Fixed vs. Zoom Lens - DPChallenge Forums

12/14/2004 03:05:35 PM · #1

Now that I have acquired my new 300D, I will be looking to add a lens (or two, if my budget allows - but it quite possibly may not) to my arsenal. My main question at this point is, what is a good (perhaps all-purpose) lens that everyone would suggest as a good quality starter lens? And, if you could make a second recommendation (of any kind of lens, whether specific or all-around), what would it be?

In particular, I'm interested in the Prime vs. Zoom question. Zooms offer more compositional creativity and ease of use (especially for objects you simply cannot get closer to), but Primes are known to offer better quality/sharpness. If you can, a low budget list would be preferable (although I know is quite restraining), because I'm a poor college student ;). But, ANY recommendations are really welcome because I'm mostly just trying to get a good direction to head in.

For example, I've heard that the Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD is a good lens for the price.

Thanks for reading :)

Message edited by author 2004-12-14 15:09:43.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

12/14/2004 03:21:25 PM · #2

well, my lenses are as follows:

kit lens
28mm 2.8 prime - $160.00
50mm 1.8 prime - $70.00
70-200mm f4 zoom - $650.00

In retrospect, I kind of wish I got the 200mm 2.8 prime (same price as zoom) instead because I find the f4 a little slow at times. Most people would rather have zoom's and if you are only printing smaller sizes, you should be fine with lower priced zoom's. But like me, I think you find that you want to upgrade to better lenses very quickly.

I had an older Tamron 70-300 and worked ok, but I was quickly frustrated with it. It's a little slow, and a little soft ... but not a deal breaker for the price. The Canon 70-200mm f4 is soooo much better, but more than likely out of your price range.

I use my 28mm ALL THE TIME and the 50mm 1.8 should be a required lens.

milo

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

12/14/2004 03:54:49 PM · #3

thanks for the reply. i've been hearing rave reviews about the 50mm f/1.8, so i think i will more likely than not end up getting that over the course of the next week or two. now, if i can just find a suitable zoom (well - maybe it's not necessary, but i would like the flexibility of a zoom in those can't-get-closer type of situations).

rscorp

Nikon D70

12/14/2004 04:02:23 PM · #4

I had mostly zooms in the past for my Nikon F100 and now the D70, and I just picked up the 50mm 1.8 from Nikon and the 105mm Sigma macro. What I do find myself doing now with the prime lenses is moving my feet more.

It's so easy with zooms to try to force a great photo by zooming in and out, looking for a great composition. The prime lenses force you to move your body around more, and in doing so you might be more likely to discover an angle you might not even have explored with a zoom.

cghubbell

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

12/14/2004 04:08:15 PM · #5

As long as you are buying high quality zooms, and not low-end, you should get nearly equivalent image quality from zooms as from primes. Of course, there are some primes (and zooms) which are better / worse, so exceptions are expected. In general though, you can shoot mind blowing shots with either primes or zooms. Case in point, the Nikon 80-200mm AF-S is a pro-grade zoom which will produce publishable work even with a teleconverter. The 70-300 G is a Tamron manufactured low-end zoon I regret ever buying. Slow, soft, hunts on focus. Ugh.

If you know you like the feel of a certain focal length, and shoot that style a lot, a fast prime is a great tool. If you like to go light and avoid bringing a big bag, then zooms are a great tool.

Buy good glass, and it's not about what gives the best image, it's about what tool fits your shooting style.

colyla

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM II

12/14/2004 04:10:49 PM · #6

I got the Tamron AF 28-300 XR 3.5-6.3 for less than $300 on Amazon.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/14/2004 04:13:18 PM · #7

Originally posted by hopper:

well, my lenses are as follows:

kit lens
28mm 2.8 prime - $160.00
50mm 1.8 prime - $70.00
70-200mm f4 zoom - $650.00

the 70-200 is much closer to $550 now. the 85mm 1.8 is like $330. the 100mm 2.0 is $375 or so, the 135mm 2.8 with soft focus is around $330 as well. I would stay away from hugely varying mm lenses, as they cannot compete as well as more conservative numbers vs primes. I love my 50mm 1.8, i would highly recommend it!

