Is the 12-40mm good enough to forego 12mm, 17mm, 25mm and 45mm primes?

Started Mar 13, 2014 | Questions thread
Fotoloco Contributing Member • Posts: 879
Re: Is the 12-40mm good enough to forego 12mm, 17mm, 25mm and 45mm primes?

If you already have the 12-40 and love it - which you should cause it is great - then before you even consider the 25 and 45, you should think about the mid tele zoom you mentioned and/or the 75.  The zoom will be more versatile, but the 75 still gets you good reach, is super sharp, and can be used as a thin dof portrait lens outside (and inside if u have enough space). I often take just the body with the 12-40 attached only. If I want more reach I add the 75, but some would prefer the zoom. Only add the the two shorter primes if you really feell the need for thinner dof. If you do not, then don't. I have the 25, 45, and 75. I use them all a fair amount, but truth be told wide wide open is often a bit of an overkill and too much blur for environmental portraits. You can typically achieve a little background blur by shooting the 12-40 wide open at 2.8 (you get a little subject separation, if you have multiplin people in shot they are all in focus, and you still can recognize they are at playground/standing in front of church/whatever) which is often desirable vs squashing the whole background to nothing. It is certainly good enough for upping your game over camera phones and the P&S cams. It is a decision you have to make for yourself, but my opinion is you agent a lot when you add the zoom or 75, then it becomes diminishing returns. 8 did add them, but could live without them if I had to.

One  thing  - you do not need the grip just because you have a lot of lenses? Not sure why you think that, or maybe I misread or did not understand.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow