Prime Lenses vs Zoom Lenses
Image credit: POTN forum member Sootyvrs.
A contest which seems to be almost eternal is the photographers war on zoom vs. prime lenses. A few commonly asked questions are which is best, which should I use, which is the most affordable, and which will give me the best image quality? Sit tight and be prepared to pick a side, the war is just beginning.
Advantages of Zoom Lenses
Zoom lenses are the most common lenses on all camera types, both DSLR & Point and Shoot. How often do you see a simple Point and Shoot camera with a fixed focal length lens?
Zoom lenses are perfect for situations where you don’t have the time to keep changing lenses every half hour, or need the versatility to be shooting landscape one minute and wildlife high in the branches of trees 30 seconds later. In the aspect of versatility and function when you’re on the go, having a zoom lens will save you many headaches and many missed shots.
Advantages of Prime Lenses
In terms of image quality prime lenses win hands down. This is because prime lenses don’t have as many internal elements as zoom lenses, meaning image quality is much sharper and saturation much more balanced.
For a photography beginner prime lenses will force you to move in or move out to physically change the perspective of your subject. They will totally remove your mindset of “I’ll just zoom in to get closer” - they’ll make you use your feet to zoom and make you much more aware of the importance of good framing.
Prime lenses are also much sharper than their counterpart zooms at the same focal lengths, heavy cropping an image produced through a prime lens will give you a much better result than cropping an image from a zoom lens. They also tend to have faster aperture speeds and are lighter than their zoom counterparts.
Prime lenses are much less versatile than zooms, I wouldn’t be caught using them in a very important situation where image subjects are switching rapidly as shots will be missed. If you have the time to make images and are shooting for your own personal satisfaction, prime lenses are a perfect solution.
Conclusion
Personally, I would follow the philosophy of Duncan Davidson, Apple event photographer goes by. Zoom lenses for work when time is everything and prime lenses for personal work where you have time to spare and time to “make” shots.
Both lenses have their place for different types of shooting, jobs and people. I would recommend not kitting out your bag solely with either prime lenses nor zoom lenses. Consider having a couple of each in there and then further assess your needs after a few shooting assignments.
No matter what you currently have in your kit the main elements are always solid, take your time, discover how you shoot, and ‘make’ images instead of taking them.
Update: Darren Rowse also has an insightful article on zooms vs primes.
#1
Yohannes Wijaya → yohanneswijaya.com
Glenn, you nailed it on the last sentence of the first paragraph of the conclusion. If you (or anyone) were to invest in only 3 lenses for a long time, I recommend the 16-35mm, 24-70mm, and the 70-200mm (Nikon’s should have almost similar lenses). Those lenses basically cover the most used focal ranges.
I, myself, recommend folks who are interested into photography should start out w/ a prime lens (The 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 are a good start for they are affordable given how fast they are). Prime lens forces you to think about composition by physically moving closer or further from the subjects you are about to take. This is how I started out.
The next thing is to join a photography group in your area. This is an opportunity for anyone not only to network, learn, but to exchange tips/tricks w/ one another. For example, in the bay area, we have this bimonthly event called photowalking (you can google it and watch some videos on the series) where we mingle w/ fellow photographers. I can attest that I learnt so much from this group and still am.
#2
Michael Mistretta → michaelmistretta.com
Very good article Glenn! I’m never heard it explained quite so simply. Thank you, from the bottom of a noob DSLR photographer’s heart… :P
#3
Ryan → cameraporn.net
Great article and perspective on the prime vs. zoom debate. You conclusion is a great way to look at it. I generally recommend zooms to people starting out because of the versatility they offer, though Yohannes is spot on the fact that they really do force new photographers to learn framing and composition. Yohannes is also right on with the lens recommendations. That is the dream zoom lens kit, though i’d add the 100-400 IS to the list for a telephoto zoom.
Keep the great photo-related content coming! Love it.
#4
Prime vs. Zoom Examined at CameraPorn → www.cameraporn.net/2007/08/27/prime-vs-zoom-examined
[...] He does a great job explaining the differences, and benefits of each in different situations. Check it out! Add to Digg, del.icio.us, Ma.gnolia, Reddit These icons link to social bookmarking sites where [...]
#5
Timothy Neilen → blogs.worddissociation.net/timothy
Any reason for just having a picture of primes?
#6
rmaspero → www.rmaspero.com
great article i have alway been a bit confused with prime vs zoom and this was so simple i could follow it thanks
#7
Daniel HollisterThis is a no-brainer. There is absolutely no argument that prime glass is going to produce better-looking images, but given the lack of zoom capabilities, the shots should be planned. If you’re using something standard like an 85mm or 50mm prime, you’re still probably good for most events and such where medium shots of people are your primary concern.
Any reasonably serious photographer should have a mix of primes and zooms in their arsonal. This is not the wise opinion of Duncan Davidson, but a simple fundamental fact known by anyone who has been doing photography for any period of time.
