Why use a prime?

[Francesco]

--
'He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond
the pale of any acceptable human conduct.'

• Apocalypse Now

--
Francesco Gallarotti

 

[dyslexia125512]

I don't know if I'd go that far. Neither primes nor zooms make art. An artist makes art; the lens a photographer uses is just a tool, and as I said, the prime vs. zoom debate is really one of personal preference.

I would argue, though, that spending some time with only primes (or only a single prime) can help a person grow as a photographer. I think it helps take some of the fiddling out of the equation, and forces you to focus a lot more on composition. However, that doesn't mean that you can't have excellent composition with a zoom; it's just that using primes means you don't have the option of quickly changing composition.

And though I'm a prime person, I've got a long way to go before I'd consider myself an artist For now, I'm just a guy who dabbles a bit when he can.

--
-- dyslexia

http://implausible.net/galleries.html

 

[sjstokes]

Thanks everyone. Is this a built-in Photoshop filter (for Photoshop 7)?

I can get-around ok in Photoshop, but mostly have used in the past for making images for different web and non-web based programs that I write.

I just purchased my 10D earlier this week. I picked a lens that I am finding a bit uncommon as it is "not known for it's sharpness". Not to big of a deal, I am learning well with it (it's 28-200 USM f3.5-5.6)
I posted my first shots here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=6130252
And most recent here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=6145393

What is "USM in Photoshop"?

Hi SJ,

Your question deserves a more thorough answer than previous poster
gave. The Canon digital SLR cameras (and especially the 10D) don't
do much processing of the image inside the camera. Non-SLR
digitals apply a lot of digital sharpening (and other "touching up"
operations) before the image is even written to the memory card.
This makes the image look great right out of the camera.

The problem is that this automatic touch-up work actually throws
away image information that cannot be later recovered. Also, the
touch-up is really an artistic thing... and we all know that
computers are TERRIBLE at making artistic decisions. The
algorithms that sharpen the image inside the camera don't
understand what the real goal is or what the real scene looked
like; they just go about applying the sharpening no matter what.

So.... the Digital SLRs do very little processing inside the
camera. That means that the images you get off your 10D are a
little bit fuzzy and the colors are very vivid. 10D owners then
pull the images into Photoshop software on their Windows or
Macintosh computer to manually retouch the pictures. The human
photographer can conrol just how much sharpening (and other
adjustments) to make with a few slider controls on the screen. One
of the very most important adjustments controls the sharpness of
the image and is called "unsharp mask"; that is usually called
"USM" for short.

The 10D's lack of in-camera automatic sharpening often comes as a
big (and bad) surprise to new 10D owners. Pictures sometimes seem
bland right out of the camera. The trick, of course, is to use
Photoshop (or similar program) to adjust the iamge after it is
taken. This is a FAR superrior approach than the in-camera
automatic adjustments.

 

[Francesco]

However, that
doesn't mean that you can't have excellent composition with a zoom;
it's just that using primes means you don't have the option of
quickly changing composition.

And why is that a good thing? Why I have to run up and down a place when I can just zoom? See the point is that if you talk about speed and colors I can agree with you, but compisition-wise I believe that the "common-say" that a prime teaches you a better lesson is not true.
To learn you need to shoot a lot. Digital gives you this opportunity.

The reason is that you learn from your own mistakes and watching what other people do.

Now why having to stick with one "framesize" would make me a better photographer, when without a zoom I can't get the particular framing that I would like..... please don't answer "post-processing -> crop" because that would be cheating, right?

BTW can you tell me what is "excellent composition"? I give the same picture to 10 photographers and they will tell me that it is good because.... 10 different reasons! I am not even sure what is a good composition. Composition is just very fashionly, changing with time. A picture of a screw in a old window might be "Cool and well composed" today, but it wasn't 30 years ago and maybe won't be in 30 years..... Actually thinking again about this very last issue I am not sure that I am totally right or not. But for example a picture taken 30 degrees rotated along the lens axis, would have been never accepted as a cool picture (even though maybe by doing so you creat some sort of diagonal rule in composition).

