I think a lot of us who used rangefinders for a long time do... but those who use long lenses and slrs for action probably don't. It's why some of us like a dedicated shutter speed dial, aperture ring, depth of field scale, etc and some like huge grips with thumb and finger wheels. The latter seem to make their decisions while looking through the VF for long periods of time. Both methods are ok... just a difference I've observed. Of course, the exact opposite could occur for some folks too.
peterm1
Veteran
I think you are basically right in what you say. Zooms give you some choices (perhaps too much choice) in how you compose and shoot. But in other ways they limit you too. Let me explain.
For convenience, I use zooms sometimes, especially when I travel. It is just easier than lugging about lots of lenses. For this purpose I presently have a modern AF Sony E mount zoom which fits their E mount(a relatively inexpensive but good kit lens). But its disadvantage is that when shooting it I am not shooting with classic glass.
The more I shift to shooting with mirrorless cameras the more I somehow find that I like zooms less for everyday shooting. Perhaps because mirrorless allows me to try lots of old classic glass of all sorts and marques (and often very cheaply) - which is what I enjoy doing most of all. It is fun and can be a relatively cheap way of trying lots of different glass. So naturally I prefer that and most of those lenses happen to be primes.
Also perhaps, partly this preference arises because other modern zooms (that are not for my E mount system) are not so convenient to use manually because most modern zooms are AF and AF lenses are not really designed for manual use. The haptics are just not quite right for me anyway. Older MF zooms on the other hand may be better to use in MF mode as you would expect, but tend to have some significant disadvantages too - all metal and very heavy, slow apertures and in some cases poor IQ at least at some settings.
Having said this I have bought some classic zooms with stellar reputations (Nikkor, Konica, Olympus, Minolta and Series 1 Vivitar) but still find myself not picking them up as often as I thought I would when the time comes to go out on the street. Mainly I think, without having closely analyzed my motivations, because all of these are slow lenses which compromise my way of shooting in another way - I like good subject background separation and this is harder to achieve with slow glass.
I suppose there is another reason too now that I consider it. I have become so attuned to using my feet to zoom that this way of shooting has become second nature to me.
For convenience, I use zooms sometimes, especially when I travel. It is just easier than lugging about lots of lenses. For this purpose I presently have a modern AF Sony E mount zoom which fits their E mount(a relatively inexpensive but good kit lens). But its disadvantage is that when shooting it I am not shooting with classic glass.
The more I shift to shooting with mirrorless cameras the more I somehow find that I like zooms less for everyday shooting. Perhaps because mirrorless allows me to try lots of old classic glass of all sorts and marques (and often very cheaply) - which is what I enjoy doing most of all. It is fun and can be a relatively cheap way of trying lots of different glass. So naturally I prefer that and most of those lenses happen to be primes.
Also perhaps, partly this preference arises because other modern zooms (that are not for my E mount system) are not so convenient to use manually because most modern zooms are AF and AF lenses are not really designed for manual use. The haptics are just not quite right for me anyway. Older MF zooms on the other hand may be better to use in MF mode as you would expect, but tend to have some significant disadvantages too - all metal and very heavy, slow apertures and in some cases poor IQ at least at some settings.
Having said this I have bought some classic zooms with stellar reputations (Nikkor, Konica, Olympus, Minolta and Series 1 Vivitar) but still find myself not picking them up as often as I thought I would when the time comes to go out on the street. Mainly I think, without having closely analyzed my motivations, because all of these are slow lenses which compromise my way of shooting in another way - I like good subject background separation and this is harder to achieve with slow glass.
I suppose there is another reason too now that I consider it. I have become so attuned to using my feet to zoom that this way of shooting has become second nature to me.
This lens gave zooms a bad rep for decades.
But the last version of it was actually quite good, although few people know this because the early ones had such a stigma.Zooms started getting good in the late 70s, the 80-200 Nikkor being one example.
Shooting indecisively using zooms as compared to primes isn't something I've ever experienced.
Agree completely!
And when on rare occasion I do use a zoom this is how I use it... Also, I tend to prefer zooms with a modest zoom range as they seem better optically.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
I get lazy using a zoom. With a 24-70mm or whatever I find myself shooting with the long end a lot rather than walking up to the subject. Less work = less interesting photos...for me.
seany65
Well-known
Zooms are good for helping you to frame the pic without having to stand in the middle of a road or river, unless you're looking up it of course.
james.liam
Well-known
Ditto.
Tended to use them at either end of the zoom range far more often than the middle. Don't know why. I did develop an appreciation for 70mm that made the Leica 75 more natural.