zoom vs fixed focal length: I have the 24 - 70 Nikkor lens on my D 800 I also have the 105 macro. When I shot on film I always thought the fixed focal length lenses were sharper than...

ollie Loc: Ogdensburg, NY

I have the 24 - 70 Nikkor lens on my D 800 I also have the 105 macro. When I shot on film I always thought the fixed focal length lenses were sharper than the zooms. Is this still true ? Would it be worth my money to invest in a good 24 mm and 50 mm ?

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Convenience= oppourtunity for me. I don't do landscape or fine art stuff, just to let you know where I'm coming from. Zooms are a lot better than they used to be and really convenient. You already have one of the best in the 24-70. That being said, you could gain a few stops with a prime lens and lose some weight along the way. My favorite primes are the 35 f2 & 85 f2.
In my experience, if you're on a tripod and really pixel peeping, you could probably tell the difference, but in practical use it may be splitting hairs.

wolfman

This is a good 50mm lens for the price. I use it on my D200/D800. They also have a 35 1.8G
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/766516-USA/Nikon_2199_AF_S_Nikkor_50mm_f_1_8G.html

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

I have about 20 lenses "three zooms"

corryhully Loc: liverpool uk

there are some fantastic old primes available for silly money which are as sharp as sharp can be. try takumar, but you already knew that :-)

corryhully Loc: liverpool uk

JR1 wrote:

I have about 20 lenses "three zooms"

great

Crwiwy Loc: Devon UK

ollie wrote:

I have the 24 - 70 Nikkor lens on my D 800 I also have the 105 macro. When I shot on film I always thought the fixed focal length lenses were sharper than the zooms. Is this still true ? Would it be worth my money to invest in a good 24 mm and 50 mm ?

A fixed focal length has all its elements designed for that focal length. A zoom lens generally needs a lot more elements and they all have to be optimized for the range of focal lengths and so will not be as good as the prime.

Look at any test report on a zoom lens - and many UHH posts - and you will find that a zoom may perform well over a small part of its range but is not consistent over the whole range.

It depends what you require though. Many are willing to lose a little bit of quality in order to have the convenience of a lens covering a wide range of focal lengths rather than have to carry a bag full of different lens and change them when required. In nature shots you may well find that 'the bird has flown' by the time you get the required lens on your camera whereas the person with the zoom has a picture.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

I don't think you can see the quality between a zoom and a prime. I would like to see some honest comparisons.

charles brown Loc: Tennesse

ollie wrote:

I have the 24 - 70 Nikkor lens on my D 800 I also have the 105 macro. When I shot on film I always thought the fixed focal length lenses were sharper than the zooms. Is this still true ? Would it be worth my money to invest in a good 24 mm and 50 mm ?

What would you use them for, type of photographs? How large the prints to be made? Once answered, ask yourself is the cost of two or three fixed focal length prime lenses worth it. If possible, go to a good camera store, take your own camera, and test shoot the fixed focal lengths and the zooms. Go home and see the results for yourself. Zooms can be very good. For example the 70-200 2.8.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

terry mcgrory wrote:

there are some fantastic old primes available for silly money which are as sharp as sharp can be. try takumar, but you already knew that :-)

When I went digital and finally sold my Nikon Photomic F, I sold my 50mm f/1.4, not realizing it would be good for the DSLR. Live and learn.

corryhully Loc: liverpool uk

jerryc41 wrote:

terry mcgrory wrote:

there are some fantastic old primes available for silly money which are as sharp as sharp can be. try takumar, but you already knew that :-)

When I went digital and finally sold my Nikon Photomic F, I sold my 50mm f/1.4, not realizing it would be good for the DSLR. Live and learn.

glad you did jerry, it may be the one i bought ;-)

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

terry mcgrory wrote:

jerryc41 wrote:

terry mcgrory wrote:

there are some fantastic old primes available for silly money which are as sharp as sharp can be. try takumar, but you already knew that :-)

When I went digital and finally sold my Nikon Photomic F, I sold my 50mm f/1.4, not realizing it would be good for the DSLR. Live and learn.

glad you did jerry, it may be the one i bought ;-)

Well, it did travel to your general area of the world - Dublin, Ireland

silver Loc: Santa Monica Ca.

ollie wrote:

I have the 24 - 70 Nikkor lens on my D 800 I also have the 105 macro. When I shot on film I always thought the fixed focal length lenses were sharper than the zooms. Is this still true ? Would it be worth my money to invest in a good 24 mm and 50 mm ?

I have the 24-70 lens and I use it on a D800E camera. I have had this lens for quite a while, I previously used it on a D700. This is a great lens. Why do you think you need a fixed 24? The 24-70 performs very well on the D800 cameras.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

ollie wrote:

I have the 24 - 70 Nikkor lens on my D 800 I also have the 105 macro. When I shot on film I always thought the fixed focal length lenses were sharper than the zooms. Is this still true ? Would it be worth my money to invest in a good 24 mm and 50 mm ?

I'm a Canon guy but hey, we can still be friends.

In my experience there's some lenses that do compete with primes for sharpness. I love my 50mm because of the low light shots I can get. But I have a 28-200 that is tack sharp.

It all depends on what you want to do with it I guess and I'm sure you know that story.

But I think you're probably correct over all that prime lenses are perhaps a bit sharper than zooms.

Good Luck

Photogdog Loc: New Kensington, PA

jimmya wrote:

I'm a Canon guy but hey, we can still be friends.

In my experience there's some lenses that do compete with primes for sharpness. I love my 50mm because of the low light shots I can get. But I have a 28-200 that is tack sharp.

It all depends on what you want to do with it I guess and I'm sure you know that story.

But I think you're probably correct over all that prime lenses are perhaps a bit sharper than zooms.

Good Luck

I have the EF 24-70mm f2.8 & it's tack sharp. Having said that, I recently picked up a 50mm f1.4 & it's CRAZY sharp. There's a lot to be said about optical quality from primes.