2 bodys 2 primes vs 1 body 1 zoom

[maciejosek]

Hi!
Recently I've earned some money and I want to invest some money into new gear.
I wonder which combo will be better: 2 mid FF bodys with 35mm and 85mm or 1 well and newer body with latest ZOOM (tamron 35-150 f2-2.8)
I shoot portraits, events (as a news photographer) but I would like to try some concert and street photography. What do you think?

 

[George Mann]

2 bodies and 2 primes. I use a Nikon D3300 with a Nikkor AF 24mm f2.8 D and a Nikon D40x with a Nikkor AF 50mm f1.8 D.

The lenses on these APS-C bodies are the equivalent of 35mm and 75mm.

Zoom lenses are bigger, heavier and inferior optically to primes.

 

[koraks]

What do you think?

I'd definitely go for one good camera and one good zoom. Modern zoom lenses are great. The idea that primes are better is difficult to maintain given today's high-end zoom lens performance. And in any case, having two cameras is always less convenient than one.

 

[George Mann]

The idea that primes are better is difficult to maintain given today's high-end zoom lens performance.

My own experience shows that primes are more consistent in their optical performance while being smaller and lighter to boot.

And in any case, having two cameras is always less convenient than one.

Camera's of the right size and weight with the right bag and/or sling setup may change your mind.

 

[koraks]

We'll have to agree to disagree, I'm afraid. But to each their own.

More importantly - I forgot: @maciejosek welcome aboard!
Also, what's your budget and do you have particular requirements or limitations? Presently the question is quite open-ended.

 

[Paul Howell]

I agree with koraks, for news and street one body, one zoom, FF I would think about a Sony A7 and a zoom, if price is right maybe a zoom and wide prime.

 

[runswithsizzers]

I wonder which combo will be better

I think we need to know what you mean by "better" -- better image quality? more versatile? more convenient? faster? easier to carry?

At various times I have tried it both ways, and which one I prefer at any given time is determined by a whim of the moment.

When I want more versatility -- that is, when I do not know beforehand which focal length will best suit my subject -- then I'll carry one body and a zoom. In my experience, most recently with Fuji lenses, optical performance of modern zooms is plenty good enough for the kind of photography I do.

I can think of only two reasons that might make me select the two primes over the zoom: If I wanted to use very wide apertures, or if I wanted to avoid the large size and weight of a porky zoom.

I rarely shoot at apertures much wider than f4 or 5.6, so using slower zooms is not usually an issue for me. Weight, however, is. I am pretty sure I would not want to carry something like the zoom you mention. I've never seen a Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8, but I am guessing it is pretty dang big and heavy (the specs say 1,190g / 42oz!). Personally, I could never tolerate carrying a lens that heavy. And I would be willing to accept a compromise in focal length coverage or aperture (or both) to get a smaller lighter zoom.

 

[gary mulder]

A >4x zoom will not be able to get everything out of a good FF camera. The current 3x zooms are almost as good as primes. In the time that I photographed theater performances I used two body's. If you can get close to the stage, you want to be able to use two focal lengths. Changing lenses becomes annoying. Nowadays I would go for a 3x zoom and 1 body. If I couldn't afford f1.4 primes and two body's.

 

[Pieter12]

Why 2 bodies and 2 primes? Why not 1 body and 3 or 4 primes?

 

[George Mann]

Why 2 bodies and 2 primes? Why not 1 body and 3 or 4 primes?

I have found the 2x2 formula to be the best compromise since both are always ready to shoot.

 

[Paul Howell]

When I started working as a PJ is was common for most of us to carry 2, even 3 or 4 bodies. As Zooms got better most dropped the second body for a single body and zoom, with Canon EOS F mount the 70 to 210 2.8 became the de-facto standard. Shooting breaking news, day long events, the lest amount of weight and gear the better. The downside is that of course if something happens to your one and only body, well your out of luck. I stuck to the 2 body plan, F3 with Nikon 70 to 210 Ed and FG with Nikon 35 to 70. As reliable as modern cameras are, as good as the zooms are, I would not hesitation to carry a Sony A1 or 9 with single zoom, maybe a 35mm wide in my pocket.

 

[gary mulder]

Why 2 bodies and 2 primes? Why not 1 body and 3 or 4 primes?

With concert and street photography you usually don't have the time to change lenses. With street photography f1.4 is not needed. So a zoom will be fine. But trying to make something during a concert there is not much light. Hence you want a light bucket as lens.

 

[George Mann]

With concert and street photography you usually don't have the time to change lenses. With street photography f1.4 is not needed. So a zoom will be fine. But trying to make something during a concert there is not much light. Hence you want a light bucket as lens.

Now you are starting to see where I am coming from.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hi!
Recently I've earned some money and I want to invest some money into new gear.
I wonder which combo will be better: 2 mid FF bodys with 35mm and 85mm or 1 well and newer body with latest ZOOM (tamron 35-150 f2-2.8)
I shoot portraits, events (as a news photographer) but I would like to try some concert and street photography. What do you think?

