I love Primes.
- Thread starter RLPhoto
- Start date
- Status
This past Saturday, I spent about two hours comparing my 28/1.8 versus the 24-105L.
When you shoot the 28/1.8 at f/4, you get sharper corners, better corner contrast, better flare control, less CA by a huge amount, and from what I can tell... pixel peeping.... at least the same sharpness and contrast and "snap" in the center regions, as compared with the 24-105L. Done with a 5d2.
So, it doesn't have to be L glass to be really good. And granted, the 24-105 is not really to die for in image quality either (though mine is very impressive on the long end).
I can also say, that my 300/4L (non-IS) is as sharp, contrasty and snappy as my 50/1.4, assuming the 50 is stopped down to at least 2.8
The L glass is spectacular though... I'm lusting for a 35/1.4, but I'll probably succumb to a 16-35/2.8 instead.
When you shoot the 28/1.8 at f/4, you get sharper corners, better corner contrast, better flare control, less CA by a huge amount, and from what I can tell... pixel peeping.... at least the same sharpness and contrast and "snap" in the center regions, as compared with the 24-105L. Done with a 5d2.
So, it doesn't have to be L glass to be really good. And granted, the 24-105 is not really to die for in image quality either (though mine is very impressive on the long end).
I can also say, that my 300/4L (non-IS) is as sharp, contrasty and snappy as my 50/1.4, assuming the 50 is stopped down to at least 2.8
The L glass is spectacular though... I'm lusting for a 35/1.4, but I'll probably succumb to a 16-35/2.8 instead.
Upvote
0
sweet, first to vote against primes. they have their advantages sure. i have a couple, but i'll take a zoom. Sure they are small, and light(until you get a few of them), but barring the long teles they are at the very least matched, usually beaten in IQ by zooms(the L variety). for all of you out there with zooms that want to be liberated, i can come over to your house free of charge and epoxy your zoom lens in your preferred focal length.(provided it's within your zoom's focal length range) I'll even do weird custom stuff like 80mm, 140mm, or even 103mm, whatever you need. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying zooming all over the place is a replacement for moving closer or further away from your subject. All the distances and angles play a large role in the final results.
really though, obviously sure they work great for a great many photographers, I'm just not that guy.
really though, obviously sure they work great for a great many photographers, I'm just not that guy.
Upvote
0
T
trygved
Guest
Purchased every cheap prime a person could want.
Sold those cheap primes and got a 24-105L.
Of course the low light performance is not there, but being able to reframe the shot quickly has been more helpful to my photography. Seeing the mix of focal lengths is refreshing, and I loathe the idea of toting around additional lenses to accomplish that.
I don't question the quality of primes, but the shooting style is not for me.
Sold those cheap primes and got a 24-105L.
Of course the low light performance is not there, but being able to reframe the shot quickly has been more helpful to my photography. Seeing the mix of focal lengths is refreshing, and I loathe the idea of toting around additional lenses to accomplish that.
I don't question the quality of primes, but the shooting style is not for me.
Upvote
0
MARKOE PHOTOE
Photography is a love affair with life.
I'm with you RLPhoto. I love my primes and use them daily for most anything. The only time I use my zooms obviously is for sports: 70-200 II, 70-300L and 100-400L.
Upvote
0
I use the Canon 28 1.8 and 85 1.8 on Canon 5D III and I am very happy with the result. Previously I used Canon 50D with Canon 17-55 2.8 IS USM and like the results from 3.5 up. Now I happy with the result of those primes from 2.2 up. Besides that I use the canon 70-200 2.8 is ii. I shoot mostly weddings
Upvote
0
I love fixed lenses (I've retired my sermon on why most of them aren't "prime"), but don't own any. The 135 2.0 and 300 2.8 are frequent rentals, however. I do feel non-zooms get a little over-romanticized, though. They put a lot of extra weight on both your bag and your credit card without getting you a huge advantage in terms of image quality compared to a quality zoom, UNLESS you work in low light a lot, or are REALLY into shallow depth of field, or any of the obvious range narrow use cases.
Shooting with a fixed lens is an excellent creative exercise for photographers of all skill levels. A while back, I was evaluating the utility of the 85mm focal length for a possible lens purchase and gaffer taped my 24-105 at that focal setting. You can do this at any time with any zoom to get a feel for it.
Give me a couple of good zooms for day-to-day work, but if I hit the lottery. . .
Shooting with a fixed lens is an excellent creative exercise for photographers of all skill levels. A while back, I was evaluating the utility of the 85mm focal length for a possible lens purchase and gaffer taped my 24-105 at that focal setting. You can do this at any time with any zoom to get a feel for it.
Give me a couple of good zooms for day-to-day work, but if I hit the lottery. . .
Upvote
0
Whilst I love big primes and the ability to blow backgrounds with big appetures on small primes they are a pain outside. Changing lenss missing shots etc. If you do get it right though they do give amazing bokeh, all of them.
But, the latest L zooms are just as sharp. I've got a 70-200 mk2 and 70-300 4-5.6 L. I'm totally blown away by the sharpness, colors and tones. I miss nothing, they are so well sealed I can go out in a rain storm and they work perfectly. Primes have their place for that different special shot but for me I'm zooms all the way now. Oh and I've tried the 14mm prime against a 16-35mk2. I can't tell any difference when printed at a2. They look identicle except the prime does look a bit wider and 2mm does actually make a big difference.
But, the latest L zooms are just as sharp. I've got a 70-200 mk2 and 70-300 4-5.6 L. I'm totally blown away by the sharpness, colors and tones. I miss nothing, they are so well sealed I can go out in a rain storm and they work perfectly. Primes have their place for that different special shot but for me I'm zooms all the way now. Oh and I've tried the 14mm prime against a 16-35mk2. I can't tell any difference when printed at a2. They look identicle except the prime does look a bit wider and 2mm does actually make a big difference.
Upvote
0
gferdinandsen
was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker
I like my 50 f/1.2; but would never get rid of the 24-70. While I am amazed at the number of shots at or near 24, 28, 35, or 50mm; I love the flexability to shoot at 43mm without haveing to do post processing to crop out the unwanted noise/garbage. I travel a lot, and for my money it's not worth changing lenses often. I'll use my 50 indoors and when I am tripodded up, but otherwise +1 for zooms.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
