When I started getting 'in' to photography, there was still a lot of prejudice against variable focal length lenses; there was a fair bit against interchangeable lens system SLR's as well, TBH.
An SLR needs a mirror-housing between the film-plane and lens mount to accommodate the periscope that allows through-taking-lens view-finder; the mirror has to be as tall as the film-trap, so the mirror housing has to be at least as deep as the mirror is tall, to let it swing out of the way; so if you use 35mm film, with a 24x36mm film-trap, you need at least an inch of mirror housing; so you cant mount a lens any closer than 25mm, probably more like 35.
Consequently, lenses for SLR cameras tend to be compromised from the out-set by being what's known as 'Retro-Focus', the optics being 'fudged' to focus behind the natural focal-plane, to accommodate the mirror housing, rather than simpler, 'true focal length', which you can have on a range-finder or twin-lens-reflex camera that doesn't have a mirror housing 'in the way'.
Zoom, variable focal length, lenses, then add more 'compromises'. To offer a lens that changes focal length, you need 'movements' inside the lens. This means that stuff moves; which means its harder to maintain accurate alignments; and where parts move against other parts, they tend to 'wear' so maintaining alignments gets worse with age. Add a 'loose' quick-release bayonet mount to that, rather than a fine thread screw mount to let lenses be interchangeable, or even to have the lens permanently fixed to the camera body, and things are getting more and more compromised.
Keep It Simple - a fixed-lens camera, is simple; the lens can be true focal length; there's no mount to introduce 'play' to spoil focus accuracy, or movements to introduce more.
So, introducing 'sophistication', through the lens view-finder, interchangeable lenses & variable focal length zoom lenses, you introduce compromises that tend to make the camera more expensive, and less 'precise' for the 'user easement' offered.
My first SLR was a 2nd hand Olympus OM10, with 35-70 & 70-210 'zoom' lenses, covering pretty much the entire 'then common' range of focal lengths. As the lens-mount and the 35-70's zoom barrel started to get a bit 'wobbly', I started to 'get' what the 'luddites' were talking about! Meanwhile, I started getting given 'old' cameras, other people didn't know how or couldn't be bothered to use; Of the ones that I've kept I have a rather nice Ziess Ikonta 120 roll film 'folder', and an all metal Sigma MK1, M42 screw-fit SLR.
That Sigma, became the basis of a second 'all-prime' SLR 'outfit', I started to build up for 'pocket-money'. Screw-Fit lenses, and particularly primes at that time were rather out of favour and very cheap in the second hand baskets in the camera shops. The Olympus, with all the easements of meter-coupled exposure, zooms and winder was great for 'fast-photo'; not having to work too hard to get a shot; but the Sigma, whilst still compromised by being an interchangeable system SLR, with rigidly mounted screw-fit primes, wasn't 'as' compromised; the lenses didn't wobble, and they tended to have better optics and faster apertures. Camera was completely clock-work and fully manual, and the only concession to convenience was a swing needle through the lens exposure meter. It was a different sort of 'slow-foto' methodology, taking your time, being more discerning, more disciplined, more diligent, more 'thinking' about it all.
Over ten years, rummaging through the baskets whenever I went to by some film, I acquired quite a lot of lenses for it, usually for £2-£3 a time, or maybe £5-£10 for a 'lucky-dip' bag of 'stuff', usually including a camera, like an old Praktika or Zenith! Oh the 'fun' we used to have when they sold stuff in real shops! ANYWAY, point is, that that M42 'outfit' evolved, and now, twenty odd years on consists of; Camera; 29mm prime, 50mm prime, 135mm prime, 300mm prime and a 12mm fish-eye. Just five lenses. These days it lives in 'period' gadget-bag, but way-back-when, I did 'go-retro' and the camera lived in it's soft case with the 50 on the front, the 29 & 135 in soft-cases on the strap! The 135 proved a bit of a pain in the ribs for the use it got, so was often left at home, and these days, (I still use it BTW), I tend to be even more discerning (or lazy!), and when it goes out, tends to just have whatever is screwed to the body on it!
But, three, maybe four 'prime' lenses; wide-angle, normal-angle, short tele-photo & long tele-photo. 29mm to 300mm.... and 'everything' is covered, pretty much. You really DON'T need all the 'middling' focal lengths in between.
As far as composition is concerned, framing shouldn't be 'that' critical, and you'd do better to frame with your feet than a zoom-travel. For perspective depth-extending or depth-shrinking stacking effects? Difference in a couple of mm of zoom travel is again, not going to make that much odds, and even with the large-range zooms of today, to get that sort of effect you are probably still going to be reaching for another (zoom) lens, rather than getting it with a control ring, and you are STILL going to be framing with your feet to do it 'properly'.
My electric-picture-maker has taken over from the old Olympus' for 'fast-foto' convenience, now, and wonders of marketing driven consumer electronics see all the 'easements' added as 'sales features' for little added cost thanks to saturation sales; but curiously back to a four lens 'outfit'; 4.5mm fish, 8-16mm UWA, 18-55mm 'Standard' & 55-300 tele-photo. Pushes the end-stops of available focal lengths a bit, but, practically it makes little odds.
The zooms aren't so much like having five or six or more primes in one lens-body. That's just not how you would use 'primes'.
The 18-55 'Kit', covering the equivalent of a 28 'wide', 50 'normal' & 80 'short-tele', is probably the closest, but using primes, I wouldn't pack three so close in focal-length for any outing, and if I did, I probably wouldn't use them all!
So, it's slightly ironic, that, with the electric-picture maker, I am back to three & the fish, and they are picked, almost exactly the same as the old primes, as 'a' wide-angle, 'a' normal angle, and 'a' telephoto. At best, there is a little over-lap in coverage, and one 'zoom' might, for practical purposes, cover the framing of two primes, but more often, they are doing the same 'job' as a prime in that range, and just offering a bit of fine adjustment around it.
