Does it take more skill to shoot with Primes?

I love primes for their size, weight, and eye building but I honestly feel I don't have much luck with them. I've used a handful of primes for extended periods of time and have never been blown away with their performance. This includes the 50 f/1.4, 135L, 85L II, and 400 f/2.8 IS.

I don't know if its my technique or the lenses themselves but I can't get a stupid sharp photo like I can with my zooms (16-35 II, 24-70, 24-105, 70-200 II), even stopped down a stop or 1.5 stops. Logic tells me the 85L II should be just as sharp, if not sharper, than the 70-200 II at f/2.8. But its not

Is it my technique, do I have bad luck, or do I just need more experience shooting primes?

No additional skill or technique required.

Gatorboy wrote in post #13450739
No additional skill or technique required.

Then I have problems

I find it's easier, one less thing (zoom) to worry about.

Note the prime lenses have faster maximum apertures than the zooms, therefore more accurate focus is required-- camera auto focus may need calibration for using the faster lenses.

melanopsin wrote in post #13451289
Note the prime lenses have faster maximum apertures than the zooms, therefore more accurate focus is required-- camera auto focus may need calibration for using the faster lenses.

I agree with you on that, it is a possibility. But if both lenses are shot at f/2.8, then the prime should be just as sharp if not sharper? Hmm...

rick_reno wrote in post #13451244
I find it's easier, one less thing (zoom) to worry about.

Strange... I'd say a zoom is easier, you don't have to worry about people getting in your way, running out of space or tripping over things when moving...

The perspective changes a bit though - between say 24mm and 70mm rather than walking to make the motive fit into 70mm.

Have you tested the AF for these Primes? Sounds silly as the zooms appear to work, but who knows.

I've registered my Primes in my 1DIII using the AF Microadjust C.Fn III -7. Have not done this with the 5DII as I tend to use zooms on this one.

Might be worth checking just to verify the lens/camera combo.

Then again, might just be because the primes are heavier and you shake more.

Edit: yes, I noted you tested the 70-200 against the 85. Just having a little fun.

Staszek wrote in post #13451396
I agree with you on that, it is a possibility. But if both lenses are shot at f/2.8, then the prime should be just as sharp if not sharper? Hmm...

not if AF calibration of prime is inaccurate

JAZZ D.P.G. wrote in post #13458539
Have you tested the AF for these Primes? Sounds silly as the zooms appear to work, but who knows.

I've registered my Primes in my 1DIII using the AF Microadjust C.Fn III -7. Have not done this with the 5DII as I tend to use zooms on this one.

Might be worth checking just to verify the lens/camera combo.

Then again, might just be because the primes are heavier and you shake more.

Edit: yes, I noted you tested the 70-200 against the 85. Just having a little fun.

melanopsin wrote in post #13458667
not if AF calibration of prime is inaccurate

I have tried MFA on the primes and can't see a difference in results. Who knows...

Other than potential thin DOF, not really.

It doesn't take that much skill to shoot primes but, it's the ones that are MF that people run away from!

jdizzle wrote in post #13462617
It doesn't take that much skill to shoot primes but, it's the ones that are MF that people run away from!

Exactly. Not harder unless you pick a MF lens. Even then, I might argue that MF isn't any harder than making sure your AF is working for you and not against. Primes might just make you a better photographer.

There is nothing magical about prime lenses. It is no different than a single focal length from a zoom lens. As others have mentioned though, shooting at wide apertures is different than from shooting at narrow apertures whether it's a prime or not.

Try an experiment. Set the camera on a tripod with good light and shoot an object focusing using live view and zooming in 10X to pull a perfect focus. Do this with your prime and with a zoom set to the same settings. There should be little to no difference.

If the prime looks much worse, maybe it's a bum lens.

I happen to be left-handed, right-brained and therefore see things differently than the rest of the world. I think zooms are slightly more difficult to work with than prime lenses. Given the fact that there is another feature built into a zoom lens (the zoom part of it) says one additional setting / feature to consider.

Of the two 'zoom' lenses I've owned, both were set to longest focal length 99.9% of the time and stayed there. Could be why the only lenses in the bag today are primes!

dave