenient to transport as a zoom but I usually plan what I'll be shooting in advance and take only the ones I need.
cheers,
bazz.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2006 05:41:19 AM · #9 |
Its inherently true that moving around isn't the same compositionally as turning a zoom ring, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a prime is better.
A 10-22mm zoom can allow you the ability to CHOOSE between moving around and flicking the wrist. Sometimes, you don't want to move around, but the reason isn't about laziness. It's specifically for the composition.
I am a poor example, but the more I am understanding my lens, the more I find myself making decisions about foreground vs background and actual focal length required to make the shot.
As a learning tool, Zooms rule here. As compositional tools, they also do quite well. You can also fudge a bit if you run out of room to move.
I'm not saying that they are categorically better, just that I like them and I think they definitely have a place.
I do plan on getting a couple of prime lenses for my kit and I have chosen a series of lenses that actually fit the pictures I take. I will probably use them all pretty close to the same ways.
That 8mm peleng always seems so very interesting too....
Message edited by author 2006-03-28 05:41:52. |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 05:45:11 AM · #10 |
Primes, as long as they are fast.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2006 05:52:25 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by sir_bazz:
I noticed your 3 highest rated shots here are shot with a prime. ;)
Coincidence or not ? |
Yup, if you are in control, primes are the sharpest way to go. I can imagine few reasons why in a sudio environment where you control the light and the subject why you would use anything else. I was looking at the best scoring lenses on DPC here and it is an interesting mix of zooms and primes on the first page. The ninth highest scoring average of 335 lenses is a Sigma 70-200 2.8 for Pentax, and look who is responsible for it's lofty position ;) zooms have their uses, no? |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 06:00:19 AM · #12 |
Just remember that "Cameras (and lenses) don't take pictures, people do"
I'm convinced it's purely a coincidence weather people use primes or not to take winning photos. A good photographer with an eye for good pictures, will win prices with pinhole cameras.
Message edited by author 2006-03-28 06:00:58.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2006 06:07:33 AM · #13 |
I love fast primes, but to be honest - I'm sure I'd be happy with L zooms as well, I just can't afford one :)
I LOVE shallow depth of field, I love smaller, lighter lenses, and I love the higher image quality.
I own the 28-135mm and I use it often (mostly family snapshots), but I just enjoy using primes more. I want more of them :) |
|
|
|
03/28/2006 06:14:53 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
zooms have their uses, no? |
Absolutely! At longer focal lengths the gaps between primes are too large for effective coverage and if someone would buy me the Pentax-FA* 250-600mm f5.6 I'd quickly take back everything and agree that zooms are the best. :)
cheers,
bazz.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2006 06:16:17 AM · #15 |
For things like portraits, where you know about what focal length you want, primes are the best (because of better optics). But for walk-around and general use two zooms can give you a wide range of optics, cheaply.
I, generally, go with two zooms 28-80 and 70-300 on any new camera system. Then, I'll buy a few of the more common primes (ie portrait, wide-angle). I've never bought a long telephoto prime, because I just wouldn't use it.
Message edited by author 2006-03-28 06:17:09.
|
|
|
|
07/15/2007 12:18:29 AM · #16 |
zoom vs. prime... I'm looking into this right now. I'm actually thinking about replacing my 28-70 Sigma 2.8-4 with either the Sigma 24-70 EX DG 2.8 or Canon 24 and 85mm primes... this is a hard choice :-)
Anyone wanna chime in?
Message edited by author 2007-07-15 00:19:33.
|
|
|
|
07/15/2007 12:29:34 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Anyone wanna chime in? |
I wouldn't replace a zoom with a prime personally (nor have I as you can see from my bag). I find they both have their uses and see no reason to only use one type or the other.
edit: uhh, all of which is to say "buy both"
Message edited by author 2007-07-15 00:29:55. |
|
|
|
07/15/2007 12:38:23 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by bfox2:
Which do you prefer, and why?
Personally I have prefered zooms becasue a lot of the time I don't want to be walking back and forth trying to get the proper framing but I'm thinking about going prime sometime soon for better 'out of the camera' results... |
Apples and oranges.
|
|
|
|
07/15/2007 12:48:32 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
edit: uhh, all of which is to say "buy both" |
And more :-) why is it that my B&H wishlist keeps getting bigger? :-)
|
|
|
|
07/15/2007 12:54:53 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Anyone wanna chime in? |
I wouldn't replace a zoom with a prime personally (nor have I as you can see from my bag). I find they both have their uses and see no reason to only use one type or the other.
edit: uhh, all of which is to say "buy both" |
Yeah, both is good advise from my perspective, both have their place, a zoom is more versitile and a prime (generally) is faster and the optics are super clear! I use a 50mm f1.7 prime for some things and my 18-55 zoom for others just depends on what you are looking for with each shot...
Edit for typo...
Message edited by author 2007-07-15 00:56:05.
|
|
|
|
07/15/2007 05:35:14 PM · #21 |
| Primes. They cheaper and better quality. When I was able to save up the money, I bought zooms (L glass only). |
|
|
|
07/15/2007 06:36:10 PM · #22 |
The best lens is a combination zoom/prime like this one ;-)
|
|
|
|
07/15/2007 06:49:16 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Matthew:
The best lens is a combination zoom/prime like this one ;-) |
Yeah, that joked wearing thin, and more armor for why id like to administrate the hell out of that database. |
|
|
|
07/15/2007 06:56:19 PM · #24 |
Both lenses have their uses. Prime is for more specialized use while a zoom lets you be ready for more situations- at a price of slower shutter speed. Neither is intrinsically better overall. Just better for a given situation and zooms fit into more situations. I prefer the flexability to carrying lots of gear around. I have a better chance to take advantage of photo opportunities that way. Sharpness of zooms used to be more of an issue that it is today as well. Each will decide, based on budget and needs, which is better for their own situation. I presently have three zooms- covering from 10mm to 300mm.
[/url] |
|
