Thinking on mixing it up a little with primes, am I crazy?

Cagey75

Cagey75

Messages
17,227
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
OK, here is what I have at present:

24-70 2.8
105mm micro 2.8
70-200 2.8 VRII

Both zooms are no more than a few months old, I bought the 105 used last year, it's still mint.

My idea, after some serious thought, is to sell both the 105 + 70-200. I know most people are crazy for the 70-200, and some might say you should never sell it on, but, an old back injury has been killing me lately and I find the 70-200 just a little too heavy to have in the bag all the time. Let alone have it hanging from my shoulder [I do use a BR-sport strap]

One route I was considering was:

85mm 1.8/1.4 - supposedly sharper than the 105, a little wider, better for portraits, all that extra light
200mm f/4 micro - which I would only take with when I actually want to do macro, or specific portraits. It's a bit of a beast, but actually lighter than the 70-200 + 105 combined.

Keep the 24-70, and add the new sigma 35mm 1.4 for days when I just want to head out with a lighter,more straight forward load for street/general walk about.

I have also looked at the likes of Zeiss wide primes - and selling the 24-70. Say the 21mm, along with the 35, 85 and 200. Sound like a good combination? Or can you suggest better?

Just wondering if anyone else has gone and completely changed their lens set up? And for what reasons?

Cheers.
 
I went from all primes (mostly Takumar), to nowdays a mixture of primes & zooms.

Main reason decent (that were affordable) zooms didn't exist at the time, especially for 42mm screw mount cameras.

35 years latter when I got seriously back into photography, as a hobbyst, after retirement, they did.

Nowdays I like the versatility of the zooms and are my most used lenses.

However they don't always do the job when shooting in very low light where you cannot use long exposures (mostly clasical music concerts). Four out of the 5 primes are F2 or faster.

----------------------------
Your projected lens line up looks good, however I would not sell the 70-200.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Just wondering if anyone else has gone and completely changed their lens set up? And for what reasons?
Click to expand...

I mostly use primes but I wanted an even lighter load and so bought in MFT. I've kept my Canon DSLR and lenses but mostly I use a G1 and a fast prime.

It's an option :D
 
I do have an RX100 on the side, I like that I can smuggle that into gigs a lot easier than a dslr :) - well, i say I have, it belongs to the missus ... or so she 'thinks'!

Selling the 70-200 will be hard, it's one of the lenses I always wanted to own. But I find I get tired quick using it, so it ends up back in the bag while I carry on with the 24-70 mostly. It's a shame to be wasting it.

Anyone here got the 200mm micro f/4? or anyone ever used it?

Off topic: I'm off the cig's 2 weeks today! So savings on that over time will help towards gear :) saved almost €200 already.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, been eyeing those samyang lenses up. How do you find them with regard to manual only focusing? I have owned manual lenses in the past, but they wouldn't have been every day lenses.
 
Depending what you are shooting, a monopod can help with taking the strain of your arms when using heavy lenses for long periods of time. Also a harness sytem helps a lot and with the right holster they will hold a largish lens (even mounted) without having to put it a backpack.
 
Last edited:
Personally I struggle with manual focus on DSLR's. Macro and hyperfocal are one thing but I don't find full time manual without some sort of aid easy on a DSLR.
 
Yeah, I think wider manual lenses would be much easier use - like 15/18/21 even 24mm but once you go to 35mm, I would prefer to have AF. I imagine for critical sharpness you'll be using Live view alot for focus, that wouldn't really suit me.
 
RichardTaylor said:
Depending what you are shooting, a monopod can help with taking the strain of your arms when using heavy lenses for long periods of time. Also a harness sytem helps a lot and with the right holster they will hold a largish lens (even mounted) without having to put it a backpack.
Click to expand...

Monopod is a good idea, keep meaning to get one! I have a tripod, but again, it's weight I don't like to carry most of the time.
 
My main background was manual focusing 35mm & medium format & large format many years ago, so I've no problems manual focusing, makes you slow down and think about what your about to capture!

It's no big hassle for me personally, I actually prefer it over auto focus. Different strokes -- different folks.
 
I wouldn't mind, as I said,a wide manual prime, like that delicious Zeiss 21mm ..... Mmmmm. And I have heard great things about those Samyang lenses. The 85mm maybe is worth a look, will look up some reviews. For a 35mm, i would prefer AF, just as a more on the fly, street type lens. 85mm would work better as a manual as it'll be used mainly for portraits
 
I'm heading more towards primes, mainly for the better IQ.
I have the Samyang 85mm f1.4, and I also have the Nikon 105mm f2.8 micro, and recently bought the Nikon 135mm f2 DC lens too.
I shoot mostly portraits.
This just about covers the 80-200 f2.8 zoom I have, which I find myself using less nowadays, so I might sell this soon.
I don't have a lot in the wide zone though.
Thinking of going for a couple of primes of the shorter variety next.
That Zeiss 21mm is a lovely lens, this and a 35mm will do me nicely I think.
 
How do you find the 85mm vs the 105mm in terms of sharpness/bokeh?

Have you looked up on the new Sigma 35mm 1.4? I really like the look of that, going on reviews so far it's better all round than the Nikon 35 1.4! It's not available anywhere atm though, expected mid feb.
 
I like both, they are both sharp, and as for the bokeh, the 85 opens up wider, so I guess that has the edge. I keep the 105 for any macro I might want to do.
The 135 is my fave though!

As for the Sigma, I too am keen on having a closer look.
I get my D800 in the next couple of weeks, so it may be that a 35 f1.4 will be my first lens to get after the camera arrives !
They do seem to be out of stock everywhere in Nikon mount though.
 
It was available [the sigma 35] for a bit, then just seemed to vanish, plenty of Canon version out there still, very odd. Everywhere i have inquired about it say they don't even know when they will have fresh stock!

That 135 looks bloody good too! Ever looked at the 200mm f/4 micro?
 
I used to be a medical/forensic photographer, and we had a couple of the 200mm f4 micros.
It is, without a doubt one of the most extraordinary lenses ever made !
It is very very sharp indeed.
We used to use it for macro shots where you needed a bit of distance between me and the subject, which was often something no-one wanted to get close to !
The only downside to it as a general lens, is that the f4 wide open doesn't make it a particularly good portrait lens. The bokeh is not good on portrait distance shots.
Others may disagree on the use for portraits, but no-one can argue it's sharpness.
 
It's not a bad price for what you get- below £1000 on amazon. It would be the kind of lens I'll only take with when i know I'm going for macro. I love to shoot bugs and spiders and other strange creatures, so the distance would suit me. I'll have the 85 for portraits :)

That's if I go ahead, my lenses have generated interest on the local used sites here already. If I get the right cash for them, it'll be a go.
 
As much as I like the 105 for macro, the 200 is better. Especially for bugs, due to the longer working distance.
You will not be disappointed by it for macro.
 
Many years ago, when I first got into photography, pretty much all that was available (and certainly affordable!) were primes, although the Vivitar Series 1 70-210 was around and almost within reach. Like pretty much everyone, I started with just a 50mm - an f/2.8 IIRC, upgraded over time to an f/2. A wide (35mm) and a short tele (135mm) turned up over time and were enough for a while and saw me through to the time I discovered cigrettes 'n' whiskey 'n' wild, wild women and photography took a back seat - in fact, I gave all the kit to Dad - he had lent me the original body and 50mm in the first place, the fresh kit was cheap - and didn't get back into it for about 20 years, at which point zoom design had improved beyond anyone's wildest dreams - computerised design allowed the light paths to be plotted in seconds rather tha laboriously done by hand - and production had be improved. Not only that but there was this new fangled AF...

I now use zooms for most things and have a few primes for special occasions - an f/1.8 50mm for low light, an 8mm fisheye and a 105mm Macro/short tele. Can't say that I miss all the lens swapping of the prime days although I do miss some aspects like the split/microprism focus screens. Can happily live without the external meter and the faff of setting apertures manually and having to reset the lever or ring after every shot...
 
I wont be resetting anything, any primes I buy will be AF I'd say, unless I do ever go for that Zeiss!

I had that vivitar 70-210 1 series :) Nice lens, was pretty useful for close up/macro - 1:2.3 or something? Considering I bought it for €50!

I wouldn't bother tracking down old classic manual lenses - I want fast and reliable. I don't mind switching lenses, it just takes a little planning ahead. I mean, if you head out with a couple of zooms plus the primes you mentioned, you're probably switching more!
 
Rarely switch TBH! The 24-70 is the most used lens and the general walkabout. I may decide to switch to the 12-24 for a while but that tends to be with a specific series of shots in mind, as do my forrays with the fisheye. Same with the other primes, they have specific uses so I tend to plan a period around that use. Rather than lug all the kit around, I've recently switched to a trio of smaller and lighter options - all Fujis. An X-10 and XF-1 provide compact cover with slightly limited coverage (although my interests lie mainly in the wider end than tele so the XF's 25-100 and X-10's 28-112 suit me well) and the HS30 gives much more coverage, having a 24-720 range! Of course, the Fujis don't offer the same ultimate quality that the DSLR does but the lightness and portability are now a major consideration!
 
I've debated it myself but i have no need for tele's. I think i could live with a 20mm a 35mm and a 50mm. I would do the opposite to what you've suggested as you're planning on buying a 35 anyway, sell the 105 and 24-70 and keep the 70-200mm.
 
Last edited:
I don't use tele's much myself though, I feel the 70-200 is just being wasted sitting in the bag. The weight of it in there gets annoying, especially when I'm not actively using it much.

I do hate crossing focal lengths, but the 35 and 24-70 would not travel together, it would be one or the other in the bag. An 85 would stay in, and the 200mm macro would only go on specific trips too. If I did decide to get the 21mm though, the 24-70 might well go. I find with zooms I tend to use them at either end, rarely in the mid section.

Hard to get the right balance, I just feel what I have now isn't bang on for me.

Another option is to get the lighter 70-200 f/4, the 35, 21 and keep the 105. Selling the 70-200 and 24-70 to pay for it all :/
 
Last edited:
I've just bought the 85mm 1.8, its fantastic! I have the 70-200 2.8 is mkii, and the 85 compares well in terms of sharpness.
 
Cagey75 said:
An 85 would stay in...
Click to expand...

If it helps at all...

I have a 5D and amongst my lenses are Sigma 50mm and 85mm f1.4's. The 50mm is my most used lens but the 85mm is almost certainly the best AF lens I've ever used. I know that sharpness isn't everything but the 85mm is sharper than the 50mm at the widest apertures and it gives a lovely overall look IMVHO. If you are in the market for a 85mm f1.4 I recommend taking a look at the Sigma.
 
Decided on the Nikon 85mm 1.8G. Just happened to check DXO today, and they've finally reviewed it [took their time eh!] and it's straight in top of their lens list with a score of 35!

Now, I know that's not what we should go on completely, but I had been eyeing it for a while. Had been thinking on the 85 1.4G but considering the price difference, there isn't enough going for that over the 1.8G
 
I think that's a great choice. The 85 G 1.8 gives you 95% of the 1.4's performance for 25% of the price.
I don't think most would notice the missing 5% TBH.
 
Back in the day when I had a D700 I did much the same and sold my 24-70 and 70-200. I replaced these with a 35mm F2, 50mm 1.4G, an 85mm 1.4 and a beautiful Zeiss 18mm which was a stunning lens.

I found I could happily carry the lens around with me all day long and it was very rare that I found they didn't cover the range I needed. As an aside it also made me think about my composition a lot more.
 
Forgot to mention [in here at least] that I also ordered the Sigma 35mm 1.4 too [which made the choice of the 85 1.8 easier, as I wanted at least one 1.4 lens] . I'll see how that goes when it arrives, if the 24-70 ends up gathering dust, that will go on sale too. I don't feel any dedication to any piece of gear, I don't believe we all need this "Holy trinity" - you should always use what you're most comfortable with. I don'tmind changing lenses on the go, I do like the flexibility of zoom if I'm covering an event [gig/wedding/party] - but every day use,it only takes afew seconds to switch really.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top