New Glass Coming

[PhotoJim58]

There are 4 wide-angle L prime lenses coming in the next 12 months [CR2]

 

[Kwazy]

Noob question:
Is there any advantage to prime lenses over zoom other than the higher speed?

 

[Chris Summers]

Noob question:
Is there any advantage to prime lenses over zoom other than the higher speed?

While there have been great advancements in zoom lenses, primes are generally considered to capture higher quality images. Zoom lenses have to have more optical elements and lens groups as well as relying on mechanics to move the optics to produce different focal lengths. Primes as you mention often offer brighter apertures but also are much lighter in weight than most zoom lenses.

 

[MikeZ]

Chris hit the nail on the head, though I do question the need for a 24mm f1.2 lens. At 24mm you're grabbing so much real estate that it's hard to believe that you'll need that fast a lens.

Chris, as a pro have you really found an advantage to the extra stop when shooting wide?

 

[Chris Summers]

Chris hit the nail on the head, though I do question the need for a 24mm f1.2 lens. At 24mm you're grabbing so much real estate that it's hard to believe that you'll need that fast a lens.

Chris, as a pro have you really found an advantage to the extra stop when shooting wide?

When I was shooting for hire I was using Nikon F3 cameras and Nikon lenses for small format. I guess Nikon made zooms but I never owned one, always shot with prime lenses and usually fast ones. A lot of my 35mm work was on location and often out of doors shooting at first light or close to or after sunset so faster lenses made a difference from a brightness standpoint especially since I mostly shot Kodachrome 25 or later Velvia (ASA 50). But beyond speed fast apertures then did the same as now by limiting depth of field and making beautiful soft backgrounds when needed.

Since moving from DSLR cameras to Canon mirrorless I have found I don't need as fast a lens as before for good image quality as the sensors are so much better at controlling noise. And of course we have great noise reduction software. While I do own 2 fast primes (Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 and a Sigma ART 135mm f/1.8) I opted for the RF 70-200mm f/4 as it is lighter and as I age I appreciate that!

 

[Hali]

While there have been great advancements in zoom lenses, primes are generally considered to capture higher quality images. Zoom lenses have to have more optical elements and lens groups as well as relying on mechanics to move the optics to produce different focal lengths. Primes as you mention often offer brighter apertures but also are much lighter in weight than most zoom lenses.

And one can't forget the sweet bokeh that the prime telephoto lenses give that you just can't get from a zoom because of the smaller f/stops. On my trip to Costa Rica I had my 500 prime (an EF lens with a converter) which is an f/4 and my RF 100-500 and the difference in background quality between the two is night and day (f/4 vs f/7.1) but... the weight and size difference was also huge. The 500 weighs so much more and at my age I can't hand hold it for more than one or two shots and it requires a gimbal head and a heavy tripod. The 100-500 is light and nimble but it isn't nearly as crisp.
I just need to hire a Sherpa if I want to carry the 500 around to get that smooth background.

 

[PhotoJim58]

Noob question:
Is there any advantage to prime lenses over zoom other than the higher speed?

in a lot of respects they can be sharper, but not in all cases.