relationships # 7 ~ primarily primes
One of the things that I have rediscovered by picturing with the EP-1 and prime lenses is the joy of making pictures with prime lens.
Last year, when I acquired my first and then only prime lens for my Olympus E-3 digital camera - a 25mm f2.8 Zuiko pancake - I did so on a complete lark of sorts. I was just plain curious with a side-interest in starting to explore primes with relatively fast apertures for wide open / narrow DOF picturing. I also did so with a bit of apprehension regarding the commitment to picturing with a single focal length lens.
That apprehension was somewhat ameliorated by almost 3 decades of prime lens-only picturing. Prior to my entering the digital age, picture making wise, back in 2002, the only zoom lens that I ever owned was the Nikkor 43-86mm and it spent most of its time sitting around unused. Pre-digital picture making, primes ruled the roost. Period. End of sentence.
And, to be completely accurate, prior to my digital picturing days, I did not even own an AF lens.
All of that said, I was rather surprised to find that the "standard" lens on a dslr was a zoom lens. In fact, it seemed that prime lenses were scarcer than the proverbial hen's teeth. So, it was on with the show and zooms it was.
Long story, short - I became quite acclimated to using zoom lenses. My kit included/includes a 11-22mm, a 14-54mm, and a 50-200mm (22-400mm range, 35mm equiv.). For about 90% of my personal picturing, I used the 11-22mm lens and about 90% of that use was limited to and around the 11mm end of things - not exactly like picturing with a prime, but pretty close.
In any event, I was still a bit concerned about using just a prime lens - you know, things like did I still know how to use my legs and feet instead of a zoom ring to get the framing I wanted? Would I be left out in the world feeling foolish and confused because I didn't have the means / lens to get the shot? You know, dumbass things like that.
Long answer, short - my feet and legs still work and I have yet to feel foolish and confused out in the world of picture making. In fact, I've come to the conclusion that I can live on without ever again mounting a zoom lens on my camera (for personal picturing) - I don't need no stinkin' zooms.
BUT .... I am I asking too much by hoping that lens makers refocus some of their design and manufacturing expertise on producing some fast and compact prime lens? Is there a big enough market / demand out there for such products? Or, are so many "serious" picture makers buying up zooms simply because that's virtually all that's available or is that what the really want?
Any prime lens picture makers out there who might add their 2¢ on the topic? Is anyone discovering, has discovered / re-discovered, the joy of primes?
Reader Comments (6)
I always appreciate the followers of this blog, who absorb some of gravitas' observations on life, so I have time to watch tv. That is why it pains me when I have to throw a follower off the island for violating my one rule - never, ever encourage the purchase of new equipment.
On Feb 10, a person who's comments i usually welcome, and who has an interesting blog as well, committed the cardinal error.
I have had my contacts in the Chinese secret police hack into the security codes of this site, and there is a certain person whose shadow will never again darken this digital forum.
This little service cost me 8 million yen - I hope it works.
Not to offend in any way "the wife" but I did pick up a zeiss distagon f2 35mm lens for my canon 40D and it is sweet. Not only a prime but manual focus, which works very well with live view.
Still looking for a nice prime for my M4/3 camera which I use almost exclusivley these days.
FWIW....
Sorry this is looking like a geary post, but...
The only zoom I have came as the kit lens with my D70. I just think of myself as a prime person. Now I have a D300 with a 35 mm Distagon and also some Nikon primes: 1.8 50, 1.8 85 and 105 micro. I guess I'm old school but it's hard for me to trust zooms and I don't feel the need to cover every millimeter from here to California. It's funny but Nikon just announced a new 24 mm f/1.4, but crimany the price is way out of my range.
As far as micro 4/3 is concerned there seems to be a lot of options. Panasonic 20 mm for instance. Also doesn't the M mount work ie Leica and Zeiss ZM and Voigtlander for that matter. Obviously price comes into play here.
On the gear front I've a right mixture. Can't say I'm fussed either way, although I do appreciate the wider primes for their small size. With an AF zoom my zoom action is largely a similar reflex to the focus action on a rangefinder - quick and intuitive.
On the pictures - Les 3 Brasseurs looks like a great place (apart from the dumb-ass TVs).Similar to one of my favourites in The Hague - a Belgian place with great food and a ridiculously long beer list.
I agree Mark. I had a 2 kit lenses (30-70? 50-200?) with my nikon d50 and used them because I was unable to afford/know that I wanted more. Eventually, I stumbled on a used 50/1.8 and slapped it on the camera and wow.A year later, I bought the new 35/1.8 that was just introduced (and upgraded to the d90). I haven't used anything but those outside of sports events - and even at sports events. Love the primes. I had no experience with slr's pre-digital except for a brief period in early 80s.
Primes are definitely getting some attention from Manufacturers, it's just that Olympus is somewhat allergic to them.
Pentax has a beautiful set of small primes for their digital system, running from 14mm through 100mm along with the usual 200 and 300mm tele's. Nikon just introduced a new 24/1.4 for their 35mm FF cameras, Sony released 2 new primes for their APS-C cameras last year, with FF primes expected this year, and Canon has recently updated its 24/1.4L and 24T/S lenses and added a 17mm T/S lens.
In 4/3rds Panasonic is the prime vendor, with their 20/1.7 for micro-4/3rds, 25/1.4 for 4/3rds (with Leica) and 45/2.8 IS for micro 4/3rds (also with Leica), a 14/2.8 pancake and 8mm f3.5 fisheye are expected this spring.