lets go with just primes
Jun 16, 2012 07:16:26 #
i read an article on primes vs zooms,if you decided to by-pass zooms all together, what battery of primes would you choose.
Jun 16, 2012 10:38:53 #
If I had an unlimited or very large budget, I'd go with 14 & 24 for landscapes, 45 T&S for architecture, fast 35 & 50 (I shoot both a crop sensor and 35mm film), 200 macro, 400 & 600 for wildlife. I don't really do portraits but if I did, I'd go with an 85 and the 105 DC Nikkor.
With a more realistic budget: 14, 24, fast 35 and 50, 105 macro and 300. With a 300 f/2.8, I could add a 1.4x or possibly a 2x TC and it would still give me f/4 or f/5.6 which is no slower than the long end of the DX tele-zooms.
With a more realistic budget: 14, 24, fast 35 and 50, 105 macro and 300. With a 300 f/2.8, I could add a 1.4x or possibly a 2x TC and it would still give me f/4 or f/5.6 which is no slower than the long end of the DX tele-zooms.
Jun 16, 2012 10:48:23 #
Jun 16, 2012 13:02:52 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
Primes are, in fact, what I use. On full frame, my standard combination used to be 35+90, then it became 35+75, but now I use 50 a lot more. Then again, I also have 15, 18, 21, 28, 90 and 135 for rangefinder cameras, and 14, 15, 35, 50, 90, 135, 200, 300 and 600 lenses in Nikon F fit. Then there are my MF and LF lenses... I've been doing this for a long time!
A handy outfit is 18-35-75-135 (halving the focal length each time) but my wife prefers 18-50-90. The whole thing is intensely personal.
Cheers,
R.
A handy outfit is 18-35-75-135 (halving the focal length each time) but my wife prefers 18-50-90. The whole thing is intensely personal.
Cheers,
R.
Jun 17, 2012 07:12:57 #
Jun 17, 2012 10:36:08 #
Jun 17, 2012 11:00:14 #
What article did you read. It may also depend on the quality of zoom you buy. Primes are still better but they may depend on the size of enlargement you want. I've read an article that said there is a slight difference. I have two zooms and four primes. I use the zooms when I'm covering a story generally.
Jun 17, 2012 11:13:39 #
Technically speaking, some of the newer zooms are equal to or better than the older primes which, for economic reasons have not been updated ( Canon, Nikon ). Niche producers like Samyang, Zeiss and Leica are forging ahead with primes - but can be costly.
Jun 17, 2012 11:19:34 #
For focal lengths, I like for whatever format I am using - a focal length equal to the short side dimension, one equal to the long side dimension, and then one twice the long side dimension. Then it goes into telephotos.
Jun 17, 2012 11:39:16 #
I have been reading that primes are on their way back as well.
For what I do, I'd take(nikon) 24mm(I believe they have a new one. 35 1.4 85 1.4 and the 105 DC.
For what I do, I'd take(nikon) 24mm(I believe they have a new one. 35 1.4 85 1.4 and the 105 DC.
Jun 17, 2012 11:52:52 #
sirlensalot
Loc: Arizona
I think Samyang which is sold under many brands Rokinon, Bower, Vivitar, and of course Samyang, is producing some great lenses for the money if you can live with manual focus only. I understand they do do have a focus confirmation chip on lenses made for Nikon mount. I bought an 85/1.4 a couple of years ago with a Pentax mount. Love the lens, not so much for the camera. Lol
Bought a chipped adapter for Canon mount. Works good. Useful for portraits on tripod.
I like using both zoom and prime lenses, but in all honesty, I think primes have gotten me out of more low light issues overall, but there are some awesome zooms out there too.
Bought a chipped adapter for Canon mount. Works good. Useful for portraits on tripod.
I like using both zoom and prime lenses, but in all honesty, I think primes have gotten me out of more low light issues overall, but there are some awesome zooms out there too.
Jun 17, 2012 12:23:41 #
Check out Gary Voth's "The Forgotten Lens". I recommend it to everyone who asks about prime lenses.
Jun 17, 2012 13:54:41 #
Jun 17, 2012 15:26:16 #
Roger Hicks wrote:
Primes are, in fact, what I use. On full frame, my... (show quote)
Roger, thanks for your specifics with the voice of experience on this subject. I have been and am still am wrestling with this issue as my advancing age makes me well aware of the weight of cameras, lenses, tripods etc. My 70-200mm f 2.8 Is great but weighs 3 lbs!
I am thinking of maybe keeping my 11-16mm f2.8, a 35mm 1.8 prime and adding 3 or so primes, while selling my 3 intermediate/longer teles. These primes wouldn't cost much more nor weigh as much as the teles and might make me think more and maybe be a better photographer? I already carry 3 intermediate teles and change them frequently so changing primes wouldn't be much different.
Meanwhile most people seem to go for a single walkaround, but I have reservations about the apertures and total quality of these and can't afford the finer glass ones.
If Anyone else is using several primes or planning to, I will appreciate your rational/experiences.
Jun 17, 2012 16:06:24 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
Scalawag wrote:
. . . I have been and am still am wrestling with this issue as my advancing age makes me well aware of the weight of cameras, lenses, tripods etc. My 70-200mm f 2.8 Is great but weighs 3 lbs!
Exactly! That's why I use rangefinder Leicas, often with just one fast prime (35/1.4 or 50/1.5). Small and light. Sure, no long teles (135mm max), but I'd rather live without the bulk and weight, and miss a few pictures.
Cheers,
R.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.