Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

Ah, the debate on primes vs zooms. When I go on assignment, I take a 70-200 and a 24-70. The reason is that these two lens give me a to of focal lengths. However, primes have advantages. I have a bunch of primes, also. I think both have their place.

This links talk about primes. Interesting stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbglOhvSbtc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trjHFsqBraU

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

No debate to me. They have different uses, advantages and disadvantages. I "optically" prefer Primes and for weight while actually using. If I am going to walk a lot and not have the car near by, I'll opt for a Zoom. Also I have a few focal lengths needed that I don't have as Primes but I do with in a Zoom. Fastness, speed - Primes hands down; are there F 1.4, 1.7, 1.8. 2.0 Zoom Lenses? Though I do have one pricey "digital" 16-50mm f/2.8 Zoom, most are f/4 or slower. Some of my old "film" Zooms are all metal & glass construction and weigh nearly too much for my now arthritic hands. And the sharpness of some Zooms is fantastic these days. Even my kit "digital" 18-55mm f/4.5-6.3 lens ain't bad. And that one is light in weight.

Same with APS-C vs Full Frame, good for different uses. And even though I've never used one, I know many people love 4/3 Format cameras and various Mirrorless. If they could/would only build a mirrorless with an optical finder like a true rangefinder (think Leica M3, etc.)...

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I agree. Primes do have their place because typically, they have wider apertures, possibly better glass (depending on the quality of the prime as there are some very inexpensive primes that are entry level and don't even come close to comparing to an average zoom). But, good primes tend to be more expensive than semi-comparable zooms (considering that with a zoom you get, for instance, an 18-70mm or a 70-200mm etc.) where with a prime you get a 50mm or whatever, that the only way you can change the focal length is with a tele-converter and then you lose aperture (plus the time it takes to remove the lens, put on the tele-converter, and replace the lens). With a zoom, you can take one shot on your widest setting then zoom in for a tighter shot on the next in the span of a couple of seconds. Sure, you may give up some aperture in the zoom, but you are shooting digitally so if necessary you can always increase ISO, where with film, if you wanted to use a TC (or a zoom) and you needed more speed and couldn't reasonably go any slower on shutter, you had to change film which was often very difficult. The Digital age has made zoom lenses and other options much more acceptable.

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

There are zooms with variable aperture which go to a smaller f/stop with you zoom out. A much more expensive alternative are fixed aperture zooms. Then there is the ultimate zoom called your feet if you can physically more closer. That's what we had to do in the old days.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I know and have used several.. and many will be an f/4.0 to f/5.6 or whatever depending on where the lens is zoomed. In other words (and this is just an example) a 70-300mm lens might be a f/4.0 at 70mm and an f/5.6 when zoomed to 300mm so you are dealing with a slower lens for the same light at longer zooms. Better (more expensive) lenses may have a constant wide open aperture across the zoom (in other words f/4.5 all of the way from 70-300mm) I have seen and used both..

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

Because of my press work comma I have used 2.8 or better 4 interiors and night shots. But they are constant all the way across the zoom range.