April 16, 2014, 08:16:33 AM

Poll

Do you use primes, zooms, or both

Only primes
13 (11.8%)
Zooms when I can, specialized lenses for Macro, TS-E, super telephotos
12 (10.9%)
Zooms all the time
6 (5.5%)
Both primes and zoo
79 (71.8%)

Total Members Voted: 110

Author Topic: Prime vs zoom  (Read 6891 times)

FTb-n

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #30 on: April 01, 2013, 01:22:53 AM »
"Standard" kit for me was a 60D with a 17-55 f2.8 and a 7D with a 70-200 f2.8L II.  For a while, I used a 35 f2 for low light, but I had better success with the 17-55 even with slower shutter speeds (down to 1/30).  Now I've added the 40 for those times when I want to travel light(er).

With a recent acquisition of a 5D3/24-105 f4, I'll be shuffling lenses between this body and the 7D more often, but still relying on zooms.  But, I can see myself using the 5D3 with the 40 for short work in lower light.
5D3, 7D | 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 24-105 f4L IS, 17-55 f2.8 IS, 40 f2.8, 35 f2 IS...  |  PowerShot S100

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #30 on: April 01, 2013, 01:22:53 AM »

Hobby Shooter

  • Guest
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #31 on: April 01, 2013, 01:33:43 AM »
Primes and zooms

kbmelb

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #32 on: April 01, 2013, 02:08:47 AM »
I shoot primes whenever I can. I love shooting f/2 and under. I shoot with two FF cameras so most of the time I have the 50L on one and either the 35L or 85L on the other. I also have the 135L for longer range event work and head shots.

During event work I sometimes slap the 24-70 on one cam and either the 135 or 85 on the other. I try hard to avoid the zoom though.

I also have the 16-35II for wide work and the 100-400 for tele stuff. This stuff is the lesser of my work so I don't feel compelled to own primes in the range. I do occasionally wrestle with the thought of the 14 2.8II though.

RGF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1195
  • How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #33 on: April 03, 2013, 01:38:05 AM »
I shoot primes whenever I can. I love shooting f/2 and under. I shoot with two FF cameras so most of the time I have the 50L on one and either the 35L or 85L on the other. I also have the 135L for longer range event work and head shots.

During event work I sometimes slap the 24-70 on one cam and either the 135 or 85 on the other. I try hard to avoid the zoom though.

I also have the 16-35II for wide work and the 100-400 for tele stuff. This stuff is the lesser of my work so I don't feel compelled to own primes in the range. I do occasionally wrestle with the thought of the 14 2.8II though.

I have the 14 and think it is a great lens.

insanitybeard

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #34 on: April 03, 2013, 06:46:16 AM »
Mostly zooms, but I only own one prime at the moment. I aim to get another wide-normal fastish prime as a compact walkaround lens in the future.
7D / EF-S 10-22 / 17-40L / 70-200 f4L IS / EF-S 60 macro

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
    • View Profile
    • Zee-bytes
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #35 on: April 06, 2013, 11:56:39 PM »
Depends on what I'm shooting. I prefer zooms for outdoors, walking around and events. If I have the time and I'm working indoors or doing something specific like a headshot or products then primes are the way to go.

If I had the money though I'd have the 24-70L II and 70-200L II with a 5D III and be done. Two lenses that pretty much do it all would be awesome.

I feel like I have too many lenses and too much overlap.
5D II | 7D | EOS M + 22 f2 | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 | Sigma 50 f/1.4

bdunbar79

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2425
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2013, 12:17:51 AM »
I'm mixed on this topic.  Outdoor sports with sideline passes or golf courses, track meets, etc. where you aren't limited where you can go, you really can use the 400 f/2.8, 300 f/2.8 and 200 f/2 quite easily.  Indoor sports it's not so trivial.  Weddings it isn't trivial at all and is actually worse.  So I think it is very smart to use both, each where they are maximally useful.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #36 on: April 07, 2013, 12:17:51 AM »

alexanderferdinand

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 377
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #37 on: April 07, 2013, 01:24:47 AM »
I use both.
Coming from the 80s: the 35-70/4 (?) wasn't a lens with real good IQ, and there was a 3-stop gap, with the highest ISO of 3200 of the T-MAX 3200. So I used the FD 50/1,4.
Today I still use primes although I have zooms with now satisfying IQ.
Using f 1.4 to 2.0 sometimes gives the extra kick on 35mm, or the holographic look of the 135L wide open.

ScottyP

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 469
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #38 on: April 07, 2013, 01:55:26 AM »
I dunno. I think the super wide aperture effect is a little overused. Arty folks or lens guys love a super shallow DOF In more situations than do average viewers of photos.   At least for people photos.   My wife really dislikes shots where one eye is in focus but the other eye, and the ears and maybe even the mouth, and most of the hair are blurry.  And this is 1.33 stops more true on a FF body.   Plus your keeper rate plunges with a razor thin DOF.
Canon 6D; Canon Lenses: EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF 85 f/1.8; EF-S 17-55 f/2.8; Canon 1.4x Mk. III T.C.; Sigma Lens: 35mm f/1.4 "Art"

eml58

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1225
  • 1Dx
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #39 on: April 07, 2013, 02:21:33 AM »
I use Both, depending on what is needed.

For Underwater Photography it's primes, 14f/2.8 L II, 24f/1.4 L II, & used to be the 15f/2.8 but the newer 8-15f/4 @ 15mm kills the older 15 prime, almost the only case I see in My photography where a Zoom beats a prime.

For my Wildlife Photography, done mostly in Africa, Antarctica & The Arctic, almost exclusively Primes, 200f/2 L, 300f/2.8 V2, 400f/2.8 V2 & my latest addition, the 600f/4 V2, only Zoom I pick up, which is a cracker by the way, the 70-200f/2.8 L II.

Most used Lens overall for me is the 300f/2.8 V2, best Lens Canon make I believe.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

Quasimodo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 799
  • Easily intrigued :)
    • View Profile
    • 500px.com
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2013, 03:21:04 AM »
Having the trinity for both zooms and primes is the way to go, if you can.  ;D
Zooms for versatility and convenience, and fast primes to get those magical shots.

Is there a fixed agreed-upon trinity for primes and zooms?
5DII w/grip, (1Ds III), 3x600 EX RT, ST-E3
Canon: 8-15L, 16-35L II,  24-105L , 70-200L IS II, (200/2L) 17L TS, 135L, 100L, 2x III TC, 40 F2.8 STM, 50 F1.4. Sigma 35 F1.4 Art, Sigma 85 F1.4, Sigma 150-500.
www.500px.com/gerhard1972

wayno

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 228
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #41 on: April 07, 2013, 03:44:08 AM »
Landscape and architectural work: zooms
Portraits/events. primes (usually)

Conveniently aligns with aperture needs for both, too

pwp

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1410
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #42 on: April 07, 2013, 03:46:39 AM »
Primes and zooms...they're not opponents.
They're tools for jobs. You choose the right tool for the job. Your choices will be different to mine.
It's not a competition.

I have and use both on a daily basis. In my work, zooms tend to be a first choice because of their flexibility, the primes come out for special needs and 300+mm work. The next photographer may choose primes first. Both are valid positions.

-PW

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #42 on: April 07, 2013, 03:46:39 AM »

mb66energy

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • It's the light ...
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #43 on: April 07, 2013, 04:14:06 AM »
Zooms and primes have a "peaceful coexistence" in my bag.

Usually I prefer primes because they have something I do not see from zooms:
- I think the images are more radiant, a little bit more contrasty especially in contralight situations (there is a difference between 15 or 6 lens groups!)
- with primes I take a lot more care in composition.
That's the reason why I prefer to have two identical bodies: one with the 2.8 40 and the other with the 5.6 400 or (if with zooms) 3.5-4.5 10-22 and 4.0 70-200.

But: Zooms are flexible. I tend to see 135mm (in terms of 35mm equiv) a "normal lens" so the 70-200 is a great walkaround lens with great quality (except contralight).
So I am not shure if it was the right decision to choose the 5.6 400 instead of the 100-400 zoom ...
TOOLS: EF-S 10-22 | 60 || EF 2.8/24 | 2.8/40 | 2.8+2.0/100 | 4.0/70-200 | 5.6/400 || 2 x 40D || 2x TC ||| 600D for video ||| EOS M + bunch of FD chrome rings

Dick

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 111
    • View Profile
Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #44 on: April 07, 2013, 04:26:08 AM »
I use both, but will most likely be done with zooms soon enough. I tend to grab a zoom for convenience, but then I usually end up unhappy with the results. I think that I also want to use shallow DOF in quite a lot of shots and zooms don't offer the possibility. I guess my ideal setup would be a 35mm + a 85mm, but without another 5D3 it'd be quite annoying to work with that setup.
EOS 5D Mark III + Sigma 35mm DG + L lenses + other stuff

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Prime vs zoom
« Reply #44 on: April 07, 2013, 04:26:08 AM »