Azrifel

Fujifilm X100 VI

12/14/2004 04:13:33 PM · #8

What rscorp said.

It is so easy to just zoom or out a bit. But when I use the 50 I go places. Climbed over fences, trespassed, etc. :)
The advantage of a prime is that you pay more attention to the composition, because you often need more time and are willing to give it more time to frame it right. IMHO.
My only experiences with a prime on a dSLR is a 50mm. In my opinion the angle of view is suited best to portraiture and places where you have some space to work with. For street photography I think a wider one like a 35mm would be better.

lebowski

Canon EOS-10D

12/14/2004 04:16:50 PM · #9

the canon 50/1.8 is a must
then i would add a canon 24-85 usm for everyday use...

then wait until you know what u need, tele or wa

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

12/14/2004 04:23:47 PM · #10

I'll remind you that Fred Miranda's favorite lens is a Zoom... but it's a $1200 Canon L glass zoom.

cghubbell

Nikon D300

12/14/2004 04:25:38 PM · #11

Originally posted by Azrifel:

It is so easy to just zoom or out a bit. But when I use the 50 I go places. Climbed over fences, trespassed, etc. :)
The advantage of a prime is that you pay more attention to the composition, because you often need more time and are willing to give it more time to frame it right. IMHO.

I see this as a question of individual discipline more than technical capability. Since I like nature work, I tend to want to do as little lens swapping (field dirt), and gear carrying (travel light!) as possible. For that reason, zooms are ideal to my style.

I always thoroughly explore my subjects prior to creating an image, and try different focal lengths from different physical positions. In that respect, a zoom gives me more exploration power than a prime+hiking combo. Telephoto compression can be very interesting, but you can't always explore it efficiently without a zoom because you may not have time to change lenses before a subject is gone.

To really answer the zooms vs. primes question you need to evaluate your own style, strengths and limitations. Either option will allow you glass that can produce stunning images. Regardless of your decision, you should always take the time to enjoy the photographic exploration of your subjects, and use your feet as well as your glass.

12/14/2004 04:31:29 PM · #12

hmm - i never considered the compositional implications (ie: exploring new angles/finding new subjects/etc) of a prime.. sounds like an adventure!

glad you guys addressed my mention of the 70-300 - i was fairly sure i would end up getting it, and now i'm starting to feel like i need to do my research a little more to double check if that's what i really want (given the reviews of its lackluster quality here). i think i'm sold on the 50mm f/1.8 :D

coly: any comments on that zoom you mentioned- i haven't found much on it.
kye: was not aware that the range that the zoom offered hindered its overall quality - (i always wondered why the pros seemed to shoot with primes, or with something like a 75-120 (just making up numbers) as opposed to the 28-300 that coly mentioned)

dpdave

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

12/14/2004 04:34:19 PM · #13

I'm going to go with the 70-200 for something to reach out a bit. I am also seriously thinking about the 1.4 converter to go with it.

One thing I have yet to hear is anyone saying that a good 50 prime is wasted space, so one of those will be in my bag as well.

Flash

Nikon D700

12/14/2004 04:36:59 PM · #14

Originally posted by rscorp:

... What I do find myself doing now with the prime lenses is moving my feet more.

It's so easy with zooms to try to force a great photo by zooming in and out, looking for a great composition. The prime lenses force you to move your body around more, and in doing so you might be more likely to discover an angle you might not even have explored with a zoom.

Excellant assessment. Main reason that newer SLR owners should shoot with a primary lens like a 50mm for awhile. It teaches you angles and framing. Will make your photos better, even as you progress with a larger stable of lenses.

Sony 16-35mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE ZA OSS Lens

12/14/2004 04:37:29 PM · #15

another thing, you can check this list.. anything over 3.5 is good but once you hit 4 that's great! it's not a nearly completely list though.
lens optical quality ratings

Nusbaum

Fujifilm X-T1

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

12/14/2004 05:12:17 PM · #16

I would say that I have become a prime advocate, unless you are shooting sports where a long fast zoom is clearly required. A basic three lens kit, 20mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2.0, and 85mm f/1.8 is light weight, fast, and relatively inexpensive when compare to fast L zooms. You have to realize that there isn't a single fast, f/2.8, zoom that will cover the tradition sweet spot of 28mm to ~100mm (17mm to ~70mm on the dRebel), so you will probably end up with at least two lenses anyway.

I have a 24-85 zoom that hasn't been used in months... I'm happier dragging around my little bag of primes.

Message edited by author 2004-12-14 18:09:25.

bryanbrazil

Sony Alpha a7R III

12/14/2004 06:03:22 PM · #17

I have the Canon 28-135mm IS USM zoom that I think is a great everyday lens. I think it's about $400.

Message edited by author 2004-12-16 02:00:44.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

12/14/2004 06:20:23 PM · #18

gah! so much information and stuff to look up! i love it! it's making it so hard for me to study (i have a final exam tomorrow), cuz now i just want to look up lenses, their pros/cons, and go shopping! haha. speaking of which..

thanks for the lens recs so far everyone, i really appreciate them.. i've been bookmarking them all in my B&H wish list so that i can research them later :). also, thanks a lot for the site kye, i think i'll be visiting it a lot for awhile :). i've also found photographyreview.com to be of some help at times, since it's all consumer reviews. flash: good point, i actually thought about that after reading the reviews.. it may force me to think more creatively, which sounds fun (although maybe i'll get frustrated too.. we'll see!)

Falc

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

12/14/2004 06:22:49 PM · #19

I have the Canon 28mm f2.8 prime, the canon 50mm f1.8 mk II prime and the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro - all superb lenses, but whats on my camera right now? .... well its the Canon 16-35mm f2.8 L its just too crisp to even think about pulling one of the primes out of the bag.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/14/2004 06:25:52 PM · #20

Originally posted by Falc:

That lens is also $1375... I would not compair it to the much cheaper SET of lenses.

Gauti

Canon EOS-7D

12/14/2004 06:58:12 PM · #21

I have the Canon 50mm 1.4 and the Canon 100mm 2.8 macro. Both are very good. I just love the macro detail you get with the 100. I finally managed to the a reverse coupler ring the other day, but haven't had much time to try it out yet. I also have the Canon 75-300 4-5.6 USM IS which is handy for the extra reach, but is too slow and difficult to use for me, I only rarely get usable pics from it. I also have the 28-105 4-5.6 which I never use and am trying to get rid of. But my workhorse and by far fav lens is the Canon 17-40 F4L and it more or less lives on my 10D and almost always with a CPL filter. That lens is just soooooo good. Now I'm looking into a fast ultrawide (all seem to be either junk or very expensive or both) and long telephotos (same problem).

I'd recommend the 50mm (any version) and maybe 70-200 zoom (as fast as you can afford).
then, as many have already said, either a wide/ultrawide if you're into landscapes/architecture or longer telephoto if it's sports/wildlife/birds/etc.
BTW the 17-40 is a must :)

12/15/2004 01:13:09 AM · #22

anyone know if any shops allow you to go in and attach display lenses to your camera in order to take some sample shots in the store? that could be a fun way to blow an hour or two (granted, a lame way to have fun - but good enough for a geek like me!). i've never bought a lens before, so i'm not sure if that might be a common practice or not.

Message edited by author 2004-12-15 01:13:28.

12/15/2004 01:15:39 AM · #23

i'm sure the camera shop in my area would let me do that, but you'd have to call up and ask! worth a shot tho.

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

12/15/2004 02:26:12 AM · #24

20 mm f2.8
50 f1.8
85 f1.8
105 f2.8 EX
200 f2.8 L

No Zooms :-)

No need zoom,just crop the part you need :-), like this one: