prime vs zoom composition

[Christie Photo]

...what would be the difference between zooming in on a subject so that it fills the frame, versus moving closer to the subject so that it fills the frame.

Well, rather than fixed focal length vs. zoom... this is a question about long vs. short.

You can easily see this with a simple exercise. Selet an object in the room. A smaller object may illustrate this better... ie. a coffee mug on your desk. Close one eye. Now, make a circle (aperture) with one hand by touching your index fingertip to the tip of your thumb. Move the circle in and out to frame your suject.

Take note of the shape of the subject. Remember what you now see in the background.

Now, without moving you head, move the circle close to your face... pretty close... about 4 inches away. Preseving the distance between your hand and your eye, move directly toward the object until you have the same framing you started with.

Look at the shape of that object. Note what you can now see in the background.

I hope this helps.

-Pete

 

[Mike_E]

The old saying goes the if all you have is a hammer then everything starts to look like a nail.

Sometimes it's a good thing to only carry a hammer. You are reminded where your thumbs are in short order. ;^)

 

[THORHAMMER]

both have their uses,

Primes force you to know what shot you want before you take it.
Thats where you grow in skill for the must have shots AND the art shots.

 

[Garbz]

So you learn more about composition by limiting yourself to only one or two perspectives? Sounds like a typical school way of teaching, just throw creativity out the window.

Don't get me wrong, primes are great for their apertures and their macro ability (for macro primes) but that is it. If I had a 18-200 f/1.2 then I'd never own another lens again.

 

[skieur]

Sure I get that. And with the apparently little difference in optical quality between many zooms and primes ( especially at pro level ), that makes a zoom the thing to have for most of the time. At least I think that would be the case.
However, for a beginner, I am becoming rapidly convinced that more can be learned, and bad habits can be avoided by forcing oneself to deal with a fixed focal length.

Also, isn't it true that in the situations you mentioned above, one could take the shot with the prime and then crop in for what you want in PP ? If the prime is sufficiently sharp, it probably wouldn't matter much. In effect isn't that what you're doing with a zoom anyway ? Cropping ?

The difference is that in cropping you are losing megapixels and can be down from 15 megapixels to 5 megapixels in one crop. With a zoom, if the camera is 15 megapixels, then that is what you get in the shot. If you need a reference for confirmation, try the April issue of Popular Photography.

skieur

 

[usayit]

So you learn more about composition by limiting yourself to only one or two perspectives? Sounds like a typical school way of teaching, just throw creativity out the window.

Not throwing creativity out of the window..... neither zooms nor primes limit creativity. What primes do offer is a simplified way to explore composition (in addition to IQ, fast aperture, etc).

Call it "typical school" way of teaching but most learned skills start as simplified exploration.

I enjoy primes for the same exact reason... It is the reason why I enjoy old mechanical cameras and digital cameras rooted in the past without the complexity. I still use zooms when I find they are the best tool for the job but my preference for single focal length lenses is rooted in the enjoyment of simplified exploration.

 

[usayit]

Perhaps I should force myself to use it more.
Also do you think that for a Nikon D90 ( 1.5 crop ), a 35mm lense would be a better walkaround than a 50mm ?

Define walkaround lens...

If you mean a lens that you can take to you as you walk around an area to explore (sight seeing), I found that a lightweight, decent optical, zoom is the best answer. You can't enjoy your trip, be creative, or explore if you are lugging around a lot of weight. A wide focal range is especially useful. I'm not familiar with Nikkors but I am thinking along the lines of the Canon 28-135 IS or Canon 24-105L.

If you mean a lens for street shooting, then I prefer a slightly wide angle prime lens. Focal lengths include 28mm or 35mm. Good optical quality, fast aperture, compact design, good for capturing a subject in their environment (story telling), good amount of DOF, and controlled distortion. Cropped cameras introduce an added complexity for their effective FOV...

Of course all photographers have their personal choice. Even choices on how to combine more than one lens. I prefer the 24-105L + 50 f/1.4 for my "walk around" while others will prefer to just carry a fast single zoom 24-70 f/2.8L. For street, I like 24 w/ 50 or 35 w/ 75.

 

[THORHAMMER]

So you learn more about composition by limiting yourself to only one or two perspectives? Sounds like a typical school way of teaching, just throw creativity out the window.

Don't get me wrong, primes are great for their apertures and their macro ability (for macro primes) but that is it. If I had a 18-200 f/1.2 then I'd never own another lens again.

Well I guess one could argue that you can get more creative when your walking around for hours with little or no back strain from using a light prime that's got the same quality as a zoom that weights 5-10 pounds, not to mention low light usage and shutter speed. Many times those factors make the prime much much more creative, like I said there are times for both.

 

[fwellers]

The difference is that in cropping you are losing megapixels and can be down from 15 megapixels to 5 megapixels in one crop. With a zoom, if the camera is 15 megapixels, then that is what you get in the shot. If you need a reference for confirmation, try the April issue of Popular Photography.

skieur

Hadn't considered that !
Thanks.

 

[fwellers]

Define walkaround lens...

If you mean a lens that you can take to you as you walk around an area to explore (sight seeing), I found that a lightweight, decent optical, zoom is the best answer. You can't enjoy your trip, be creative, or explore if you are lugging around a lot of weight. A wide focal range is especially useful. I'm not familiar with Nikkors but I am thinking along the lines of the Canon 28-135 IS or Canon 24-105L.

If you mean a lens for street shooting, then I prefer a slightly wide angle prime lens. Focal lengths include 28mm or 35mm. Good optical quality, fast aperture, compact design, good for capturing a subject in their environment (story telling), good amount of DOF, and controlled distortion. Cropped cameras introduce an added complexity for their effective FOV...

Of course all photographers have their personal choice. Even choices on how to combine more than one lens. I prefer the 24-105L + 50 f/1.4 for my "walk around" while others will prefer to just carry a fast single zoom 24-70 f/2.8L. For street, I like 24 w/ 50 or 35 w/ 75.

Thanks Usayit. I appreciate the reply.
One thing I've been enjoying a lot in carrying around the 35mm prime the last couple of weeks is the light weight of the camera and the ease of lugging it, getting it in and out of the bag etc...

There are times though that I miss the zoom !! However, I am still convinced for now that I need to keep only the prime with me. Real soon I'll carry my 50mm prime and switch between it and the 35mm. I figure that after a time, I will realize at a deeper level ( starting to already ), the relationships between focal length, perspective and field of view.

When I can say, ( darn I wish I had a 75mm FL for this shot, then I think I'll have learned enough to stick my zoom on again. But I still may not, because I truly enjoy the smaller package. ) I also enjoy the fast glass, but I don't want a 10 pound lens in order to get that.

I'm justing waiting for the M10 ( think I'll skip the M9 ), and my winning lottery ticket. )

 

[Torus34]

Forget, for a moment, the apparently never-ending discourse on the 'advantages' of lens sharpness ['Ah, if only Monet could have seen better in his later years!'] Trust an old geezer on this: composition rules. Many truly great pictures have been made with what today's equipment wonk would condemn as 'junk' lenses.

The primary [sorry!] difference between a prime and a zoom is in how you yourself see the world about you.

When you wander about with a camera, you put mental frames around certain 'scenes' or nascent pictures. For some of them, you take time to make one [or more] exposures.

Try this, even as a mental exercise [Note: it really makes its impact if you actually do it.]

1. Wander about your local area with a 35mm rig fitted with a 24mm wa lens. Shoot a 20 exp. roll of film.*

2. Next day, retrace your path and shoot another 20 exp. roll -- but this time use a 35mm rig fitted with a 135mm tele lens.*

Process and compare the images you selected. They will, I believe, be quite different.

Now consider how you would have seen your surroundings if your rig was zoom-fitted.

*If you've one of those newfangled digital rigs with a zoom, do the first step with the lens set at it's widest angle fl and the second with it set at its longest tele fl.