Anyway, this is not an attack or anything against you, I just wanted to get out my point of view (bad or good, i dont care) here in this page... Think about it as a blog post, LOL

fg

 

[sjstokes]

Ok, I have found Unsharp-Mask
Sorry, should have looked first. I even had Photoshop open

 

[dyslexia125512]

No offense, but I don't really get your point, especially since you seem to be contradicting your earlier post.

Anyways, as I said, using primes does not make someone more of an artist, nor does it make photographs better. All I said (and I stick to this) is that using primes for a bit can help remove some of the complexity of photography and allow you to focus on other aspects

And as for running all over the place vs. zooming, as I said, it's personal preference. There are times I think a zoom is the right tool, and there are times when I think a prime is. If I feel that I want the change in perspective of moving closer, I'd rather use a prime. If I feel that I like the perspective from where I am, or if I'm trying to take shots of subjects that are moving (and thus require reframing faster than I can accomplish by physically moving), I'm going to want to use a zoom.

--
-- dyslexia

http://implausible.net/galleries.html

 

[Zidar162589]

"An economy of means forces me to be more rigorous." -Henri Cartier-Bresson

Abu Mumia

--
'He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond
the pale of any acceptable human conduct.'

• Apocalypse Now

 

[Peter Phan]

Or as Homer Simpson said...

"I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman."

"An economy of means forces me to be more rigorous." -Henri
Cartier-Bresson

Abu Mumia

--
'He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond
the pale of any acceptable human conduct.'

• Apocalypse Now

 

[Rylee Isitt]

Glad you found it.

What settings to use will depend on your own personal tastes, but i usually find this to be near perfect:

Radius: 0.3
Amount: 100
Threshold: 0

If your images have lots of noise in them, USM won't help at all, even if you fiddle with the threshold value (which is designed to stop the filter from sharpening noise).

Ok, I have found Unsharp-Mask
Sorry, should have looked first. I even had Photoshop open

--
All my work are belong to me

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

M5Laser wrote:
[snip]

In addition to the demonstrable advantages (weight, brightness, flare) and the less tangible effect of primes as a creative or compositional stimulant (works for many, but not for everyone), there's something else.

Character.

Primes are like a woodworker's knives, planes, and chisels. Zooms are like power tools.

Each prime has a very subtle character, and they're simple enough that with time and attention you can get to learn to know them thoroughly.

When wide-open, my 50/1.4 lightly kisses the subject. It gives delicate detail a translucent quality. The field of focus pops out like child's laughter at a funeral, with the rest fading into misty-milky distance. As I stop down, the subject emerges like the main theme out of a symphony; the background and foreground coalesce out of the softness, taking up secondary melodies and harmonies. At f/11, the lens plays like the Deutsche Oper in the middle of the Ride of the Valkyries -- the scene sings in a chorus of detail, almost intense enough to make the eyes burst.

My Tokina 17 is a gypsy violinist. He may not have the richness of tone of a Guarnieri or a Stradivarius, but he has the improvisational virtuosity of a Paganini. Wide-open on film, vignetting makes the corners start to darken into deeper shades, and the caprices of the player stertching the geometry into dreamlike forms, taking you into a world where men wore felt hats and suspenders, and women had their bright eyes in white faces, with the mouth a dark, sensual gash, where music was overlaid by the hiss and crackle of gramophone noise. There is a foreground and a background, although the point where the tripping melody of the field of focus fades into the harmonies of the background cannot be defined -- look at it one way, and it's all melody, look closely, and you hear the harmony. Stop down, use it on digital, but keep your eye on the ball, and the lens sees as through clear water: colors and contrasts almost more intense than real: the pictures no more natural and seemingly as far away... but this time, in space rather than in time. And, of course, there are the little off-sounds of red and green CA here and there.

Zooms? Like power drills. Sure, you'll be able to produce a picture with them, just as well as with a prime, only more efficiently. But they lack personality and character. They're efficient and boring, turning you into a picture-taking machine instead of an artisan. For sheer feel and romance, there's nothing like primes that you keep, treasure, and learn to know and love.

Petteri
--



Portfolio: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/index/ ]
Pontification: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/ ]

 

[Nilo Here]

Majority of the people here would not know who Bresson is and why his work is so important?

"An economy of means forces me to be more rigorous." -Henri
Cartier-Bresson

Abu Mumia

 

[DavidP #28649]

If the only reason one has for using a prime is that it somehow magically forces him to stick with a certain focal length, I suggest a little will-power.

Or, duct tape.

LOL.

--
The Lowest Paid Concert Photographer Around
http://www.neonlightsimaging.com/artshow/final.htm
Photography -- just another word for compromise

'Since we can't keep crime in check, why don't we legalize it and tax it out of business?' -- Will Rogers

 

[Adam-T]

Have a look at how small the 300/4 is - and that's next to two CONSUMER Zooms (28-135IS and 70-210USM) - couple that with that it's sharper at F4 than even a 100-400L is at F5.6 PLUS you get the extra stop AND if you add a 1.4X you get a 400 F5.6L on the cheap (420 actually) - you can see why this lens is popular!



--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

The No1 Dedicated 1D forum in the UK -------->

http://www.1dforum.co.uk/php/phpBB2/

 

[Adam-T]

For sheer feel and romance, there's nothing like primes that you
keep, treasure, and learn to know and love.

Admittedly, a Sigma 50-500EX or 120-300F2.8 on a 1D with a bracket on the tripod mounts begs you to ask where the Belt feed for the Ammo goes and you DO expect the barrel to spin around when you focus but toting a 500L or 600F4 IS is so reminiscing of warfare in the gulf also ;-) ..

Primes thesedays are for when you need fast aperture or/and light weight, specialist lenses like Macros or TSEs - otherwise in the 21st Century (or even the late 80s onwards) most of the time (especially under 200mm) they're just a Pain in the ass ;-) .. LOL

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

The No1 Dedicated 1D forum in the UK -------->

http://www.1dforum.co.uk/php/phpBB2/

 

[Melanie Kipp]

Adam,
If you have any primes to give away, send them to me at.....
grin
I may have to get a decent 50mm

--
Please visit me at:
http://www.caughtintimephotography.com

 

[Thomas Gardner]

dyslexia...
would you stretch that over and say that "prime-people" are more
similar to painters (who take time and lots of patience to get one
of their pictures done) while "zoom-ers" are more similar to
reporters, who just care about grabbing the instant?

Well that's about the silliest thing I've read. Why? If you know anything about perspective, zooming with your feet, changes the perspective. By standing in one place and using a zoom, it allows you to tighten the crop in your viewfinder, without changing your perspective. This is a good thing.

Do you have any zooms? I have both and find zooms to do a better job in getting the shot. Why? Because I use both, my feet and the image cropping ability of the zoom. That's a bunch of whooie that's being bantered about because it makes people feel better, in an elitist way about their use of primes. I have many of both and find zooms get the job done where as primes prevent me from getting a job done. A lense is a tool the allows the user to get the job done and to think one is better then another is pure, egotistical nonsense.

I would agree to this point of view actually. This is why somehow I
believe that shooting with a prime gives you a larger "aura" of
professionality and makes you a better artist.

I started out with primes and zooms. I've learned on 35mm and twin lens reflex film bodies as well as 4"X5" view cameras. Ain't nothing slower then a film plate and a view camera

If you're worried about "aura", then you're new to the game. As a pro, I don't care as I am a pro. I've also been a pro long enough that I can let my pride of professionalism run a bit rampent. It's about attitude, not "aura". Equipment does matter but the customer doesn't care a wit about whether or not you have a coke bottle bottom on the sensor body or the finest "L" lense. What they care about is your reputation and can you get the shot.

If you're fussing around with a lense, that causes you to have to shift around a bunch because you can't keep your perspective, then you're using the wrong tool. Customers hire you to get the job done, not to fuss around bucause you think a prime is somehow the magical, because it makes you look good, way to go.

If you're a pro, don't listen to the others, do listen to your experience and what you know will get the job done. If I listened to the pros in my profession, my callbacks would go through the roof, I'd get a lot fewer jobs completed each day and my job would not be as much fun. That's a bad thing.

Get a decent zoom and learn how to use it. Then mix the benefits of the zoom with your prime and get the job done and move on to the next one. In business, it's all about finishing a job and moving on to the next one as there's always a tomorrow and if you're busy, another job.