Welcome to Photrio!

I use two bodies with similar lens, one with black & white film and the other with color film for 35mm. For medium format 6x6 Hasselblad 503 CX with color and black & white film backs.

 

[koraks]

I use two bodies with similar lens, one with black & white film and the other with color film for 35mm. For medium format 6x6 Hasselblad 503 CX with color and black & white film backs.

Given OP is going to shoot FF digital, he can fold all that kit into a single body + lens.

 

[Hassasin]

Prime for street is limiting, unless street ego takes over and it must be a prime. It's the whole package that counts in the end though. Convenience of a zoom has no counterarguments, but a GOOOOD zoom is expensive all the same and heavy by comparison. yet, two bodies hanging around the neck kills the latter argument beyond recognition.

But I also see another issue with two vs. one bodies, strictly image management afterwards. One body and it's all sequential in same memory card, flipping bodies breaks that up. With large amount of shots this is no small inconvenience to get it all in order.

Two bodies would only make more sense if one was monochrome sensor.

 

[Paul Howell]

Prime for street is limiting, unless street ego takes over and it must be a prime.

I agree, the only advantage for street shooting is smaller package, a long zoom sticks out a bit more, so maybe a Z body with a Sigma 50mm 1.2 for speed.

 

[Hassasin]

I'll add more: get the largest pixel count sensor you can and think of it as a "zoom" for later cropping out the goods form most frames. I'll leave out any lens suggestions as that depends a lot of how one actually works.

It was the beauty of what Fuji did with last X100 where the 40 mpx sensor is the big advantage over all prior models of this great camera.

 

[loccdor]

Your zoom lens is 2.5 lbs. I'd like to ask what's the heaviest, largest lens you've comfortably handled for long periods of time. Also, what size of camera bag would you like to carry.

My medium format 180mm f/2.8 Sonnar is just slightly heavier, and it's not really fun to carry around all day, even for an in-shape person. Although your camera body is probably a little lighter. I've considered taking it on trips, and later reconsidered.

Optically, you aren't likely to have a problem with any of the lenses. Just as Koraks said, lens design has come a long way, especially with companies like Tamron and Sigma. I've used old Tamron and Sigmas which were pathetic, their new designs are a complete role reversal.

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to Photrio.
Two bodies, one fast fixed focal length lens, one zoom lens.
Because I love dodging these sorts of questions .
And because I've always disliked referring to fixed focal length lenses as "primes".
The choice of focal lengths is a personal one.
For me, the fixed focal length lens would be a fast 35mm lens, and the zoom lens would start out at 24mm and zoom to ~80mm, but that reflects my personal likes.
If I wasn't confident in my preferences, I would start with the zoom lens, and then see which focal lengths I gravitate to - someone whose preferences are very different from mine might very well end up with an 85mm fast lens instead, or a 50mm fast lens, or even a 300mm reasonably fast lens (if they like bird photos).

 

[gbroadbridge]

I wonder which combo will be better: 2 mid FF bodys with 35mm and 85mm or 1 well and newer body with latest ZOOM (tamron 35-150 f2-2.8)
I shoot portraits, events (as a news photographer) but I would like to try some concert and street photography. What do you think?

I suggest your second option, although I would try to trade some lens speed for weight for mobility reasons. Heavy lenses work if you have a tripod/monopod...

 

[Pieter12]

For me, it really depends on what you intend to buy as a body or bodies. For street & concert photography, I would opt for a modern, mirrorless camera with IBIS. The ISO range for the newer cameras is pretty incredible and the quality great, so you don't have to spend a fortune for a super-fast lens. A small camera and lens is easier to tote around for street photography and less obtrusive. Unless you do street and concert photos at the same time, one body with a moderate wide angle (35mm) for street and a nice zoom lens for concert use should be fine.

 

[warden]

Welcome! Considering how you want to use the system I'd go with a quality zoom.

 

[George Mann]

Prime for street is limiting, unless street ego takes over and it must be a prime. It's the whole package that counts in the end though. Convenience of a zoom has no counterarguments, but a GOOOOD zoom is expensive all the same and heavy by comparison. yet, two bodies hanging around the neck kills the latter argument beyond recognition.

But I also see another issue with two vs. one bodies, strictly image management afterwards. One body and it's all sequential in same memory card, flipping bodies breaks that up. With large amount of shots this is no small inconvenience to get it all in order.

Two bodies would only make more sense if one was monochrome sensor.

Well, when I choose to use just one camera, it must be the one that leaves my smaller cameras in the dust both in function and image quality.

That camera is my Nikon D2x, which I use primarily with my "long-barrel" Nikkor 35mm f2.8 Ai (50mm equivalent).