FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

And all of that looks smaller than some of the new adapters alone!

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

Before the vultures move in - yes, I saw quixdraw’s and goofy’s responses before I posted mine. I just thought bebu and spirit might like to clarify that they were asking reasonable questions, not taking shots at each other.

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

I got my Sony F1.8 / 50mm yesterday. Combined with such a small body as the Sony A7C, it's really delicious to use.

BebuLamar

The Df isn't bigger but it's too big for the small prime lenses. Those small primes only look good on a film camera which is a lot smaller than any DSLR.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Todays Nikon, Canon, and Sony primes are not much different than they always have been, if anything, they are lighter than in the past. Primes such as 20, 24, 28,35, 50, and 85.

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

I love primes and often just put one on and walk the neighborhood shooting with just that one lens and zooming with my feet! Usually it's a 35 or 50mm.

ELNikkor

I like the look of my D750 with the petite but sharp 100mm 2.8 E series prime...

Canisdirus

lol...what are you going on about...

Who cares about the 'fashion' statement of how proportional the lens is to the body?
Hey, make sure your shirt matches the camera strap too...lol.
And comb your hair for Pete's sake...poor Pete.

par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.

Love primes! I have 21,24,28,40,50,55and 180

BebuLamar

You don't care I know. Just expressing my opinion on the OP statement
" But have you noticed that today’s modern primes are as large and heavy as zooms? Being a prolific street shooter, I find it so liberating when I just screw on a small prime and blast away."

In my opinion those modern primes that are large and heavy match well with today large (not so heavy) DSLRs.

Canisdirus

I get the weight argument/opinion/statement/whatever...sort of anyway.

But looks? really?

BebuLamar

For me? Yes looks is important. If the camera doesn't look good it won't take good looking pictures

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

If you want " Looking Good " and great pics pull out an Olympus EPL and mount a small prime on it. Small body, proportional sized lenses, and you can explore the world of 12-16 mp. with great glass.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

I do too. I noticed that the new Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM lens weighs a whopping 778g. My Sony 24-105mm zoom only weighs 663g.

Part of the reason is the race to produce ever faster and sharper lenses. As the next generation of mirrorless cameras will have 100 MP, manufacturers already are producing lenses that will be able to provide enough resolution for these powerful sensors. All this requires more glass which leads to larger and heavier (and more expensive) lenses.

There is good news too. My Sony A7 III (650g) weighs less than the Cosina Hi-Lite (725g) that I used in the 1970s. And for street I use the tiny Sony 35mm f/2.8 that weighs a measly 120g. Sony has a line of lenses that are light-weight, like the new 24mm, 40mm, and 50mm lenses that weigh 162g each. The older but outstanding Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 only weighs 281g, and so on.

Canon and Nikon are producing smaller and lighter primes as well. So we as photographers have choices. There are plenty of outstanding but small prime lenses for those of us who care about these things. As a travel photographer, I am keenly aware of this trend, yet I am also happy with the options that I have these days.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I liked primes until zooms got good... At least, that's what I believe most of the time.

That said, one of my most versatile lenses is my macro lens. I use it for copying everything, and for portraits, and for landscapes.

When I used almost nothing but slide film, I had a 24, 35, 50, 55 macro, 85, 105, 135, and 200. Changing lenses was a PITA. But it did nudge me to compose with my feet, always a good thing when possible. My favorites were the 35, the 55, and the 105. I probably used the 35 more than anything.

Probably what you'll hear is that people use a few favorite lenses, even if they have many. The length range will depend upon what they photograph and the format they need to cover.

In a mid-life crisis panic, a pro friend of mine retired and switched from Nikon film and dSLR bodies to Lumix Micro 4/3 digital. He had 32 primes and five zooms in his lens locker, along with five bodies of various vintages (F3, F100, D3s, D500, and D810). He sold all of it with his studio and has bought two Lumix GH5 mirrorless bodies, a Lumix G9, and six lenses — three zooms, a macro, and two other primes. That started in 2017. His choices, in 35mm/full frame equivalent fields of view:

24-70mm (actual 12-35mm f/2.8)
70-200mm (actual 35-70mm f/2.8)
200-800mm (actual 100-400mm f/4-f/6.3)

60mm (macro) (actual 30mm f/2.8)
30mm (actual 15mm f/1.7)
85mm (actual 42.5mm f/1.2)

Now he is considering adding a full frame Lumix body and a couple of zooms, but with one eye on what Canon and Nikon and Sony are doing... And he's waiting on the Lumix GH6 Micro 4/3 body, too.