Primes vs Zooms

Started May 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
Chad Gladstone Senior Member • Posts: 2,608
Re: Don't listen to these wishy-washy miscreants...

paulski66 wrote:

Primes are better.

Right now most modern primes are "better" (especially if you are value or weight conscientious) but technology marches on.  Almost nothing in Nikon's current stable in the 14-24mm or 105-200mm is objectively bettered by the zooms except in price and portability and a fast fifty is hardly a compelling argument for dumping all zooms (coincidentally, I just did dump my 24-70 and 70-200 VR, but my 50 1.4g is next to go so I am an equal opportunist when it comes to dumping gear that I no longer value higher that the market will pay me).

At the moment I prefer the primes for wide, normal and short telephoto, but if I shot UWA,  I would be compelled to shot the 14-24/16-35 VR/18-35 (or be forced to go MF)  Just as some of the old primes are showing their age on the D800, so too are previous optical zoom wonders (like the 24-70).

I just don't think anyone can categorically dismiss any class of lenses because of preconceived notions that predate the digital age, except to spark controversy and debate for argument's sake.

-- hide signature --

Chad Gladstone

 Chad Gladstone's gear list:Chad Gladstone's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow