p.2 #1 · Should I get a 35 prime if I already have a 24 and 50?
Kevner wrote:
This is a good point, Jack, although I don't think it's always the case. I far and away prefer primes and own way more than I would ever try to carry at once. I do like to make up a "kit" before heading out for a day or trip based on what I want to do. I do own a couple general purpose zooms (24-70 GMII and 24-50G) and usually use those for travel when I want my camera with me, but it's not a photography trip. The 24-50 gets more use than the GMII since it appears far less intrusive and obvious when I'm traveling.
I believe there are photographers like me who just prefer primes versus zooms and build their gear around it. Not right or wrong, just how they like to go about their business. To me, building your kit around primes also makes it easier to introduce a lens whose characteristics are different from your normal kit of working lenses. For instance, Zayne is looking to fill a gap in his lineup. He could buy a lens consistent with his other lenses, or he could purchase a lens that captures differently and provide greater variation in his equipment. That's why I suggested an out of the box option like the Laowa. ...Show more →
I understand that philosophy totally and appreciate the je ne sais quois of it, so no argument or debate needed! But I know from my experience leading landscape and travel workshops that many of our initial prime adherents migrated to at least one do-it-all zoom for convenience. Hard to frame perfectly by zooming your feet when you’re shooting from the edge of a cliff or dealing with the varied subject sizes and shooting distances in say a city square.
Edit: To be clear, I am sort of a hybrid shooter in this regard. When I travel there is usually the zoom on the camera around my neck and 3 feather-weight primes in a small bag I carry across-the-shoulder. At night, I tend to grab one prime and head out with only the cam and focus on capturing images that work with that particular focal.
p.2 #2 · Should I get a 35 prime if I already have a 24 and 50?
Kevner wrote:
This is a good point, Jack, although I don't think it's always the case. I far and away prefer primes and own way more than I would ever try to carry at once. I do like to make up a "kit" before heading out for a day or trip based on what I want to do. I do own a couple general purpose zooms (24-70 GMII and 24-50G) and usually use those for travel when I want my camera with me, but it's not a photography trip. The 24-50 gets more use than the GMII since it appears far less intrusive and obvious when I'm traveling.
I believe there are photographers like me who just prefer primes versus zooms and build their gear around it. Not right or wrong, just how they like to go about their business. To me, building your kit around primes also makes it easier to introduce a lens whose characteristics are different from your normal kit of working lenses. For instance, Zayne is looking to fill a gap in his lineup. He could buy a lens consistent with his other lenses, or he could purchase a lens that captures differently and provide greater variation in his equipment. That's why I suggested an out of the box option like the Laowa. ...Show more →
Exactly how I feel about primes. For me a single focal length totally changes how I approach looking for my subjects. I look at the world through that focal length and feel totally immersed doing so. With a zoom, my vision wanders everywhere resulting in weaker compositions. The convenience of a zoom with its range of focal length detracts my observation resulting in weaker images.
p.2 #3 · Should I get a 35 prime if I already have a 24 and 50?
Jack Flesher wrote:
Interestingly, those of us that learned to shoot in the heydays of interchangeable film cameras where primes ruled the day and zooms were limited to a few 80-200’s initially which were optically slow and garishly expensive in comparison, we almost always lived by the axiom, “shoot a little loose and crop later.” Because of that, I still do that today with primes and digital. An advantage is it also allows for things like horizon leveling and perspective corrections before a minor compositional crop. I’ll also point out that with my current 33mp A7CII cropped to aps-c, I still net out at a very usable 24mp. Yes net DoF is diminished with that crop, but the ability to do it on the occasions a bit tighter view needed is a definite advantage.
Not saying your method is wrong, just pointing out that there is an alternative logic available when shooting primes, especially so with higher resolution digital. ...Show more →
Jack, you must have misunderstood me here. I did not say that cropping by itself is bad, in fact it wasn't about cropping at all. I said that for me, in order to leverage the "deep vision" through the FOV of a prime, it is important to have visual guides, like the framelines or an auto-cropping EVF, to be able to see the final image while framing. I cannot walk around with a 24mm and compose through it as if it was a 35, promising myself to crop later.
Thank you for referencing the good old film days. Back then, if shooting with a 645 back, I'd paint 645 framelines on my 6x6 focusing screen. To see better. Same thing. Now there are apps for that, I have "Viewfinder Mark II" on my phone. Sometimes it's easier to frame on a phone while hiking, no need to mess with the camera+backpack just to evaluate a composition.
