Zooms or Primes?

An important article from Master and world renowned photographer Jeff Ascough regarding zooms vs primes. An absolute must read:

http://blog.jeffascoug​h.com …zooms-or-primes.html#more

I agree with the sentiment but it's not exactly ground breaking stuff...

i agree and i can say it is not such thing zooms vs primes is all about what you need at the moment.

SOK wrote in post #14026206
I agree with the sentiment

As do I.

well stated. Personally, I went almost twenty years between being around photography in professional circles when primes were the standard (zooms were there, but highly scrutinized and often criticized). Fast forward to 2006 and I just can't accept my photography instructors advice to get a 24-70, a 70-200 and an ultrawide prime or a full frame body, one or the other. Too stuck on old opinions about poor quality zooms.
After using dozens of lenses, mostly primes, and selling and trading and borrowing steadily for the past 6 years- guess what? No more IS lenses, no 4x zooms, I have a 24-70 and a 70-200 and a full frame body. No set up is 100% complete, but I feel pretty darn well prepared and am very happy with the IQ and I really beleive it is every bit as good as any of those primes I tried.

It was good advice and I should have taken it, but I had alot of fun learning it on my own.

I do agree with Jeff about the learning part.

Find things that work well for you and your vision. Thats all that matters.

Yeah, I agree with what he says, but it's hardly new thinking. Whilst there are a handful of photographers who feel that primes are better then zooms, or vice versa, and stick to that, most have the common sense to realise that they are very different tools and perform different functions. Like any other tools, you use what best suits the job in hand. Whether that is a prime or a zoom, then that is the best at the time.

Like the author, I have a mix. I have 3 zooms that cover me from 10-400mm for versatility and to make sure that I have the right focal length for the position I want to shoot from and the framing I want. I also have 4 fast primes for when I need something with a wider aperture than I can get from the zooms. Combine that with a dual body set up combining crop and FF and I have a nice versatile setup that allows me to use the best tools for the shot I want to take.

Whilst I agree with the article, I wouldn't call it "important" or a "must read". Most photographers are already aware of the message it contains.

It has been interesting to see how zooms have progressed over the years, so that attitudes toward them have progressed as well.

These days arguments in favor of primes are more about them often being less expensive, lighter weight, and some bit of sharper, although for many shooters a lens like the 70-200 gives outstanding shots for events and such, and for many of us the 100-400 is great for a "birding walkaround" lens.

'Course, once you get to needing/wanting longer than 400mm, well, the long and expensive and heavy Canon primes do tend to rule, although we have satisfied Sigma xx-500 zoom users here.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14038829
Find things that work well for you and your vision. Thats all that matters.

This, to me, is the underlying lesson that so many forget about. That lesson doens't just apply only to prime lenses vs. zoom lenses, but also things like higher ISO vs. acceptable noise, crop vs. full frame, flash vs. ambient, extensive processing techniques vs. "just the basics," etc.

With photography, it's all got to be about getting the image! It doesn't really matter the path, but get the damned image! (If you can repeatedly follow the path you choose and get a great image, you're on your way to becoming a very good photog.) It doesn't really matter the imperfections; we've seen many cases where the technical side of the image is next to junk, but the impact the image creates carries the weight of the world.

Is there reason to know the virtues and pitfalls of your equipment choices? Absolutely, no question about it. Is there reason to debate it to the extent that many do on internet forums? Probably not.

As for the lens debate, I'm pretty much exactly in line with Mr. Ascough.