gavinlg
Veteran
Right... So I just received my nikkor 35 f2 to use on my d300 and fm2n... Ahhhhh... what a relief... I've been living with the 18-200 VR for the last couple of months as the only autofocus lens, and really, I hate zoom lenses. For some reason, they stifle my creativity, I find that I get really lazy composing with them. They're massive, slow, uninspiring pieces of junk! I can barely take the 18-200 VR anywhere without feeling like I'm holding a freakin 2kg dumbbell.
Now the 35 f2 nikkor - It's tiny, well built, has great IQ, focusses quickly and silently.
So the question is this: Do you hate zooms? Do you like zooms? Are you compensating for something with that 28-300 L lens you have?
Now the 35 f2 nikkor - It's tiny, well built, has great IQ, focusses quickly and silently.
So the question is this: Do you hate zooms? Do you like zooms? Are you compensating for something with that 28-300 L lens you have?
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
I don't think I could ever be a primes-only guy with my dSLR. There just seems to be too much unpredictability in the way I shoot (with the dSLR) to consciously move around the scene to compensate for a fixed-focal length.
On the other hand, even if it was feasible to make a true zoom (an honest-to-gosh zoom, not something like a Tri-Elmar) for RFs I'd be the last guy to buy it. Something about the way the camera works changes my shooting style to the point where a 28/50 setup can cover just about any situation I'd use the camera for.
On the other hand, even if it was feasible to make a true zoom (an honest-to-gosh zoom, not something like a Tri-Elmar) for RFs I'd be the last guy to buy it. Something about the way the camera works changes my shooting style to the point where a 28/50 setup can cover just about any situation I'd use the camera for.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I can't use zoom lenses with RF cameras (except for the Tri-Elmarit ... 
) and don't have an 35mm (D)SLR anymore. Back, when I had a D1x, it was most often either the 35/2 or 50/1.8. Also had the 17 - 55 DX and 70 - 200 VR but hardly used them for obvious reasons ...
) and don't have an 35mm (D)SLR anymore. Back, when I had a D1x, it was most often either the 35/2 or 50/1.8. Also had the 17 - 55 DX and 70 - 200 VR but hardly used them for obvious reasons ... Nh3
Well-known
With primes I need to carry four bodies at the same time. With zoom lenses two bodies.
ChrisN
Striving
Just back from holidays and starting to examine the photos (digital). For the sake of simplicity I only took two lenses for the dSLR - an 18-125 Sigma zoom and a FA 31.1.8 (high quality prime). I didn't use the prime enough - even before processing the images taken with the prime stand out. The zoom is convenient, but ...
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Spyderman
Well-known
Prime lenses whenever situation permits.
But there are moments when I just need a zoom. Like when I'm not alone photographying but when I'm with a group of non-photographers (hiking, sight-seeing), and I have to move quickly. No time to play around, change lenses to find which focal length suits the best etc.
But there are moments when I just need a zoom. Like when I'm not alone photographying but when I'm with a group of non-photographers (hiking, sight-seeing), and I have to move quickly. No time to play around, change lenses to find which focal length suits the best etc.
LOOP
maraboutflash
OK no zoom !!!
OK no zoom !!!
I have had some zoom lenses, but it makes lazy and 70-200 f 4 from Canon is good but I replaced it with a 100 f 2 and a 200 f 2.8...and sold the zoom ...
OK no zoom !!!
I have had some zoom lenses, but it makes lazy and 70-200 f 4 from Canon is good but I replaced it with a 100 f 2 and a 200 f 2.8...and sold the zoom ...
myoptic3
Well-known
I never understood the odd notion that a zoom lens makes anyone lazy. By that reasoning, I guess AF, AE, in camera metering, and most everything else is laziness too. Sometimes one can't get close enough, or back up far enough, to use a fixed lens. And my Nikon zooms are as sharp as most any prime lens. Has anyone tried to capture a fleeting moment while having to change lenses?
Hey, using a camera is lazy. Pull out that pencil and paper and draw that portrait. But make sure you use a regular pencil. I think that mechanical pencils make you lazy.
Hey, using a camera is lazy. Pull out that pencil and paper and draw that portrait. But make sure you use a regular pencil. I think that mechanical pencils make you lazy.
Last edited:
Colman
Established
In my case, zoom lenses facilitate my laziness. I don't have the discipline to work well with them: I admire the people who do. So I avoid them: I only own the Nikon 70-200/2.8 (for horses - hard to get action shots with a 50mm) and the Sigma 10-20mm (as an affordable wide angle for DX).
V
varjag
Guest
You got it
But thing is, there is always something that too close, or too far, or too fast, or too dark. You have to live with limitations of what you have and focus on what you can achieve with it, rather than try to be a one-man-band. Right job for the tool, if you will
oftheherd
Veteran
I have and use zooms. In fact, I put together a system a few years ago, consisting of a Yashica FX 103, and three zooms from 18mm to 150 (with the Contax T* 50mm f/1.4 thrown in) to cover most used focal lengths. It is nice in many ways. All the lenses are relatively small and light. However, I learned with primes, and never like the added weight of zooms. My first was a 75-260 Vivitar TX. Probably not a good choice for a first. It covered a lot of ground, but it was heavy.
Bottom line: I have and use them. They have their place. But I really prefer primes. I find them sharper, lighter, and more fun when I have the time to walk around and look for the exact photo I want.
Bottom line: I have and use them. They have their place. But I really prefer primes. I find them sharper, lighter, and more fun when I have the time to walk around and look for the exact photo I want.
maddoc
... likes film again.
In some way yes
but ... I myself find AE and / or TTL metering quite convenient recently.... kalokeri
larger than 35mm
I tend to prefer primes even with dslr though everybody praises zooms as useful. But few weeks ago I bought the new 16-85 VR for my Nikon and did - for the first time in my life, I swear - a lens test, comparing the zoom to my primes 24, 50 and 85. Not really shocking, but the pictures with the zoom had more contrast and looked sharper especially in the corners at similar apertures. The 24 and the 50 looked a little bit soft compared to the zoom, the 85 was ok.
Conclusion ? I will use the zoom more often if small depth of field is not needed or intended.
I just wish it was not that big and heavy.
Thomas
Conclusion ? I will use the zoom more often if small depth of field is not needed or intended.
I just wish it was not that big and heavy.
Thomas
Matt White
Member
I sold a bagful of primes to fund my 18-200 Nikkor. One of the smartest moves I ever made. It's a terrific general purpose lens. I still have 50mm and 85mm f1.8 lenses for those times when more light-gathering power is needed, and a couple of longer telephotos for sports and birds, but the 18-200 is by far my most used SLR lens.
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
All of my lenses are primes and I refuse to work with anything else. The zoom lens that came with my new Oly e-410 will soon be replaced with a prime pancake lens.
gavinlg
Veteran
To answer that, here is the scenario:
With a prime lens I tend to walk around and change positions to try and get the best possible angle with it.
With a zoom I tend to just zoom in or out without thinking when I want closer up or farther away, because it falls immediately to hand.
It's not so much that I'm lazy, it's just that I can barely make good good enough use of a single focal length let alone having 160mm or so of them. Having a prime focusses me on whats going on rather than how close or far away I am. I tend to think the closer you can get into the action you're photographing, the better the pics.... So thats easy...
With the zoom theres another factor in it to think about and it's enough to distract me from the actual thing I'm photographing.
It just feels like a more pure experience.
Of course I'm just talking out of what I LIKE doing - if I was photographing cars it would be a 70-200 2.8 VR all the way.
Senmu
Member
Yep. Mamiya C330, 120 slide film (Velvia 50 or Ektachrome 100GX), Sekonic incident light meter, ground-glass focus with the bellows. 12 exposures per roll, slowly and with consideration, as Eastman intended. Or Nothing!
jamiewakeham
Long time lurker
Really? A common argument for primes over zooms (bar weight and speed) is that the prime, all other things being equal, will usually be sharper. Not doubting your results, of course, but could you post some more details? as I'm intrigued by this?
Cheers
Jamie
kalokeri
larger than 35mm
Sure, I will try to create some details over the weekend and post them next week.
Generally said is that older lenses made for film are useable but not the best choice for dslr-cameras. The 16-85 is designed for the use on Nikon DX dslr. Maybe that´s more important then I used to believe.
Thomas