Primes vs Zooms

Started May 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
Mssimo
Contributing MemberPosts: 862Gear list
Like?
Re: Don't listen to these wishy-washy miscreants...
In reply to Stacey_K, May 9, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

Mssimo wrote:

Primes are much better.

That simply just isn't always the case.

Zooms are slow, big, only shart in the center, have a ton of CA and cost more money.

NC on that one.

If you like to compare a $2000 zoom with a 50mm f1.8...well the 50mm prime still wins.

You pick the absolute cheapest and easiest to make prime to compare with.

Lets try again with a 24mm lens. The 24 F2.8 is pretty much a dog. Soft edges and CA goes up as you stop it down. The only other prime is fast but the edges are soft until f5.6 and it's also almost $2000. For $1200 you can get the 16-35 F4 zoom, you get VR and "drum roll please" you also get a 16mm + a 35mm lens thrown in for free!

-- hide signature --

Stacey

If you look at DXOmark lens data rankings. You will find the 70-200mm VRII on the 3rd page. This also happens to be the only zoom I own at the moment.

To your point, photography is not all about image quality. So we have a reason for zooms.

-- hide signature --
 Mssimo's gear list:Mssimo's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Circular Fisheye +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow