Bill Pierce
Well-known
I don’t use zooms that much. Shooting dress rehearsals from a relatively fixed position in a theatre, I do use zooms. And the “do everything” camera bag (actually the “I have no idea what I’ll be doing.” bag) will have something in the 80-200 range or its APS-c equivalent even if its not used much. Zooms are obviously and justifiably popular, and I wondered why I was a prime user.
Was it because I learned photography at a time when zoom lenses were rare? I don’t think so. Is it because they are bigger and slower than primes? Maybe a little bit… But I think the real reason is that I don’t want to add one more camera related decision to the process when I want to concentrate on the subject. For me that’s true even when I’m not framing a people picture that has an obvious moment. I use fixed lenses even when I’m photographing trees. As the megapixel count grows in our digital cameras, I suppose the ability to shoot a little wide and fine tune with a crop in the digital darkroom could qualify as a zoom, but, if so, the range of that zoom is rather pathetic compared to a full out lens zoom.
Saying you don’t use a zoom much because you don’t want to add to what you have to think about sounds like a statement from a photographer with limited brain power. Nonetheless, I expect there are folks who will agree with me. And I expect there are more folks who will say, “No, you are an idiot.” Are you fixed in your ways or do you zoom? Are you strong enough to carry and do both. And, as always, most important, WHY?
Was it because I learned photography at a time when zoom lenses were rare? I don’t think so. Is it because they are bigger and slower than primes? Maybe a little bit… But I think the real reason is that I don’t want to add one more camera related decision to the process when I want to concentrate on the subject. For me that’s true even when I’m not framing a people picture that has an obvious moment. I use fixed lenses even when I’m photographing trees. As the megapixel count grows in our digital cameras, I suppose the ability to shoot a little wide and fine tune with a crop in the digital darkroom could qualify as a zoom, but, if so, the range of that zoom is rather pathetic compared to a full out lens zoom.
Saying you don’t use a zoom much because you don’t want to add to what you have to think about sounds like a statement from a photographer with limited brain power. Nonetheless, I expect there are folks who will agree with me. And I expect there are more folks who will say, “No, you are an idiot.” Are you fixed in your ways or do you zoom? Are you strong enough to carry and do both. And, as always, most important, WHY?
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
No need to be bw. Yes, I’m fixed this week. Flipped the rear wheel on my bike to FG.
Next week I’ll put zoom on my RP instead of RF prime. Actually this Sunday. Guests are coming.
I like to walk with dog and primed RP, but for party wide zoom is good.
Next week I’ll put zoom on my RP instead of RF prime. Actually this Sunday. Guests are coming.
I like to walk with dog and primed RP, but for party wide zoom is good.
farlymac
PF McFarland
It all depends. Not many zoom lenses made for rangefinders, but when I'm doing an event like an auto show I like to use a couple of zooms (if using multiple SLR/DSLR bodies), or pick the one that I think will cover the range I need for the particular situation. The AF Nikkor 24-120mm 3.5-5.6D is my favorite.
PF
PF
Prest_400
Multiformat
Zooms for me are more of an exception too. I have a m43 35-100 f2.8 which makes me think that for telephoto, zoom is a good idea.
Also have a superzoom but I do see a compromise in image quality, as well as losing that 1-2 stops compared to a prime.
A quote I forgot where I first read is to think of a zoom as a set of primes. That rather than being lazy and adjusting the FL instead of moving the feet and camera.
I find that for the wide to short tele, my zoom approach is this one. I first choose a FL out of the range, and then shoot.
Last time I used the superzoom, a month ago, it was liberating as well as fun being able to shoot at 28mm or 300mm in just a turn of the ring.
Also have a superzoom but I do see a compromise in image quality, as well as losing that 1-2 stops compared to a prime.
A quote I forgot where I first read is to think of a zoom as a set of primes. That rather than being lazy and adjusting the FL instead of moving the feet and camera.
I find that for the wide to short tele, my zoom approach is this one. I first choose a FL out of the range, and then shoot.
Last time I used the superzoom, a month ago, it was liberating as well as fun being able to shoot at 28mm or 300mm in just a turn of the ring.
Hari
Well-known
Never liked zooms and never bought one.
They're fun for movie cameras. Never used
auto focus except pt&sh or on the Leitz enlarger.
They're fun for movie cameras. Never used
auto focus except pt&sh or on the Leitz enlarger.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I shoot full frame and go prime (24-50-85 works well for me). I have been meaning to getting around to trying out a zoom lens for about 25 years now. One of these days. I do like auto focus but I like Manual better.
Disappointed_Horse
Well-known
I completely agree with you. Decisional paralysis is a real thing. In today's world of knowledge work, having to make decisions all day long is what makes our lives so exhausting. Steve Jobs wore a black turtleneck and jeans every day so he wouldn't have to waste mental energy deciding what to wear. I don't think anyone would accuse him of having limited brain power.
