[Ratmagiclady]

It's not that there *aren't* good ways to learn with a zoom: it's very possible to use one to learn the very opposite of the usual pitfall: concentrating on framing to the exclusion of the relationship of objects in space. (It's also possible to learn to concentrate only on framing by sticking to a prime lens and 'zooming with your feet,' too, if all you're paying attention to is framing and walking. )


The biggest difference *I* find is simply that the zoom tends to *simulate* actual movement, but if you bring the right attitude for it, it can actually free a student to have an attitude of walking around and choosing a perspective, *then* framing what you get.

There's other things against learning with zooms, (like less consistency of performance: people don't need to be coping with, 'This puppy's soft wide open at 70mm,' when they're trying to get feedback on good camera handling and other basics. )

Every tool has something to teach, though. When a student comes along with this or that piece of gear, it's best to play to the strengths.


(Anyway, none of that's to say that there aren't a lot of reasons I prefer to teach people with a single prime lens: one of the biggest is that zoom lenses also encourage things like keeping the left eye shut and boresighting on whatever the lens shows when you should be aware of all that's around you: that's a bad habit that's hard to shake later: it's generally easier to learn to take advantage of a zoom if your feet don't plant than it is to go the other way. Still, in a digital age when a fastish normal isn't the cheapest thing out there, circumstances can dictate using other means. It's kind of like the difference between writing on a word processor as opposed to a typewriter or by hand: the former can make you sloppy, or it can make you really tie everything together. )

---

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 12-08-2008 at 10:25 AM. Reason: A bit more.

[Class A]

This would be why mediocre zoom lenses are now shipped with cameras rather than the very good primes that used to be shipped.

No. Its because they deliver sufficient quality for many consumer applications and users perceive zooms to be more useful. Do you really expect a manufacturer to bundle a camera with a fixed focal when your competition offers a zoom in a cheaper package?

my own serious opinion is that primes are used by the more advanced photographers who have learned composition and know how to previsualize, zooms tend to be used by photographers who have yet to learn photographic refinement and are visually lazy.

Even if it were true, this statement regarding frequency wouldn't say anything about which tool is more appropriate. Professionals need to be concerned about IQ and/or often work in a context where the choice of focal length is clear and the framing can be arranged for by manipulating the scene.

What if there were a zoom with IQ equivalent to all your primes and it had click stops for all the focal lengths of your primes? Would you still keep changing your primes or would you click away with the zoom and get all the in-between focal lengths as well?

If I were you, I'd listen to what someone who has a formal education as a painter has to say. Although Marc Sabatella is a prime man ( ) he knows better than to spread dogmas about fixed focals.

[Wombat]

If I were you, I'd listen to what someone who has a formal education as a painter has to say. Although Marc Sabatella is a prime man ( ) he knows better than to spread dogmas about fixed focals.

Cool it, Class A, it's only a discussion and everyone's entitled to their opinion. Wheatfield doesn't need me to defend him, but as a principle, this isn't a rugby match, so please play the issue and not the man. I think Wheatfield, Marc, yourself and others have all presented useful ideas and sound advice for the poster. He can now make up his own mind. It doesn't help him to be told that one set of ideas is dogma. That's dogmatic in itself, isn't it?

[Class A]

Wheatfield doesn't need me to defend him, but as a principle, this isn't a rugby match, so please play the issue and not the man.

I didn't mean to play the man, sorry.
I see what you mean and understand that my comment could be read that way, but when I referred to "spreading dogmas" I honestly didn't think of Wheatfield.

I fully concur with your statement that everyone is entitled to their opinion and has the right to voice it without being attacked.

I hesitated to make that posting because I didn't want to dilute the thread with counteracting someone's point of view just because I disagree. But Wheatfield made a cynical comment about my posting which I wanted to comment on. And, at least to me personally, Wheatfield's postings often come across as pretty authoritative (perhaps its just the avatar ) and as someone who calls other's well-founded contributions as having devolved "from the sublime to the absurd" I think Wheatfield shouldn't feel offended by what I've written.

