What's the deal with prime lenses

Al Valentino wrote:

Jim,

I'm sure you were not trying to be sarcastic but your statement above is lacking. It is not always about lower standards/convenience vs higher quality, it can also, and for some of us, often, be simply about with focal length best frames a composition when one is limited in their movement.

I use zoom a lot as I do plenty of landscape and very often can't move in or out to properly frame a composition so it is about having the ability to use an optimal focal length without cropping. Plus some environments are terrible for lens changing.

I use FL or 10 - 280 for landscapes and may often work a area starting wide and then doing long lens extractions. For most of these I am shooting at f/11 with slower glass is which is often sharper than very fast glass stopped way down beyond its sweet spot. It is very rare to find a serious landscape photographers that doesn't use zooms for at least 90% of their work.

I have shot extensively in places like Yellowstone, Great Smoky Mountains, Alaska, Acadia National Park... Primes are a horrible option in those areas.

So it is also about the genre one is working with that dictates what glass is best. For street shooters things are different, fast glass, 2 or 3 favored focal lengths and subject isolation or low light makes primes the better choice more often than not.