Primes Vs Zoom

B

brdplya1

Well-known member
I know this has been discussed,but I have 6 primes al nikon AI(24 2.8/28 2.8/50.14,50 1.8/85 1.8/105.2.0) will these work for most instances or should i get a 24-105 zoom instead.I'm more concerned about taking off/changing lens constantly, but money is tight for zoom right now.Should I go in debt or will these primes be enough?
BTW, Im mostly doing narrative and videos, but may do a wedding or two in the future.
 
I wouldn't trade those primes for nearly any zoom you could name. If you need to do a wedding, buy the stock zoom off someone for $75 and do the wedding.
 
Those primes are great, even for weddings. Most weddings have low light receptions and the stock zoom will not be fast enought for the reception, but your primes, especially the 50, 85 and 105 will be great for a wedding reception.

I would consider getting a Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f/3.5 for the ceremony. If you are not doing many weddings, spending $50-100 on that zoom would be good.

Now if you discover you need a zoom for other productions, maybe it makes sense to spend $1000-2500 on the Canon L 70-200, but don't go into debt to do it.
 
I am fond of fast constant speed cine zooms, but decent ones are quite expensive, even used. There are some good relatively fast still zooms, expensive also.
The big advantage to a zoom is having a infinitely variable range of primes at your fingertips without lens changes. Great in dynamic situations like weddings.
The advantage of primes is speed and perhaps better image quality, though not necessarily.
For film and video I have mostly stuck to zooms. But I used to shoot stills for live event documentation with nothing more than a Leica 35mm rangefinder and a single 35mm f2.8 Elmarit. It can be done.
 
Razz16mm said:
I am fond of fast constant speed cine zooms, but decent ones are quite expensive, even used. There are some good relatively fast still zooms, expensive also.
The big advantage to a zoom is having a infinitely variable range of primes at your fingertips without lens changes. Great in dynamic situations like weddings.
The advantage of primes is speed and perhaps better image quality, though not necessarily.
For film and video I have mostly stuck to zooms. But I used to shoot stills for live event documentation with nothing more than a Leica 35mm rangefinder and a single 35mm f2.8 Elmarit. It can be done.
Click to expand...

Only 'infinite' within their range, that is. Good zooms are usually limited to different ranges. The reason I opt for primes is because there isn't a LWZ (light weight zoom) out there that covers my entire range of lenses. The only lenses that start to cover all my needs and offer a fast stop with good quality becomes not only expensive, but more importantly, cumbersome. Forget fast camera moves, tight spaces, handheld, steadicam, small jibs, inconspicuous shooting, and etc!!!

I like to have primes that cover 18mm to 135mm for S35mm format. I'll settle for 25mm to100mm however.

Only a few lenses cover a range from 25mm to 100mm+ or 18mm-85mm. Those I could live with, but they are usually the expensive and/or very LARGE zooms.

As stated earlier, good zooms are typically only in ranges... like a 17-40mm, a 30-80mm, etc. Never have I seen an amazing quality lens that is small, light, and covers 18-135, or 25-100. Plus, zooms have many many more optical elements inside the housing, which gives those nasty flares. The flares I refer to is when you see just a row of specular reflections. The reason there are 8+ and not just 2 or 3, is because of all the many many lens elements.

Here is a quick list of pro-cine zooms I can think of. I tried to leave the really old ones off, except the cooke which I like alot! Angenieux, Arri, Cooke, and Zeiss have many many old cine zooms which are usually only good around a T4-5.6 area.

Arri Light Weight 1 14-40mm T2.6
Angenieux Optimo 17-80mm T2.2 (Runner up for favorite)
Angenieux Optimo 28-76mm T2.6
Angenieux Optimo 15-40mm T2.6
Cooke CXX Zoom 15-40mm, T2.0
Cooke 18-100mm MK2, T.3[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] (Probably my favorite, although older and slower)[/FONT]
Red Zoom 18-85, T2.9 (not a bad range, not a fan of Red glass though)
Red Zoom 50-150mm T3
Red Zoom 18-50mm T3

Just my observations. I prefer primes when doing narrative work. Zooms are great for documentaries, and other applications, but really good zooms are either limited in range or become to heavy for their advantage to be appreciated.


ps: forgot to mention that I don't tend to like the multiple specular lens flares of zooms. If I want flares, I find zooms give me too many specular reflections on the many optical elements. It is too many. Give me a nice prime that flares. Just used a set of REALLY old zeiss speeds that had a nice flare (if you don't want flares, these lenses would be a pain in the arse!)
 
Last edited:
brdplya1 said:
I know this has been discussed,but I have 6 primes al nikon AI(24 2.8/28 2.8/50.14,50 1.8/85 1.8/105.2.0) will these work for most instances or should i get a 24-105 zoom instead.I'm more concerned about taking off/changing lens constantly, but money is tight for zoom right now.Should I go in debt or will these primes be enough?
BTW, Im mostly doing narrative and videos, but may do a wedding or two in the future.
Click to expand...

when shooting narrative I nearly always have to got to 20mm, 18mm or even wider for INT.

Put a 1 : 2.39 crop on there and you'll find yourself at 14 !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top