[Wheatfield]

No. Its because they deliver sufficient quality for many consumer applications and users perceive zooms to be more useful. Do you really expect a manufacturer to bundle a camera with a fixed focal when your competition offers a zoom in a cheaper package?

Don't sidestep questions.

Even if it were true, this statement regarding frequency wouldn't say anything about which tool is more appropriate. Professionals need to be concerned about IQ and/or often work in a context where the choice of focal length is clear and the framing can be arranged for by manipulating the scene.

Professionals need to be concerned about selling pictures. IQ (as is discussed here) is on the list of things to worry about, but it is several steps down from the top of the list.

What if there were a zoom with IQ equivalent to all your primes and it had click stops for all the focal lengths of your primes? Would you still keep changing your primes or would you click away with the zoom and get all the in-between focal lengths as well?

What if pigs could fly?

If I were you, I'd listen to what someone who has a formal education as a painter has to say. Although Marc Sabatella is a prime man ( ) he knows better than to spread dogmas about fixed focals.

<deleted, stupid post.
sorry>

[Arpe]

1) I've come to realize that too often, I'll be lazy and not move my feet, instead using the zoom feature to get 'reach out' to get an image. ...How do you train yourself to pick a focal length and then zoom with your feet?

I believe this is the fault of the user, not the equipment, as you say, it's laziness. I've been brought up on zooms, only recently purchased prime. I like my photos and do not believe being restricted to one focal length would have helped one bit. Some shots would have been impossible, and I'm glad I had a zoom to get them. I agree entirely with Class A re the "decoupling" thing.

2) How does one learn how to 'see the image'?

Practice.

[Ole]

In an effort to curb my LBA, I've been doing a lot of thinking more about the fundamentals of photography these days.

...

2) How does one learn how to 'see the image'? Should I buy primes and just live with them? Note that I may end up doing event photography some time in the future.



The ultimate goal of all this is for me to become a better photographer. I've come to realize that I can have all the lenses in the world but if I, the photographer, do not improve, then my image itself won't improve.

Practice, practice, practice, and read some inspiring books. I just bought 'Creative Nature Outdoor Photography' by Brenda Tharp. That book discusses the exact topic you rase in 2) above. I can warmly recommend it. It is very reasonably priced, less than $20 at amazon.com.

This weekend I decided to forego zooms and brought a 31mm, 77mm and 135mm with me to the botanical garden. What a nightmare - changing lenses constantly (and being afraid of dropping them!)! Next time will I bring a zoom? No, I will mount the three lenses on my three bodies and go from there! Granted, one of the cameras is the old *istD without shake reduction but so what? I'll just mount the wide angle on that fella'!

[Class A]

IQ (as is discussed here) is on the list of things to worry about, but it is several steps down from the top of the list.

So what is above IQ on the list?

What if pigs could fly?

That's not very helpful. You are side-stepping a crucial question I asked. Please don't tell me not to side-step a question (which I didn't) and then dodge the crucial one yourself (without saying "please").

[KungPOW]

In an effort to curb my LBA, I've been doing a lot of thinking more about the fundamentals of photography these days.

I'm very split between primes and zooms and am not sure whether to keep my DA*16-50 or abandon it for primes... but that's a different debate. This battle is more about 'seeing the image'... and using what I have to get it. But it might well determine whether I go primes or zooms. Anyways...


To keep this brief, my question is two-fold:

1) I've come to realize that too often, I'll be lazy and not move my feet, instead using the zoom feature to get 'reach out' to get an image. I've come to realize that this makes my images look 'lazy' and 'uninspired' personally. So what I've been trying to do lately is pick a focal length, then 'zooming with my feet' (effectively making the zoom lens a selection of prime lenses). How do you train yourself to pick a focal length and then zoom with your feet?

Or is this new for us zoom users? hehe

2) How does one learn how to 'see the image'? Should I buy primes and just live with them? Note that I may end up doing event photography some time in the future.



The ultimate goal of all this is for me to become a better photographer. I've come to realize that I can have all the lenses in the world but if I, the photographer, do not improve, then my image itself won't improve.

Hi.

Here's my two bits on the topic.

