Shooting with Just Primes

S

samems

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,005
Edit My Images
No
How many on TP shoot with primes only?

I ask as i have mentioned in other threads how i have trouble with arthritis and the camera is quite heavy for me. Now, when i use the D90 with the 50mm i find it quite manageable.

Using it with the 18-70 does prove to be quite heavy for me.

So, how many use 'just primes' as i am thinking along the lines of sticking with the 50mm for now. Other alternative is to go for a lighter body like the 500D or 550D Canon as they are quite a bit lighter. Thing is, i love the D90!!
 
I've always just had primes, apart from a Zoom at the very start, for a few weeks.

Primes aren't any lighter though....
 
I know, that is true. 50mm might suit me for now and keep the D90. Or, even get a 35mm instead?
 
I think as long as you know what you want to shoot it might not be hard to manage with primes although shooting with primes is a bit more of an art form than shooting with zooms. Mainly because you need to be more creative with your angles/subjects. I am not fan of taking 5 lens with me just in case because then you stop taking pictures and start playing with your bag trying to find the right lens. So I only have one lens with me when I go out. If you have only primes you can always carry a couple at least.

I know buying new gear is no cure for anything but have you thought of swapping to M43? Weight is substantially reduced there, for example a G3+a zoom (let alone one of the pancake primes) is lighter than your D90 alone.
 
Last edited:
TBH I think you're the only one who can answer your own dilemma.
But if you find the D90 and 50mm a comfortable combination, then try running with that for a bit to see how you get on - see whether you can adapt your shooting style to suit and whether it works for the subjects that you enjoy.
It won't cost you anything to find out and it's got to be worth a go before throwing money at a new body and/or lens combination.

Personally, I far prefer shooting with primes and my most used lenses are my 50mm and 100mm macro (although that ones not very light weight!!!) . . . so much so that I actually find myself forgetting and stepping backwards or forwards to frame a shot on those rare occasions when I'm using a zoom :$:
 
i've had zooms and primes, went back to primes.

in terms of convenience and flexibility, no question, the zooms win every time.

but for that magical *something* that you get with wide aperture lenses, nothing else other than a prime will do.

i think primes are only really an advantage if you are shooting with 2.8 and wider, the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 zooms are so good that other than cost/weight there is no inherent advantage to the quality of the photograph.
 
My D90 hasn't seen a zoom for years - 50mm 1.4 and 35 1.8 do me fine:).
 
Would a monopod help you at all? Ive really bad arthritis too but keeping it at bay and manage just now.
 
I only use a prime and because I am so tight it is a cheap plasticky prime which has the benefit of being very light!
 
SimonUK said:
Primes aren't any lighter though....
Click to expand...

They usually are lighter at the given focal length than an equivalent zoom. For example 35 f2 is lighter and faster than a f2.8 zoom in that range, likewise a 100mm f2 etc.
 
G3 mentioned doesnt appeal to me as i really dont like EVFs.
 
I've recently bought 3 primes, a 35 f2, a 50 f1.4 and an 85 f1.8 to go with my 100 f2.8 L macro and while they are all fantastic for portraits, macro and a lot of other types I still need some good zooms for wildlife and aviation. Short of investing heavily in some really big primes if I win the lottery I think I'll stick with my zooms for a while. I have noticed that my 24-105 f4 L isn't getting as much use lately though as the primes are used instead, but I wont be selling it anytime soon though.
 
35mm 1.8G hardly comes of my D200.
 
Is the 50mm 1.8 a better lens to have than the 35mm 1.8? I do love the 50mm but it is quite long but also quite cheap! lol
 
samems said:
Is the 50mm 1.8 a better lens to have than the 35mm 1.8? I do love the 50mm but it is quite long but also quite cheap! lol
Click to expand...

depends what you want to shoot, the 35mm is cheaper than the 50.
 
callumduff said:
depends what you want to shoot, the 35mm is cheaper than the 50.
Click to expand...

Really? 50 1.8 compared to 35 1.8? 35 cheaper?

I like to take shots of the kids, family, indoors and holiday shots of building, inside and out. Got an 18-70 that i have yet to use properly. Was wondering whether or not to get a 35mm 1.8 to replace the 50mm 1.8
 
Last edited:
I tend to only use a combo of 24 1.4 and 50 1.4/85 1.4 now and I love it. I would prefer the 24 to be way smaller but that's not gonna happen so I roll with it anyway, well worth it.

Used to use 17-55 and 70-200 (before I went ff) and while it was awesome I just prefer small light and unobtrusive as well as the obvious f stop advantage.
 
samems said:
Is the 50mm 1.8 a better lens to have than the 35mm 1.8? I do love the 50mm but it is quite long but also quite cheap! lol
Click to expand...

I use a 50 but am looking out for a 30 or 35. The 50 on a crop sensor is a bit long. The 35 should get me closer to how I see things through my eyes field of view which is what I am after. With a 50 I frame a shot up with my eyes, hold camera to eye and then have to step back a few steps.

It is only a matter of time before I knock someone over, end up in a stream or worse still end up under a bus. I need a 35 for my own safety...
 
simonblue said:
Should be able to get blurr,with the 35mm.

They dont make 35mm F1.8D model,only an F2.

I think the one you want is the 35mm F1.8G :)
Click to expand...

This. It's too short for head and shoulders as I've already mentioned in the other thread. Full length and groups are okay though.
 
The23rdman said:
This. It's too short for head and shoulders as I've already mentioned in the other thread. Full length and groups are okay though.
Click to expand...

I think he got the 50mm,which should be ok for head & shoulders.

I thought he was more looking to add the 35mm and get rid of the zoom he got :)
 
simonblue said:
I think he got the 50mm,which should be ok for head & shoulders.

I thought he was more looking to add the 35mm and get rid of the zoom he got :)
Click to expand...

I don't think the 50mm is suitable either. Too short, too much distortion.
 
If I had 24mm, 28mm or 35mm f/1.4 I'd shoot with only primes, but I'm broke, so I have a cheapo 18-35mm instead.

I often go out with just my 50 or 85mm on the D700 tho, but that's rare as I seem prefer 35mm or shorter these days. (Obviously I'm not into portraits).
 
Laudrup said:
Prime only on the M9, and the S5 I use a 70-200 VR II for the convenience.
Click to expand...
here were people talking about whether 35mm is cheaper than 50mm, in comes a Leica M9 user with his £5000 camera. :p

lol.

sorry, couldn't resist the irony. but he's got a point, M9's are very light. :lol:


D3100 with 35mm f1.8G here, it's so light and easy to use. but only use it at home, on local streets, or any controlled/non-time-critical environmental. on touristy trips and found prime to be useless, especially with other people who don't appreciated photography is more about composition than snapping the photo.
 
Regarding the weight issue - I have a similar problem with camera weight and chose the 500D due to its low weight.

There is approx 100 grams (4oz) difference in weight between the 500D/550D/600D/650D and the Nikon D90.
In general the D90's weight is closer to that of the xxD range from canon.

I've found the weight about right for me but I added a battery grip, though this adds weight the fact that it makes holding the camera easier and balances the weight of longer lenses such as a 70-300mm makes the extra weight manageable.

I did try M43 camera's (panasonic G1) but one of the many issues I found for myself was its tiny size, its only about 2/3rds the size of a 500D and the 500D is smaller than a D90.
I found it made my hands hurt more trying to grip it securely as it didnt fit to my hand as well as a larger camera (and I have small hands).

I would suggest going to a local shop and trying different camera's with a lens fitted and see what works for you and if they are easier to manage than the D90.

As for shooting with primes, yes I used to use mainly primes when I could get out and about but often found I would have 2 extra lenses in my pockets... a 50mm on the camera, a 28mm and a 90mm or 135mm in the pockets, along with a spare battery or two.

I should also say here that at 390 grams the 18-70 nikkor is quite a light lens and primes apart from the nifty fifty will be close to that weight or heavier.
For instance the canon 85mm F1.8 comes in at just shy of 400 grams (just over 14 ozs)
Though the Nikkor 35mm F2 AF/D comes in at a lowly 215 grams (8 ozs) and is a superb lens giving you approx the equivalent of a 50mm on your crop sensor).

I think the main thing here is to go out and try out the different combinations and see how easy they are to hold, be realistic with your assessment of your ability to hold them and work from there.

All the best... and dont give up..
 
Last edited:
I shoot mostly with primes now - the last few weddings have been only with primes - a 24mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4
 
iancandler said:
Regarding the weight issue - I have a similar problem with camera weight and chose the 500D due to its low weight.

There is approx 100 grams (4oz) difference in weight between the 500D/550D/600D/650D and the Nikon D90.
In general the D90's weight is closer to that of the xxD range from canon.

I've found the weight about right for me but I added a battery grip, though this adds weight the fact that it makes holding the camera easier and balances the weight of longer lenses such as a 70-300mm makes the extra weight manageable.

I did try M43 camera's (panasonic G1) but one of the many issues I found for myself was its tiny size, its only about 2/3rds the size of a 500D and the 500D is smaller than a D90.
I found it made my hands hurt more trying to grip it securely as it didnt fit to my hand as well as a larger camera (and I have small hands).

I would suggest going to a local shop and trying different camera's with a lens fitted and see what works for you and if they are easier to manage than the D90.

As for shooting with primes, yes I used to use mainly primes when I could get out and about but often found I would have 2 extra lenses in my pockets... a 50mm on the camera, a 28mm and a 90mm or 135mm in the pockets, along with a spare battery or two.

I should also say here that at 390 grams the 18-70 nikkor is quite a light lens and primes apart from the nifty fifty will be close to that weight or heavier.
For instance the canon 85mm F1.8 comes in at just shy of 400 grams (just over 14 ozs)
Though the Nikkor 35mm F2 AF/D comes in at a lowly 215 grams (8 ozs) and is a superb lens giving you approx the equivalent of a 50mm on your crop sensor).

I think the main thing here is to go out and try out the different combinations and see how easy they are to hold, be realistic with your assessment of your ability to hold them and work from there.

All the best... and dont give up..
Click to expand...

Great post. Many thanks :thumbs:
 
simonblue said:
Should be able to get blurr,with the 35mm.

They dont make 35mm F1.8D model,only an F2.

I think the one you want is the 35mm F1.8G :)
Click to expand...

yes, the 35mm f/1.8G is the new 1
 
Zooms here,only got a couple prime 50mm Nikon,and a 25mm Panasonic,don't think I have used them yet.

Don't think I could go back to just using primes :)
 
vrapan said:
I know buying new gear is no cure for anything but have you thought of swapping to M43? Weight is substantially reduced there, for example a G3+a zoom (let alone one of the pancake primes) is lighter than your D90 alone.
Click to expand...

I'm shooting with FD primes on 90% of the time when I'm using my Panny G2, which is most of the time these days..
 
Exclusively primes for me, too.
24, 50, 85 and 200 on FF.
It's all I need and covers pretty much every scenario except wildlife.
Can be a pain when you want to travel light and can't take one lens.
But that's when I pick up my M9P and a couple of lenses.......sorry, started dreaming there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top