Fixed??

[Rob-F]

For me, a benefit of a wide angle zoom over a prime is that since extreme wide-angle shots aren't usually necessary, I can flick the lens out to its widest view, take a quick look to see if that will do me any good; and if it doesn't, I can quickly go back to a more moderate focal length without the wasted time of changing lenses. I find the 17-35mm Nikkor good for that. What it isn't good for is having it on the camera for a long time. I can carry the 17-35mm comfortably for about 45 minutes. After that, I will put on the Zeiss 35mm Distagon. Or else, I will leave the Nikon in the car and get out the Leica with 35mm on the camera and one or two other lenses in the Domke F-5XB bag.

 

[retinax]

For me, a benefit of a wide angle zoom over a prime is that since extreme wide-angle shots aren't usually necessary, I can flick the lens out to its widest view, take a quick look to see if that will do me any good; (...).

This is rff, so: The same can be done with viewfinders. I have the Ricoh GR 21 and 28 two-in-one VF (and finally have both fls in ltm as well), that's especially practical to see which FL would be better.

 

[dee]

Strictly a snap shooter , the 50mm was the lens from 1972 .
Never got on with those cheap 35-80s which followed .
Always bought a 35mm [ 50mm ] for early digitals .,
At 73 , recognised that the 35-80 actually is perfect for me .
I don't use those longer lenses .
The Fuji 18-55 is excellent to counter that pancake 27mm which goes everywhere on the X-T 1.

 

[CMur12]

With wide angle lenses, I focus mainly with the DOF scale on the lens barrel. The lack of such a scale on wide angle zooms renders them much more difficult for me to use effectively.


- Murray