Primes. Do theu really make you a better photog?

[cayto]

That's it. Each condition requires different equipment, settings. Imo

Primes are better than zoom lens in portraits, if you like to shot birds, plains, you will need zoom, and primes aren't apropriate, and so on...

Uh, no. You don't NEED zoom to shoot either of those things. Why do they make 500mm and 800mm prime lenses if they don't have a purpose? Not a whole lot of people shoot portraits at 500mm+.

They have a purpose. Zoom lenses will be better in some points, primes in anothers. Prime or Zoom? Shooting birds or plains, i think i choose zoom by their versatility

 

[o hey tyler]

Yes, you might choose a zoom lens. However you stated that a zoom lens was needed to shoot planes or birds, when it is not the truth at all.

 

[cayto]

Yes, you might choose a zoom lens. However you stated that a zoom lens was needed to shoot planes or birds, when it is not the truth at all.

Sorry, did not express myself as I wanted

My thought was following, according to the purpose you pick a prime or zoom for its best performance in your subject/purpose.

 

[Kolia]

Uh, no. You don't NEED zoom to shoot either of those things. Why do they make 500mm and 800mm prime lenses if they don't have a purpose? Not a whole lot of people shoot portraits at 500mm+.

The decision of using a 500mm is different In the sense that if you did mount a 500mm you will have no intention at all of being within a good range of a 85mm.

A portrait of a Silverback Gorilla shoot in the wild with a 85mm prime lens might look good, but it'd be pretty stupid to take in the first place !

More on topic, if someone says he bought a prime lens for the sole reason he thinks it would make him better, I'll think this guy is missing the whole idea.

Get a prime because you want an f1.4 lens instead. Or get a zoom because you want the convenience and can live with the higher f-stop.

 

[sovietdoc]

People who argue that zooms are better than primes should shoot with zooms.
People who argue that primes are better than zooms should shoot with primes.
People who argue that both have pluses and minuses, should shoot with both.
People who argue that interchangeable lenses are stupid should go shoot with their smartphone and stop trolling this forum.

 

[Heitz]

Its such a catch-22. "They" say that if you don't have an 85 mm 1.4 you're not a professional. but yet having a professional lens doesn't make you accomplished... whatever -- the lens does the heavy lifting.

My unexperienced brother with a top-line Nikon 85mm 1.4G lens WILL look pretty damn good when compared to my neighbor with a Sony cybershot P&S

BUT, you have to know how to use it - yea. Il bought the 85 1.4d a few months ago and instantly I felt like a better photographer. I take this very seriously -- i'm not screwing around -- but buying this lens instantly upgraded the quality of my photographs. So say what you will, but in my opinion, the quality of a photographer is a product of the lenses, the experience, AND the intent. To say that 'equipment doesn't make the photographer' is a half-truth.

 

[binga63]

It's not the lens....zoom or prime that makes you the better photographer... it's whether you are willing to get off your butt and learn, improve and develop... a lazy photographer with a great zoom or a great prime will still take a crap picture .. it is only when he/she does the hard work takes the 1000's of pic good and bad and learns from each one... is willing to ask questions , to accept that some of the answers they will not like will they ever improve.... my 2 cents

 

[dxqcanada]

... though crappy lens IQ does tend to get in the way of a great image ... unless the crappy IQ is purposely used to accent the shot.

 

[unpopular]

I will say this as I have said a million times before:

All equipment has limitations, even the most expensive. A good photographer can make great images within the boundaries of these limitations. While a high end setup is going to have fewer limitations than a cheap point and shoot, it is up to the photographer to understand the limitations of his or her gear - thus likewise, a camera with more limitations will be much more challenging to use to create compelling images than a less limited kit.

Also, as I have said before, this thread is not if primes or zooms are "better", "sharper", or "more convenient", but rather if primes help promote photographic skill. So what is better to improve with? If it takes a good photographer to make compelling images with more limited gear, wouldn't it make sense that you'll learn more with the more limiting option than with the less limiting option?

It has been demonstrated that a photographer who is proficient using a set of primes is also proficient using a zoom; however, I think that the learning curve in the other direction is much steeper, and I have to wonder how frustrated some of you would be if you were forced to shoot only with a normal lens - not because using only a single focal length is impossible, in fact many great photographers throughout history relied only on a set number of focal lengths, if not only one, but rather because composition considerations are entirely unique when you don't have a zoom to rely on.

Even the phrase "zoom lens" is misleading, implying that the only reason to use a longer focal length is to get in closer to subjects which are too far away, and perhaps more commonly, too lazy to approach, and I am curious how many zoom advocates really think about focal length in terms of space, DOF before they think about magnification.

So yes. I think that primes do help people become proficient. They allow us to slow down, think about not only the subject and composition, but also photography. Primes are more limiting, they are less convenient - and that is exactly why they good.

 

[louisblythe]

I dont believe the gear ever makes you a better photographer. That being said primes put some interesting restrictions on you as a photographer and force you to shoot in a different way. They also offer amazing colour rendition and they are generally pretty sharp so you run into less chromatic aberration.

I have used primes for most of my career and would only go back to zooms for a little extra length.

I think the best way to learn how to shoot more consciously and deliberately is to use primes.

Zoom with your feet!

 

[rexbobcat]

24mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.2
200mm f/2

If I could have these three lenses I'd be happy. I already have one but I crave moar!!!!!!

 

[unpopular]

I think in this context the sentiment "the gear doesn't make a better photographer" is like saying "it doesn't matter where you get an education". While an outstanding student will learn more in a less demanding program than a poor student, the outstanding student will meet his or her potential only in a program suitable to his or her abilities. Likewise a poor student will always be a poor student, regardless of teh quality of education.

It is ultimately up to the photographer to excel. But I think that a good photographer will only be great if he or she learns that very lesson: it is not the gear that makes the photographer. And I think the only real way to learn this is to self limit in such a way that you are still able to learn the fundamentals of photography.

If you really want to learn photography, throw out all your AE/AF lenses and get a single preset prime. I'm not being facetious about this either. If you want to learn to swim on the deep end, it's best to take off the water wings.

 

[Markw]

I think in this context the sentiment "the gear doesn't make a better photographer" is like saying "it doesn't matter where you get an education". While an outstanding student will learn more in a less demanding program than a poor student, the outstanding student will meet his or her potential only in a program suitable to his or her abilities. Likewise a poor student will always be a poor student, regardless of teh quality of education.

It is ultimately up to the photographer to excel. But I think that a good photographer will only be great if he or she learns that very lesson: it is not the gear that makes the photographer. And I think the only real way to learn this is to self limit in such a way that you are still able to learn the fundamentals of photography.

If you really want to learn photography, throw out all your AE/AF lenses and get a single preset prime. I'm not being facetious about this either.

I agree 100% with everything stated here. All of it. Not so much with the "throw out the AF lenses" because, well, focusing is a relatively simple concept to grasp. But, I would CERTAINLY say it would do most photographers some good, and certainly weed out the less-than-adept ones, to throw the camera into full manual for a few months. Doing that, and limiting them to primes (No, I'm not saying that them being able to use primes inherently makes them a better photographer. But, it does add work and inhibit laziness. It ensures you fully understand spacial compression per focal length, and how to fully control the aperture to get the best DOF and background rendering (combination of said traits) per shot) would certainly bring the top to the top.

Mark

 

[unpopular]

The nice thing about preset lenses is that they are very limited in AE mode, they can only work in Av mode. My camera doesn't even allow you to use a non-electronic lens in any mode except manual.

You also loose the sense that the lens and camera are a continuous unit, and have a real physical feel for where one stops and the other begins.

 

[Markw]

Coming from someone with a D800 and a slue of fully automatic (save for zooming) lenses, I completely agree. But, in this day, if you want to be competitive in any market besides selling fine art prints (and even in that area, too!), you really need to be competitively equipped as well. Sometimes I miss the days where photography was solely a hobby.

It's really a shame how little folks now-a-days know about the fundamentals. We all like to hit the ground running. But, with photography, it's like the ground you're hitting is an ice skating rink and you're equipped with crutches. It's still just as slippery and easy to mess up, but you you can use your crutches to hold you upright as you move forward. Of course, though, it would be much simpler to get a pair of ice skates and learn how to fully take advantage of the ice and what beautiful movements you can make with the proper knowledge. It's certainly much more graceful and elegant with the ice skates and knowledge than with tap shoes and crutches.

Mark