Prime Lens Usage Suggestions Needed (Page 4): If you use a prime, outside of the "normal" lens; aren't you changing the perspective, just as a zoom would do?

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Peekayoh wrote:

Zooms make you lazy and that leads to the wrong or, at least, not the best perspective in your image. .

If you use a prime, outside of the "normal" lens; aren't you changing the perspective, just as a zoom would do?

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Peekayoh wrote:

Zooms make you lazy and that leads to the wrong or, at least, not the best perspective in your image. Use your feet to get into the best position for perspective and then you can think about the Focal length and selecting the appropriate prime. If you're happy with slightly worse IQ, you can instead use a zoom to frame your composition.

After being more of a zoom user, with exception of an old 50/1.8, I just added an 85/1.8 to my bag and after using it a lot to shoot an informal wedding, noticed I will be buying shoes a little more often. Still and all, a good education.

Leitz Loc: Solms

travelwp wrote:

If you use a prime, outside of the "normal" lens; aren't you changing the perspective, just as a zoom would do?

Actually, perspective is changed by altering your position relative to the subject, not by changing lens focal length.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Leitz wrote:

Actually, perspective is changed by altering your position relative to the subject, not by changing lens focal length.

Yes, but if your object is to take a photo of an old Grist Mill, and you wanted to insure certain things are in the frame, wouldn't the perspective change if you shot at 14mm as apposed to 50mm, changing your position to get the same shot?

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Fast 35's are tradionally associated with getting good focus with SLR film cameras ( brighter VF), also subject isolation, as in "environmental" portraits from a short distance. They are also the lens of choice for documentary/reportage, street scenes at night, and other clandestine low light subjects where unobtrusive small size and weight are appreciated !

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

sirlensalot wrote:

After being more of a zoom user, with exception of an old 50/1.8, I just added an 85/1.8 to my bag and after using it a lot to shoot an informal wedding, noticed I will be buying shoes a little more often. Still and all, a good education.

Sir, rather than spending a lot of money on shoes, wouldn't it be better to spend that on photo gear instead, at least from a photographers perspective.
There is NO reason that you can't use a zoom only on 85mm if your goal is to wear out shoes!
And unless you absolutely need the speed you are likely using a flash anyway.
There are a few advantages to primes(I do use them), but discipline is not one of them. :lol:
SS

Leitz Loc: Solms

travelwp wrote:

Yes, but if your object is to take a photo of an old Grist Mill, and you wanted to insure certain things are in the frame, wouldn't the perspective change if you shot at 14mm as apposed to 50mm, changing your position to get the same shot?

Now I see your point - you are correct. To me, the greatest advantage of using a zoom lens is that it allows you to frame your scene without changing perspective. You may have noticed that there are quite a number of "foot zoom" advocates here, and the subject does get a bit heated at times. Which makes for some interesting reading. :)

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

imagemeister wrote:

Fast 35's are tradionally associated with getting good focus with SLR film cameras ( brighter VF), also subject isolation, as in "environmental" portraits from a short distance. They are also the lens of choice for documentary/reportage, street scenes at night, and other clandestine low light subjects where unobtrusive small size and weight are appreciated !

Night shots on city streets is something I hadn't really thought about. Thanks.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Leitz wrote:

You may have noticed that there are quite a number of "foot zoom" advocates here, and the subject does get a bit heated at times. Which makes for some interesting reading. :)

I use zooms a lot, but when I decide my shooting for the day will be with my 50mm prime, I really enjoy myself and the results with that lens are quite satisfying.

http://travelwp.com/2014-0731-ocean-grove-architecture-page.htm

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

gessman wrote:

Opinions, you ask? Mine is that if I had it and it wasn't hurting me some way, I'd be keeping it for low-light situations.

I've thought about that. I just feel kind of guilty having an expensive piece of glass sitting on the shelf doing nothing so much of the time. Thanks.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

LFingar wrote:

After reading the provided links and comments, I think my problem is that the 35mm prime is of limited usefulness to me but I haven't quite yet convinced myself to sell it! Decisions, decisions! Think I'll go have another cup of coffee!:)

I also have a 6D with a 24-105 f/4 L. Same $200 additional cost. Wide open, I do notice some residual spherical aberration, not as bad (as far as I can tell) as what was reported in the 24-70, but it goes away by f/5.6. The nice thing about spherical aberration is that it is the fastest aberration to go away with stopping down, the not so nice thing is that the best focus position <i>will</i> shift with focal ratio, especially near the 'open' end of the aperture range. My 6D mostly seems to handle this fairly well.

Leitz Loc: Solms

travelwp wrote:

I use zooms a lot, but when I decide my shooting for the day will be with my 50mm prime, I really enjoy myself and the results with that lens are quite satisfying.

http://travelwp.com/2014-0731-ocean-grove-architecture-page.htm

That's great, exactly where a zoom would not be recommended. Thanks for sharing.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

Leitz wrote:

That's great, exactly where a zoom would not be recommended. Thanks for sharing.

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Slick Willie Loc: The U. S.

LFingar wrote:

I've thought about that. I just feel kind of guilty having an expensive piece of glass sitting on the shelf doing nothing so much of the time. Thanks.

Another consideration would be, since you're shooting full frame now, picking up a 50 f1/8 and getting the more expensive 35mm off the shelf wouldn't be a bad way to go to loosen up some change.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

LFingar wrote:

To start with, my one DSLR body is a 6D. On the sh... (show quote)

For me if I had your equipment I'd glue the EF35mm f/1.4 L on the 6D.

Interesting how so many people have to think about this. I pretty much leave my Zooms on the shelf. For landscape or general photography I just grab a prime 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, or 50mm. For my APS-C Pentax bodies I'll use the 24 or 28mm a lot, for my film cameras, the 35 or 50mm. Once Pentax comes out with a Full Frame, I'll pretty much move to a fast WA prime, 31mm or 35mm. I also have a 19mm prime, that is sometimes fun to pay with.

For me I find that I mostly use my zooms at there extremes anyway, so there is not point in carrying a heavy lens other than not having to swap between to others. Also I don't usually use my zooms like most people use zooms. I'll decide what focal length is appropriate for the shot, set the lens and walk to the distance that looks right. I don't often "play trombone" with my zoom lenses.