And yes, I'm expecting you do to all of the jobs correctly, on budget and in a timely manner.

This is what a pro is all about as it's not about zoom, prime or "aura".

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

 

[Thomas Gardner]

Primes are like a woodworker's knives, planes, and chisels. Zooms
are like power tools.

Wow, now there's an example of poetic license Being a contractor who was a remodeler, I know for a fact that you're not gonna remodel a bathroom with knives, planes and chisels. And they surely aren't gonna help you pound a roof down or build a fence Would love to see your planes get dryrot out of the crawl space. I know, we'll use a brace and bit to make the bolt holes under the house. Now if I can only get the framing out of my way Bad example Petteri You're using romantisim as a reasoning to use primes.

There's a time and point for all lenses, zoom or prime. I can't understand why using both is such a big deal. Zoom people use both, prime people shun zooms. What! Prime people were dropped on their head as a child Maybe it's the other way around I know I bounced a few times

Each prime has a very subtle character, and they're simple enough
that with time and attention you can get to learn to know them
thoroughly

A lot of good that's gonna do me when I want to crop the image in my viewfinder and in order to get a closer shot, I have to change my perspective or do the zoom crop in the camera, throwing usable pixels away because I couldn't use a zoom.

The sigular and only reason to use a prime is because of image quality or light speed/DOF. Everything else is nothing more then a romantic fairytale.

When wide-open, my 50/1.4 lightly kisses the subject. It gives
delicate detail a translucent quality. The field of focus pops out
like child's laughter at a funeral, with the rest fading into
misty-milky distance. As I stop down, the subject emerges like the
main theme out of a symphony; the background and foreground
coalesce out of the softness, taking up secondary melodies and
harmonies. At f/11, the lens plays like the Deutsche Oper in the
middle of the Ride of the Valkyries -- the scene sings in a chorus
of detail, almost intense enough to make the eyes burst.

Well, here's the romantic fairytale

My Tokina 17 is a gypsy violinist.

Give me a brass section. I love "Big Bad Voodoo Daddy" I guess that'll get me kicked out of the club Love the "Latin" sound of music. Hey! Everybody, it's Canival time

Zooms? Like power drills. Sure, you'll be able to produce a picture
with them, just as well as with a prime, only more efficiently. But
they lack personality and character.

Wow, I bet you're still running you're music through tubes because you like the distortion and how they clip the sound Oh and yes I have a Golden Tube amp but I also have horns in my speakers

Sorry, you went over the deep end with this one Not trying to flame you but you have to admit you were getting a bit gushy on this one. Next I was expecting you to say that you had a hot romantic date with your 135

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

 

[Godfrey]

Thought I'd put my oar in...

I've had both zoom and prime lenses over the years, and still do. I find that with most zooms, I end up using roughly three focal length settings all the time: full wide, full telephoto and about half way. And even then, I spend an entire day out shooting at basically one setting ... It's as if my ability to see photos on a given day lives in one or another field of view context. I found this with zooms on 35mm film cameras in the past, I found it to be true with my Sony F717.

I also am pretty sensitive to rectilinear distortion, one of my few disappointments with the F717 camera, and want both lots of speed and as light weight/compact a lens as I can get. Finally, price does have an influence.

So when I started assembling the EOS kit, I decided to concentrate first on my most comfortable prime focal lengths and go from there as the need moved me. I found in my old 35mm Nikon and Leica days that three focal lengths really make it for me: 21mm, 75mm and 180mm. Given the 10D's 1.6x multiplier, the closest I could come keeping fast, compact, well corrected and affordable in mind were the 20/2.8, 50/1.4 and 100/2. As it turns out, these three focal lengths also match almost perfectly the wide, middle and tele field of view equivalents available with the Sony F717 and give me about the same speed throughout the range. So they fit my working pattern well and didn't break the bank. I'll usually carry just one or two of them at a time.

I also have the little 22-55mm consumer zoom that came with the EOS IX Lite. Slow, mediocre, but when I just want to knock around and play with wide to normal range, it's a handy lens to have.

