Does One Really Need a Prime Lens
May 14, 2023 14:41:31 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
It is true that today's zooms are quite good. Some are so good they are described as "a bag full of primes"!
I have found myself using more and more primes. Shooting sports, a 100-400mm has largely replaced 300mm primes I used previously (I still have the 300s for the extra one or two stops they offer, which can be a very important factor in some situations).
But I still like to shoot with primes. They can be smaller, lighter, faster, sharper, more unobtrusive, more affordable... yeah, those are all good things. But I also think zooms make me lazy. I move around more and explore more options when I'm shooting with primes. I "zoom with my feet". And when I do that I often find an even better angle to shoot a subject.
My "street photography" kit is a small, light APS-C mirrorless with four primes: 12mm f/2.8, 22mm f/2, 56mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. The entire bag of camera, lenses and accessories weighs less than one of my "work" DSLRs with its battery grip, 2nd battery and a 24-70mm lens on it.
I have found myself using more and more primes. Shooting sports, a 100-400mm has largely replaced 300mm primes I used previously (I still have the 300s for the extra one or two stops they offer, which can be a very important factor in some situations).
But I still like to shoot with primes. They can be smaller, lighter, faster, sharper, more unobtrusive, more affordable... yeah, those are all good things. But I also think zooms make me lazy. I move around more and explore more options when I'm shooting with primes. I "zoom with my feet". And when I do that I often find an even better angle to shoot a subject.
My "street photography" kit is a small, light APS-C mirrorless with four primes: 12mm f/2.8, 22mm f/2, 56mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. The entire bag of camera, lenses and accessories weighs less than one of my "work" DSLRs with its battery grip, 2nd battery and a 24-70mm lens on it.
May 14, 2023 15:06:10 #
May 14, 2023 15:33:16 #
Burkley
Loc: Park City
bkwaters wrote:
Fast primes are obviously beneficial for DOF control, such as in portrait photography. But is the “primes are sharper” argument still valid? With the ability of modern cameras to focus in low light and the effectiveness of noise reduction software, does the “primes are needed for low light” argument still hold?
I use a zoom 90% of the time. Prime lenses have a specific use. I like the bokeh capability of fast prime lenses. My Macro lens is prime. I like my 20mm 1.8 for landscapes. It is far lighter than my 16-35 while hiking. I am also considering a long prime lens (400 mm) for wildlife because of the weight.
Check out Infrared Photography section of our forum.
May 14, 2023 16:02:33 #
Did you ever had a prime lens on your camera? Judd seer for fun try it. You may have some surprises.
May 14, 2023 16:40:56 #
bkwaters wrote:
Fast primes are obviously beneficial for DOF control, such as in portrait photography. But is the “primes are sharper” argument still valid? With the ability of modern cameras to focus in low light and the effectiveness of noise reduction software, does the “primes are needed for low light” argument still hold?
Budget is the PRIME consideration. Combine a Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f/1.7 zoom with a Panasonic Leica 25-50mm zoom and you have the full frame equivalent of all the primes from 20-100mm on Micro 4/3 for about $3000. Add a macro and a 50-200mm or a 100-400mm and you are well equipped!
May 14, 2023 17:47:51 #
JeffinMass wrote:
Prime Lenses will always be sharper than the zooms. ..... ........., image will always be sharper and the usually have fixed apertures.
May 14, 2023 18:19:13 #
I prefer to compose with primes but I will not hesitate to shot with a zoom under the right circumstance and I don't care about them being a little softer at the edges.
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
May 14, 2023 18:27:55 #
Sidwalkastronomy
Loc: New Jersey Shore
I have a Cano. Rebel 77D and bought their 2 pancake lenes 24mm and 40 mm. Love their small size and images
May 14, 2023 19:27:03 #
BebuLamar wrote:
Do you still have the chrome F100 body? It's a rarity.
No, all the film cameras are gone, except for a black FM2. I haven't used it in years other than to run through the shutter speeds to keep it limber.
---
May 14, 2023 19:38:11 #
kb6kgx
Loc: Simi Valley, CA
I do primarily “fire” photography which involves water-dropping helicopters and retardant-dropping air tankers. Often they’re some distance away and with my 70-300, I’m always at 300, which isn’t enough. The other day, I was shooting a hoist rescue and took out “The Beast”, what I call the 200-500. Even at 500, it wasn’t enough. But a prime would likely have been better. Very difficult to hold the big guy steady. Sure, I could have upped the shutter speed but I can’t stand “frozen” rotors.
Example from that shoot, at 500mm:
Example from that shoot, at 500mm:
May 14, 2023 19:44:28 #
kb6kgx wrote:
I do primarily “fire” photography which involves w... (show quote)
You should check out the OM Systems OM1 with a 100-400mm zoom. It’s perfect for what you’re doing. 800mm reach due to the 2X crop. 7 or more stops of image stabilization. MUCH lighter lenses.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
May 14, 2023 19:46:52 #
kb6kgx wrote:
I do primarily “fire” photography which involves w... (show quote)
My 200 - 500 stays on a tripod since I was introduced to the 500mm PF. The PF is easily hand holdable. I don;t think there is one perfect lens.
---
May 14, 2023 20:22:57 #
May 14, 2023 20:25:11 #
May 14, 2023 23:02:11 #
kb6kgx
Loc: Simi Valley, CA
Bill_de wrote:
My 200 - 500 stays on a tripod since I was introduced to the 500mm PF. The PF is easily hand holdable. I don;t think there is one perfect lens.
---
---
Most of what I have done with the 200-500 has been at the 500 end. I'd LOVE the 500 PF. But I just can't justify the expense. You're right, there is no one perfect lens. Normally, my 70-300 is enough, even though I'm shooting mostly at 300. If the image is sharp enough, I can crop in to compensate and "fake" the longer lens effect. In THIS case, the example I posted, even 500 wasn't really enough. Of course, I'm normally not shooting from that far away from the action. Only in THIS case, it was in an inaccessible (to me) area and the location where I was at was as good as I was going to get.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.