24mm and 50mm, or just 35mm?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
NotASpeckOfCereal Senior Member • Posts: 2,019
Re: Photo Audit

Satyaa wrote:

JohnnyLuddite wrote:

...

It's funny - I'm of a vintage where modern zooms weren't and primes were clearly better. And I get the discipline of having to move (a bit like playing squash!) that primes encourage. However - the zooms are so good that now the primes are for specific characteristics plus your preferences for subject/field of view.

That's an interesting point I'll need to remember and think about.

There are some zooms like Sigma 18-35/1.8 Art for DX that's better than primes at those focal lengths, then the workhorse f/2.8 zooms give acceptably close results for all practical purposes, and more like that.

Fine art isn't practical. Acceptably close won't cut it for full-page magazine spreads.

So it really depends what you are doing and who your audience / clients are, but nothing beats or meets the finest primes out there, if that's what you really need for your work to reach its mark.

The only complaint one can have is that they are heavy, large and expensive.

They are, but they are useful for a lot of work. They're expensive and heavy because a lot of engineering has gone into making them better and better over the years. Some kinds of photographers very much need those gold-ring zoom lenses for their work.

But they still don't match the best primes.

Chris

 NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list:NotASpeckOfCereal's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D850 Fujifilm GFX 100S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +16 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