It’s like comparing a Hummer to Honda Civic — they both have their advantages, and they both destroy the other in the specific situations for which they were built.
#8
mike franklin → cheekygrin.wordpress.com
I wouldn’t call it a “no brainer.” earlier zooms were indeed not as good as primes, but at this point, the higher end zooms are pretty much as good as primes.
I’m not sure about canons, but constant f/2.8 nikkors are quite highly regarded. The variable-aperture zooms are more “consumer grade” and I’d say not as good as primes.
Primes are faster (f/1.4 or f/1.8 often) — so better for lower light, and smaller DOF and better bokeh. I’m not sure that simply fewer elements is the issue: my 105mm macro lens has 14 elements; my 17-35mm has 13 elements.
It would be interesting — and helpful — if you could post (or find) comparisons of the same composition shot with a prime, consumer zoom and pro zoom, all at f/8 or so, and then cropped to show detail. my guess is that you’d notice little difference between the prime and the pro zoom.
I find it tends to be a matter of how much you want to spend, what you want to do, and how much you want to carry. I find that I want more primes (85mm f/1.4 is next), but that’s solely for low light capability rather than quality.
#9
Ondra SoukupHow often do we see P&S with fixed focal length ? Every 3 seconds walking in the Prague city centre…I think people lost their sense for anything and just take pictures with crappy camphones, just as a “proof they were there”. Sad that they call those “digital photographs” too :(
Otherwise great article Glenn, I think most confused novices who didn’t get the idea of 50mm lenses are clear now ;)
#10
Tyson Williams → www.tysonwilliams.com
Excellent explanation - short and to the point. I am sure, it will be a very helpful for newbies in the DSLR market. Once again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
#11
Ted Winder → www.tedwinder.org
I wish my DSLR allowed extra lenses (yeah, I know its not REALLY a DSLR…but it is…does that make sense? :P )
I have however, tried both lenses, and I much prefer Prime for some reason :)
#12
Jon → www.theappleofmyi.com/blog
Very good Glenn - will help a load of folks I am sure. I own mostly zooms at the moment, but have got a couple of primes. I intend to get a 35mmL soon and am VERY happy with the 300mm F2.8LIS :-)
Some recent pics here - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonnymoss/sets/72157601660340661/
#13
Lennart → kreideraub.blogspot.com
Hmm.
Now I wonder.
You don’t know much about photography. You probably never invested much time in it and you probably never will, seeing where you’re coming from and what you do at the moment.
But you write about it as if you’ve been shooting for twenty years. Of course you will answer, that you do not claim to know everything about it. But in this post you claim way too much experience. Or whatever.
Sorry for my bad English, I’m German and only been using this very lovely language for four years now.
What I want to say is that you should at least have SOME experience before claiming to have a lot.
The stuff you wrote can be found in every single fucking article about it. Also on the net.
And in all those bad beginner books. You shouldn’t even think about equipment before you can use it in a good way. For it’s created for people who need it. It’s not somethings to look cool.
Now I’m really hoping you know more about Macs than about Photography.. because I don’t know much about Macs I won’t see it.
But when you write about photography, I see what you claim to know and what is actually there.
#14
Alex → www.makesitgood.net
Really what it comes down to is that it’s much easier to make a high quality prime than it is to make a high quality zoom. That and it’s less expensive to make them excellent. This does not mean that zooms can’t be every bit as good as primes, it’s just that it becomes increasingly impractical to do so.
It’s similar to the tradeoff you get when building big apertures. The longer the focal length, the more glass you need to have a large aperture, the heavier the lens becomes, the harder it is to make it precisely and flawelessly, the more expensive… It goes on and on.
Lens designers have to fight with many factors when designing a lens. You’ve got sharpness, which is primary, speed/aperture, weight, cost, flare, chromatic aberations, out of focus smoothness. It’s much easier to make an excellent prime. It can still be very expensive and heavy, but there are less factors you have to work with than a zoom.
Lens makers CAN make zooms equal to primes, but on every factor they work on perfecting, they have many more variables and difficulties. You see it evident in the prices of high quality zooms. It quickly becomes impractical both for the manufacturer and the consumer.
My Canon 10-22mm EF-s lens is every bit as sharp as my 100mm macro. Those are my two sharpest lenses. The macro is faster, longer, closer focusing, and less expensive. My 70-200L is every bit as sharp as my 50mm f1.4, but it’s massively more expensive, heavier, bigger, and slower.
They both have their place, and truly are equal in their utility. I’d never be stuck with just a prime or two at a wedding. I wouldn’t use my 70-200 to shoot products indoors in a studio.
#15
Stuart → www.music-photos.co.uk
Primes are good but not versatile and you are very unlikely to notice the difference in quality unless you are printing to a large size even then an 85mm vs a 24-70mm will be neglegable.
The main benefits of primes are their close focusing and low light performance and on the one hand you’ll own a macro for close-ups and secondly using f1 or anything around that isn’t going to give you any depth of field.
Lennart does make a good point if in a very blunt way, that post could have been written on any website or in any book for at least the last ten years and knowing that you only own very poor performing zooms doesn’t hold much reverence for this post.
There is too much procrastinating on the internet about kit, if you wanna collect every prime lens there is and believe only those will lead to perfect images then do so, the kit never makes the photographer.
#16
PaulGreat article and many thanks for adding to http://www.photographyvoter.com - look forward to seeing more articles
#17
TechHairBall.com » Blog Archive » Prime Lenses vs Zoom Lenses → techhairball.com/wp/2007/08/28/prime-lenses-vs-zoom-lenses
[...] read more | digg story [...]
#18
MatthewWow, thanks Glenn!
As a n00b to a Canon Digital Rebel, I didn’t know that, and my dad, who is a older photographer, and he said that there was no point in me getting lenses already covered within the zoom ranges for my other lenses.
Now I know better!
#19
Jauder Ho → www.jauderho.com
I own the 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200. But I tend to use the 16-35 the most as I shoot a lot of landscape. YMMV but I just passed 2 years on Flickr yesterday.
Check it out.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jauderho/
That said, I would love a 85mm f1.2 or a Contax wide angle.
#20
Steve RyanI too once looked down on zoom lenses as a low-quality option. No longer. I learned that the best zooms can be truly excellent. I learned to use an SLR camera with 50mm and 200mm prime lenses, but today my favorite lenses are 70-200mm and 17-55mm zooms.
Perhaps you meant to say that prime lenses give higher quality for a given price and maximum F-stop, which is generally true.
#21
Darren → digital-photography-school.com/blog/prime-vs-zoom-lenses-which-are-best
I’ll leave another resource for some further reading - Prime vs Zoom lenses - Which are Best?
#22
Darren → digital-photography-school.com/blog/prime-vs-zoom-lenses-which-are-best
thanks for the link Glen
#23
mikeI generally use a zoom lens, and I ADORE my f10-22 lens, but there is one
situation where I take a prime lens — low light where I can’t use a flash.
Prime lenses are usually several stops faster than a zoom lens in low-light situations,
which can mean the difference between shooting at 1/4 sec vs 1/30th second.
#24
SLR/dSLR: Prime Lenses vs Zoom Lenses | felix ker’s blog → felixker.com/interesting-articles/slrdslr-prime-lenses-vs-zoom-lenses
[...] SLR/dSLR: Prime Lenses vs Zoom Lenses Share This [...]
#25
ChrisI would disagree with this article almost completely
cheap primes are better than cheap zooms
expensive zooms are nearly as good as good primes
I use both all the time on film and digital, and the main way i tell them apart is distortion, zooms have worse distortion normally
one point that he did get right is that it is useful to learn on primes, otherwise go read up a bit more and test some real zoom lenses and then you might know what your talking about
#26
Kyle HowardDoes it really matter? Use the lenses that give you the results you want. I wish people wouldn’t be so argumentative about all aspects of photography. “Which company is better?”, “Is film or digital better?”, “Prime or zoom?”.
Out of my experience of many years of shooting and many years of working in a photography retailer, use what gives you what you want. Seriously.
#27
Luka → luka.hitart.com
I always pack my 16-35mm f2.8L mkII, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, and my 70-200mm f2.8L IS.
It’s a combination of zooms for my base work and fixed for my stylised, ‘Slower’ images.
Saying one or the other is better is dodging the real question at had, ‘What do I need?’
#28
Walter Rietig → Primevszooms
I am so old that zooms there not even invented. So I still use every kind of glass I can in front of my my digital reflex cameras. Favoring my 50mm f1.4 on one camera and a 17-40L f4 on my second body.
I allso like to use a closeup lens-set +1,2 and 4 for flowers. Consentrate on seeing light on subjects and have fun.
#29
Ben Hider → www.benhider.com
Read this guys website for some of the best advice on all of Canon’s lens options!!!
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Lens-Reviews.aspx
Good Luck
#30
JoshReading the blog for so long I’ve finally been persuaded to look into getting a DSLR. However I don’t know anything about them.
Can anyone recommend resources that would teach me all about the ISO, shutter speeds, lenses etc?
#31
Yohannes Wijaya → yohanneswijaya.com
I should also add that for those who are interested in learning more about lens and reviews, should check out Bob Atkins’s extensive database at http://lensplay.com
#32
Pics=$, Traps of Pro-Equipment, Prime vs. Zoom Lenses and More | Photography Bay → www.photographybay.com/2007/09/01/pics-traps-of-pro-equipment-prime-vs-zoom-lenses-and-more
[...] The never-ending debate - prime vs. zoom lenses. [...]
#33
Prime Lenses vs Zoom Lenses « Hardware → alvin4o.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/prime-lenses-vs-zoom-lenses
[...] read more | digg story [...]
#34
It’s HARDbutWARE » Blog Archive » Prime Lenses vs Zoom Lenses → itshardbutware.com/2007/10/25/prime-lenses-vs-zoom-lenses
[...] read more | digg story [...]