When the Toy Fund returns to life after being smashed so flat with all this equipment purchasing, I'll be looking to extend the kit to extremes beyond the range of my normal use ... A long tele zoom with IS (70-200, 100-400), a wide to normal zoom (17-40, 16-35), an ultrawide (14), a macro (180/3.5, 65/2.8 1-5x) all look appealing. Each of these has its attractions, each is about a $1000 plus chunk of my life ... I'll go slow and pick what works for me.

After all, the real point of all this stuff is to make photographs. Sometimes, too much equipment gets in the way, which is another reason to just hang back with a single focal length lens and learn to see. ;-)

Godfrey

 

[Louis44]

I understand that for the most part, primes are sharper than
zooms…. But aside from that, are there any advantages?

There are many other factors related to image quality: contrast, distortion characteristics, "speed" etc. But as you implied, it's mostly image quality that makes primes interesting.

I have two primes: The 50mm/f1.4 and the 100mm/f2.8 macro - I bought both of them because of reasons related to image quality and because they complement my other lenses and are suit my shooting style: It's worth looking at lenses as one member of the "lens portfolio" they are part of. My 50mm, for example, makes a lot of sense because my other lenses are the 16-35mm and a 70-200mm lens. A 24-70 wouldn't make sense at all for me, although it's a wondeful lens. On the other hand, if you already own a 24-70mm, I wouldn't recommend a 50mm/f1.4 etc.

As a rule of thumb, you can expect Canon L zooms to be as good as primes in terms of image quality. So lugging around a big bag full of primes doesn't make much sense from a practical as well as financial point of view.

Some people also like primes because it forces them to work more focused. I'd recommend working with primes also for educational reasons.

 

[Petteri Sulonen]

Primes are like a woodworker's knives, planes, and chisels. Zooms
are like power tools.

Wow, now there's an example of poetic license

Bingo. It's called "metaphor," "idiom," and "hyperbole," if I recall correctly from my high school creative writing classes.

[snip]

Bad
example Petteri You're using romantisim as a reasoning to use
primes.

Not reasonING. Reason, yes. Isn't there an irrational, romantic aspect to photography for you? For me, there is. I think that for most people, there is. Some camera makers would be long out of business if there wasn't. That was what I was describing.

There's a time and point for all lenses, zoom or prime. I can't
understand why using both is such a big deal. Zoom people use
both, prime people shun zooms. What! Prime people were dropped on
their head as a child Maybe it's the other way around I
know I bounced a few times

Oh, I agree. I think there are very good reasons professionals tend to prefer zooms and most prime-o-philes are either dedicated amateurs or (wannabe or real) artists. The pro will lose income if he loses or muffs a shot or shoot. The amateur or artist can shoot whatever he likes, whenever he likes, however he likes. He can permit himself the luxury of not getting the shot, for whatever reason.

A lot of good that's gonna do me when I want to crop the image in
my viewfinder and in order to get a closer shot, I have to change
my perspective or do the zoom crop in the camera, throwing usable
pixels away because I couldn't use a zoom.

For me, that'll just mean a shot I didn't get. So what? There are others that I got, and still others that I have yet to get. It's the hits the count, not the misses. As a Finnish poet put it, "all of us have produced excrement, but it's the masterpieces we'll be remembered for."

The sigular and only reason to use a prime is because of image
quality or light speed/DOF. Everything else is nothing more then a
romantic fairytale.

Sometimes romantic fairytales make appealing reading... and at best, they can be great art.

[snip]

Well, here's the romantic fairytale

You like it?

[snip]

Wow, I bet you're still running you're music through tubes because
you like the distortion and how they clip the sound Oh and yes
I have a Golden Tube amp but I also have horns in my speakers

Actually, I'm not much of a hi-fi'ist. If you're interested, I've got a 20 year-old NAD amp and discount Wharfedale Z2 some-special-edition speakers, and I play my CD's mostly through a $99 Chinese DVD-CD player. I prefer live music.

Sorry, you went over the deep end with this one Not trying to
flame you but you have to admit you were getting a bit gushy on
this one. Next I was expecting you to say that you had a hot
romantic date with your 135

I don't have a 135. We're not very compatible. ;-)

Petteri
--



Portfolio: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/index/ ]
Pontification: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/ ]