Bottom line, every decision you have to make to take a picture causes mental drag. I like limiting those decisions to aperture, shutter speed, and focus. I do photography for fun. I mostly shoot with 35mm film cameras with primes although I do have a couple of zooms (the 18–55mm and 55–200mm Nikon kit lenses for my DSLR). I only use the 55–200 when I know I will need the reach, and only use the 18–55 because my wife has appropriated my 35mm DX prime. If I miss a shot because I have a 35mm or a 50mm prime on my camera rather than a zoom, it doesn't bother me in the least. I like the images I make better with my prime lenses. Whether that's because of the optical properties of the lenses or because I'm more focused when I use prime lenses, I don't know.
pluton
Well-known
I've got a modest selection of primes for my 24x36 Nikon, from fisheye and 18mm to 300mm. Newer Zeiss and older Nikon.
I've owned/used, in the past, the "high end" 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm zooms, and I eventually got rid of them all. The one zoom I won't unload, and in fact would buy a new, and improved version of, is the 17-35/2.8. Still a fully useable lens, except at 35mm.
I've owned/used, in the past, the "high end" 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm zooms, and I eventually got rid of them all. The one zoom I won't unload, and in fact would buy a new, and improved version of, is the 17-35/2.8. Still a fully useable lens, except at 35mm.
peterm1
Veteran
I used to use zooms quite a bit especially with my Nikon SLRs and DSLRs. Indeed I find zooms especially useful when travelling light - maybe one on the camera and a fast prime for night work and that's pretty much it. In fact when I wanted to travel reasonably light but wanted more choice and hence had to carry more, on trips away to Asia a few years back I decided I would be better served by taking a couple of zooms from circa 1990 - Nikkors of course, mainly the Nikkor 35-70mm f2.8 plus the Nikkor 70-210mm f4 - 5.6 and a fast 50mm prime. My more modern Nikkor zooms were too big and got left at home.
Since being introduced to modern mirrorless cams though, I almost exclusively shoot with primes. The M4/3 format has many superb AF primes, they are small, light and do the job wonderfully. Somehow they just go with this format camera. In addition, I like adapting vintage lenses and that mainly means primes. I have made a few exceptions just for the sake of experimentation - a few classic zooms that have stellar reputations from Olympus, Konica, Vivitar and others. These we cheap to buy and fun to experiment with. One thing I do not like about adapted zooms is that it is more fiddly to use with IBIS. To do it correctly you really need to alter the focal length in use in the camera menu every time you zoom in or out. Perhaps I should not bother but it tis something that concerns me when doing so.
My other reason for shooting more primes is that over the years I have learned the joy of shallow DOF and bokeh. So that means using primes for the most part. Most zooms I have used have too slow a maximum aperture as well as indifferent bokeh at best. The one zoom that comes to mind as being an exception (that I own in any event) is the Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 AF D. But again it's too big for my liking when travelling so I restrict it to shooting locally for the most part.
Since being introduced to modern mirrorless cams though, I almost exclusively shoot with primes. The M4/3 format has many superb AF primes, they are small, light and do the job wonderfully. Somehow they just go with this format camera. In addition, I like adapting vintage lenses and that mainly means primes. I have made a few exceptions just for the sake of experimentation - a few classic zooms that have stellar reputations from Olympus, Konica, Vivitar and others. These we cheap to buy and fun to experiment with. One thing I do not like about adapted zooms is that it is more fiddly to use with IBIS. To do it correctly you really need to alter the focal length in use in the camera menu every time you zoom in or out. Perhaps I should not bother but it tis something that concerns me when doing so.
My other reason for shooting more primes is that over the years I have learned the joy of shallow DOF and bokeh. So that means using primes for the most part. Most zooms I have used have too slow a maximum aperture as well as indifferent bokeh at best. The one zoom that comes to mind as being an exception (that I own in any event) is the Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 AF D. But again it's too big for my liking when travelling so I restrict it to shooting locally for the most part.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I`ve used two internal zooms in about 40 years of photographing .
I`ve never really liked them especially the ones which extend .
So its come as a surprise that I`ve gone out and bought an extendable zoom (55=135) for my Leica CL .
Most useful lens I`ve ever owned .... complete shock .
The CL has a 1.5 crop so it equates to 202 at the long end and saves me carrying the much heavier Cannon 70 -200.
It gets better ....those nice folk at Leica have just released V4 firmware update which among other things provides for additional digital zoom of 1.3 and 1.7 .
That`s 263 or 344 at the long end .
Implemented by showing the crop frame lines like in the Q2 so very useful because I can now use the EVF like a Rangefinder .
As I don`t need anymore reach I can reduce my lenses accordingly and get some money back ..
Still prefer primes but you have to be flexible ..
I`ve never really liked them especially the ones which extend .
So its come as a surprise that I`ve gone out and bought an extendable zoom (55=135) for my Leica CL .
Most useful lens I`ve ever owned .... complete shock .
The CL has a 1.5 crop so it equates to 202 at the long end and saves me carrying the much heavier Cannon 70 -200.
It gets better ....those nice folk at Leica have just released V4 firmware update which among other things provides for additional digital zoom of 1.3 and 1.7 .
That`s 263 or 344 at the long end .
Implemented by showing the crop frame lines like in the Q2 so very useful because I can now use the EVF like a Rangefinder .
As I don`t need anymore reach I can reduce my lenses accordingly and get some money back ..
Still prefer primes but you have to be flexible ..
dof
Fiat Lux
I came into photography at a time when one accepted bias was that zoom lenses were optically inferior to their prime lens counterparts. This may have been generally demonstrable at the time and I'm sure that even then there were exceptions to this "rule". I'm now of the understanding that the quality gap has long been closed between the two.
Even having accepted that bias, my first "real" lens was a Nikkor 50mm - 135mm f3.5 zoom, bought along with an FM2n. Getting a zoom was a "practical" decision based on having a range of focal lengths available at a price I could afford. I didn't know exactly what I was getting into with it instead of the "standard" 50mm f1.4 - the less expensive option under consideration.
I shot with the zoom for a couple of years. Ultimately, I let it go not due to the image quality, but rather a combination of the size/weight and finding that I just didn't need the zoom feature.
I was eventually able to afford a wide-angle (a used Tokina) and a 55mm Micro-Nikkor. At f2.8 for both, neither were much faster than the zoom. However I found that not only were the fixed lenses were easier to carry, I found I didn't need for the versatility nor the longer reach of the short telephoto zoom. Working with fixed lenses served what I want from photography exceptionally well.
That first lens is also among the pieces of kit that I've never regretted selling. I've never bought another zoom and can't say that I've missed them.
Even having accepted that bias, my first "real" lens was a Nikkor 50mm - 135mm f3.5 zoom, bought along with an FM2n. Getting a zoom was a "practical" decision based on having a range of focal lengths available at a price I could afford. I didn't know exactly what I was getting into with it instead of the "standard" 50mm f1.4 - the less expensive option under consideration.
I shot with the zoom for a couple of years. Ultimately, I let it go not due to the image quality, but rather a combination of the size/weight and finding that I just didn't need the zoom feature.
I was eventually able to afford a wide-angle (a used Tokina) and a 55mm Micro-Nikkor. At f2.8 for both, neither were much faster than the zoom. However I found that not only were the fixed lenses were easier to carry, I found I didn't need for the versatility nor the longer reach of the short telephoto zoom. Working with fixed lenses served what I want from photography exceptionally well.
That first lens is also among the pieces of kit that I've never regretted selling. I've never bought another zoom and can't say that I've missed them.
dourbalistar
Buy more film
I only use Zoom for video conferencing these days... 
p.s. I still only shoot prime lenses.
p.s. I still only shoot prime lenses.
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
I'm in total agreement with you on this.
Dogman
Veteran
I started with primes because there were no really good zooms at the time. Years later, I started using zooms at work for convenience. I had two bags, one for everyday assignments that contained zooms, one for specialized assignments that had fast primes. When I transitioned to a hobbyist I went back to zooms. They were good by then, really good. And with digital lenses got even better. Eventually I went retro and started using primes again because they are discrete, small and lighter weight. And, let's admit it, they really are better optically than zooms.
I have a few zooms along with my primes. They are convenience lenses like they were when I first started using them. I prefer the smaller and optically better primes but it's sometimes better to have one camera and one lens with several focal lengths available than to carry a bag of primes or multiple camera bodies with various lenses attached.
I have a few zooms along with my primes. They are convenience lenses like they were when I first started using them. I prefer the smaller and optically better primes but it's sometimes better to have one camera and one lens with several focal lengths available than to carry a bag of primes or multiple camera bodies with various lenses attached.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
Go with the flow. It's an 'old' vs. 'new' issue. Old school zooms weren't that good. Some modern zooms are fantastic. Try the Fuji XF 2.8/16-55 and post again. Cheers, OtL
zuiko85
Veteran
Always preferred primes, for the usual reasons, smaller and a stop or two faster. But strangely the only lens I regret selling was a zoom, the 28-48mm f4 OM Zuiko. I bought it real cheap used and sold it for 4 times that amount. Now, stupidly, I’d like to have it again but my cheap nature won’t let me even consider it at current prices.
That lens was compact, constant aperture, and covered my preferred range of a walking around focal length.
That lens was compact, constant aperture, and covered my preferred range of a walking around focal length.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I think you`ve got it in one there.
I must admit to have been guilty of that out of date thinking myself .
gavinlg
Veteran
Zooms are lazy in my opinion - they dilute the connection between photographer and environment.
*puts on flame suit*
*puts on flame suit*
Michael Markey
Veteran
Which is a good thing when you`re in front of horses jumping hedges ....
Get too close and the only connection you`ll have with your environment is from the inside of an ambulance .
Timmyjoe
Veteran
My first reaction when I saw the title of this post was "Yeah, I don't know how to use it either." 'cause I thought Bill was talking about the video conferencing app my wife and kids are using all day long because of Covid-19.
Oh, camera zooms. When covering events I use a 70-200 & a 24-70, though I prefer the old days when everyone used the 20-35 & 80-200. Just haven't found a 20-35 that looks good on the Nikon sensors.
Best,
-Tim
Oh, camera zooms. When covering events I use a 70-200 & a 24-70, though I prefer the old days when everyone used the 20-35 & 80-200. Just haven't found a 20-35 that looks good on the Nikon sensors.
Best,
-Tim