Prime or Zoom?

archphoto · May 31, 2009

And sometimes you are stuck with a zoom, because there is no otherway to get the focal lengh you want as a prime.
And backing-up more: THROUGH a wall ?????

Peter

removed-user-1 · May 31, 2009

archphoto said:
And backing-up more: THROUGH a wall ?????

Peter

Yes, walls and cliff edges do present a problem.

flatulent1 · May 31, 2009

rthomas said:
Yes, walls and cliff edges do present a problem.

Not to mention busy highways and crocodile pits...

Whenever I start buying into a new system I usually start with a good midrange zoom, then a long zoom, then a wide zoom. It's not intentional, that's just how my mind works. Then I start to pick up primes as the desire strikes me. But not always. My Minolta SRT 101 kit includes five primes and no zooms; my Nikon F4 kit includes two zooms, no primes; and my Mamiya 645 kit includes four primes, no zooms. My Canon F1 bag has two or three primes, my F1N bag has a zoom and two primes, my T90 bag has three zooms. And they're all compatible. Go figure. :rolleyes:

Q.G. · Jun 1, 2009

The backing-up-problem would only be an argument in favour of either zoom or fixed focal length lens if we assume that either of the two happens to be shorter than the other.

Besides, there is a simple solution: just create more distance by folding the light path using a mirror ...

winjeel · Jun 1, 2009

flatulent1 said:
Not to mention busy highways and crocodile pits...

...

lol

Q.G. said:
...

Besides, there is a simple solution: just create more distance by folding the light path using a mirror ...

Oh dear, a new discussion now... primes, zooms, or mirrors.

Pete H · Jun 1, 2009

Q.G. said:
Besides, there is a simple solution: just create more distance by folding the light path using a mirror ...

I favour the curved space approach - just carry a portable black hole around with you. Then you can distort the light path to be any length you like.

More seriously, apart from the (very convincing) crocodile pit argument, how many primes do you need to carry to cover the range of one zoom? It can all end up weighing quite a lot ...

flatulent1 · Jun 1, 2009

At most, 24, 50 and 135. More than that really isn't necessary for my shooting. And sometimes not even that many. Camera body + FD 35mm f/2 + film = a pleasant evening stroll. Trying to be prepared for every eventuality, every time, makes for a very sore shoulder. I did this when I was young, and gave up photography in disgust after stupidly humping around a Domke F1X *full* of gear for a simple nature walk.

Pumal · Jun 1, 2009

Most of his life Cartier Bresson used just a 50mm lens.

Q.G. · Jun 1, 2009

Pete H said:
More seriously, apart from the (very convincing) crocodile pit argument, how many primes do you need to carry to cover the range of one zoom? It can all end up weighing quite a lot ...

Depending on how close you want your lenses to be, a lot, yes.
I like closely spaced focal lengths in the near wide to near tele range (i don't care much for the extremes). So i carry (or rather: carried) a lot of lenses.

I don't understand why that would be a problem. Even with 7 or 8 lenses, two bodies, and various 'small parts' my OM kit was decidedly light-weight.

Q.G. · Jun 1, 2009

Pumalite said:
Most of his life Cartier Bresson used just a 50mm lens.

Even if so: so what?
Am i Cartier Bresson? Are you?

firecracker · Jun 1, 2009

Q.G. said:
Even if so: so what?
Am i Cartier Bresson? Are you?

I'm a big fan of his work, and I find a 50mm lens on either RF or SLR to be very useful.

What I like about the 50mm is the way the vertical angle can crop the scene so well. It is a good portrait lens, not too wide or not too long.

Q.G. · Jun 1, 2009

I also found the 50 mm lens very useful.
I found other lenses very useful too.

But i still wonder, would you who like to take a leaf out of Cartier Bresson's book rather have a fixed focal length 50 mm lens, or a 50 - 50 mm zoom lens?

eddym · Jun 1, 2009

Q.G. said:
But i still wonder, would you who like to take a leaf out of Cartier Bresson's book rather have a fixed focal length 50 mm lens, or a 50 - 50 mm zoom lens?

Huh? Is this a trick question?

Q.G. · Jun 2, 2009

eddym said:
Huh? Is this a trick question?

"Prime or Zoom?"

eddym · Jun 2, 2009

Q.G. said:
"Prime or Zoom?"

It's the "50-50 zoom lens" part that I don't quite follow. :confused:

Rol_Lei Nut · Jun 2, 2009

eddym said:
It's the "50-50 zoom lens" part that I don't quite follow. :confused:

Personally, I prefer a "20-20" zoom lens, much sharper!
;-)

Pumal · Jun 2, 2009

Q.G. said:
Even if so: so what?
Am i Cartier Bresson? Are you?

I'm old. I don't like to carry a lot of weight. A 50mm lens can go a long way.

Q.G. · Jun 2, 2009

Rol_Lei Nut said:
Personally, I prefer a "20-20" zoom lens, much sharper!
;-)

I prefer the 20 mm fixed. Don't like extreme wide zooms anyway, make you dizzy when you zoom from 20 mm to 20 mm.

But give me a 100 mm - 100 mm zoom. Much better than a 100 mm.
And i'm sure there was a photographer at some time somewhere who only used a 100 mm lens (though i'm not quite sure whether it was a "Prime or Zoom").

Sirius Glass · Jun 2, 2009

Some prefer the 100mm over the 80mm for the normal lens of the Hasselblad.

With 35mm I like 50-50 because half the time I am right and the rest of the time I am correct. It keeps things balanced. :confused:

Steve

Prime or Zoom?

removed-user-1

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency