Zooms: do we actually use them correctly?

specialman

specialman

Messages
8,193
Name
Pat MacInnes
Edit My Images
Yes
I've used all sorts of prime and zoom lenses over the years but with zooms becoming oh-so good in recent years, there seems little use for prime lenses where the majority are concerned...

... or is there?

I say this as I'm hearing a lot about photographers (on here for example) exstolling the virtues of their ultra-wide angle zooms like the Sigma 10-20mm, Canon EF-S 10-22mm and others with similar focal lengths.

However, it seems that most users just whack the lens to its widest setting and shoot without actually paying attention to how much of their zoom is actually being used.

At work I use a Canon 17-40mm on my works kit but when I scroll through my image data, I can firmly say that most of the shots taken using this lens are at (or around ) the 17mm mark, give or take a millimetre or two.

Am I (we for that matter) really getting our money's worth with zooms that have inferior aperture values and glass when a prime with a better aperture and better glass would be much better for our photography?
 
I have to say I do get what you mean. Zooms do tend to make us a bit lazy. I had two weeks with nothing but a nifty fifty on my 5D and it made me work a bit more and look more critically at what I was doing.

It's a good challenge, stick on a prime and stick with it.
 
Good question - and first thought for my usage is... NO

Super-wide lenses have their limitations, mostly DoF - cos it's so massive almost whatever the aperture you're using

In most cases f8 at 24mm is a huge DoF, and at 12mm is a fair bit more - which almost removes DoF as a consideration in an image especially when Hyperfocal focussing is also used

The point of the zoom then is to capture the scene you want, without moving as (usually) I can't move further away or forwards, hence it's a cropping tool - and I shoot my 12-24 at a whole load of different focal lengths once the position to shoot from it sorted

To replace this one lens I'd need a 12mm, 15mm, 18mm, 21mm & 24mm - so fixed for me is a no-go due to weight/space/cost. Primes have their uses, but not at this range

DD
 
For shoots where I know the location, what I'm shooting and from where I tend towards the primes, they're also invaluable for a lot of work which is low light. But if I'm working on the fly a zoom does offer a real advantage and I picked up a 24-105 recently for that very reason.
 
I find my 17-40 being used at the 17 end more often than not too. I am swapping out to a load of primes for pretty much this reason :)

I find it a good excersize to head out for a shoot with a single lens and see what you can get. Helps to hone the skills and makes you work harder and look closer for that shot rather than just spray and pray.

Zooms though will always have their place in the bag, there are situations where you need to be able to get that little bit closer/further away and can't zoom with your feet.
 
specialman said:
Am I (we for that matter) really getting our money's worth with zooms that have inferior aperture values and glass when a prime with a better aperture and better glass would be much better for our photography?
Click to expand...

A lot depends on what you actually shoot. There's no way I could get half my shots just using a prime.
 
i haven't been into photography seriosuly for that long, around a year now

i haven't been out to play with the Sigma 10-20 yeah so i will let you know over the course of the weekend but for y other zoom lenses i have the sigma 100-300 i use at various different lenghts, was shooting bettween 100-135 at times on sunday as well as between 200-300 so got to make use of most of its range

other lenses i use are 18-135 and use most of the range on that if i am honest, less so the 18mm end

i would say i am getting the most out of the lenses i use but without using other ones i cant say for certain, nor have i used a fixed lens yet so cant comment on that i am afraid
 
Zooms allow you to change the subjects perspective and differentiation between the background/foreground. i.e Shooting at a subject at 85mm will look a lot different to say 40mm but shot from closer up
 
It's interesting that the two zooms you list have comparitively small zoom ranges approximately 2x, I think most people buy the Sigma 10-20mm because it is a cheap way to get a really wide lens so they tend to use it at the wide end. However I'm sure if you looked at the figures for a more general purpose lens say the 24-105 or the 100-400 you'd see a much greater variation of focal lengths.
 
I have 3 lenses (well two if you discount the kit EF-S 18-55), A nifty and a 70-300mm Zoom.

I nearly always try to complete one shoot with one lens. Changing lens in the field can be a PITA.

Regarding both zooms, I tend to use the Kit at either 18mm or 55mm hardly ever anything in between, so perhaps I should just get some L glass prime or other for wide angle ;)

The 75 (?70 whatever, 5mm between friends isn't much)-300 gets used at a random range of focal lengths, but ISTR nearer each end than the middle. So again perhaps I should save up another mortgage for some L glass primes :D

Only having had the camera for 5 months, I don't think new glass is an option, after all I still haven't got used to how it all works together as a system. My carry around lens tends to be the 50... but that's because I like messing with DoF.

S.
 
My main criticism of people with wide zooms who keep them on the widest setting is that some shots look donkey with the distortion. Sometimes it really is like people forget they can shoot at other focal lengths too.
 
I only have one zoom, a Nikkor 12-24, and I happen to use it more at the wide end going towards the middle. I only break out the 12mm when I want some funky wideangle/slightly fished effects.

My other lenses are primes, and while I love my 12-24 I can't particularly see myself getting zooms at longer lengths in the future.
 
My lenses are:-

16-35
24-70
50
70-200
300

And all have their place. At weekend I was split with the 70-200 and the 300, occasionally shooting with a borrowed 10-20. At work at the moment, I am using the 50 but if it wasn't that, it would be the 24-70.

Each lens has its use!

Carl.
 
I have the 70-200 2.8VR but to be honest I tend to side towards my prime lenses instead as I've gotten so used to zooming with my feet :LOL:
I'd say that my most used lens is my 85mm even though my 70-200 is just as sharp.

I'm the same as Dod though, half of the shots at events I take would be a pita to cover with primes :( Weddings are a totally different thing though & I only really use my zooms for the candids.
 
I have to agree, zooms make us lazy in more ways than one.

The make us think less about composing shots, and one day I forgot all my camera gear except my Canon 1000FN, my nifty fifty and my kit lens. The kit lens is EF-S so it wouldn't fit the 1000fn, so I had to use the nif-fif.
It really made me think about composition, and aperture values.

Plus, it makes us lazy, because we would rather carry round an 18-200 than a 20mm prime, a 30mm prime, a 50mm prime, an 85mm prime, a 100mm prime, and a 200mm prime.
Its just 100x easier.

I know that on the whole the IQ is heaps better on a prime than a zoom, but I'm willing to sacrifice a little IQ for less weight!

For example, I'll be taking the majority of my camera kit to new york, but it is unlikely that I'll take out anything but my 24-60 and my 10-20. On some days I may switch between the 10-20 and the 70-300, in case I wanted some candids.
But its just a lot easier to take out zooms compared to primes. I do on the whole spend a lot of time thinking about composition. I crouch, and lay, and put my camera above my head, and move all around, to get that perfect shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top