1. Yup using a zoom to "reach" the subject is lazy. I think it is only justified when you cannot get to the subject. And in my opinion, that is not the real reason for a zoom lens. I consider zoom lens to be a tool that I can use to change the perspective of the image, without changing lenses. But to do this you need to move the camera to a new location. So, you need to learn to move the camera, and not just twist the zoom.

2. You learn to see the image through practice. Then you review your images. Then you practice some more. Wheatfield's comment to use a prime for an extended periode of time is a great exercise. And it works. It does two things;

One it gets you willing to move the camera to get the composition you want.

Two it helps you pre-visualise the resulting composition. You will start to get better at seeing the composition before you move.

Then, go and do the same exercise with the zoom. But this time change the focal length, as well as changing your location. Now notice the ease that you can change to perspective in the photo.

Personally, I use public art for this type of exercise. As I write this, I realise I should do this exercise more often.

To answer your final question, "Should I buy primes and just live with them?", I would say no. Both zooms and primes have a place in a kit.

If you have the 16-50 already, keep it. If you want to buy a lens, go get a normalish prime. But you need to go out and practice.

Eric.

[dugrant153]

Wow, what a great amount of feedback. All this is helping the gears turn in my head smoother haha.

Anyways, I've been using my an M 28mm and an A 50mm lens for the last week or so. And I think using a prime definitely does help in forcing me to zoom with my feet and envision my composition better. I am starting to like these primes quite a bit actually... I am probably not going to sell my DA* 16-50 as I realize it's quality rivals some of my prime lenses (being that it's a good copy. Lucky me).

I recently bought a couple of photography books, and a friend gave me a crapload of recent photography magazines (even found an article with Benjamin K in it!!) which I will be using to fine tune my composition and my picture taking.

I think right now I have to practice (As you have all said), and just keep moving my feet and learning to position before I take a picture. This week will probably be a primes practice week.

The main thing about this whole thread is just for me to get my head in gear from mindlessly twisting the zoom ring to making pictures that really stand out: envisioning my composition, taking pictures from different angles, relying less on my equipment to composie the image and instead using my brain. Hopefully with more practice I'll become a lot better!

[Canada_Rockies]

<snip>
The main thing about this whole thread is just for me to get my head in gear from mindlessly twisting the zoom ring to making pictures that really stand out: envisioning my composition, taking pictures from different angles, relying less on my equipment to composie the image and instead using my brain. Hopefully with more practice I'll become a lot better!

There are a lot of good points of view in this thread. I personally use my DA* 16-50 zooming with both the lens and my feet. 16mm with the subject dominating the image is a completely different view than the same subject at the same size at 50mm, to use the two extremes of the range.

I am sure that living with 55 or 135 as focal lengths for many years helped me to realize that the moving of the point of view forward and back, left and right, and up and down can make a completely different image from the same scene.

[brucestrange]

Here's why I usually like primes over zooms:

I hate how giant zooms are. I like taking candid shots of people, and a big zoom lens is a bit intrusive and I think affects how people act. Plus, they're just big. That's another reason why I like Pentax--their primes are much smaller than the competition's.

I really like good bokeh, and primes usually pimp-slap zooms back into the lens bag in this category.

I also like fast lenses. Zooms don't get faster than 2.8, and of course that f-stop makes them that much more gigantic.

For me, I'd rather just pick a focal length and go with it. My smaller lens let's me keep a lower profile, shoot in lower light, and generally feel like a bada$$. But I have a friend and she likes zooms when she shoots a family because she feels she can get more of the shots she wants. Everyone has their reasons for putting a lens on their camera. I think the biggest mistake is putting a lens on a camera because it happened to come with it (that's not a knock on a kit lens, it's a knock on not knowing why it is your kit lens).

[Wombat]

The main thing about this whole thread is just for me to get my head in gear from mindlessly twisting the zoom ring to making pictures that really stand out: envisioning my composition, taking pictures from different angles, relying less on my equipment to composie the image and instead using my brain. Hopefully with more practice I'll become a lot better!

With a positive attitude like that I'm sure you'll begin to feel happier with your work very quickly. As others have said, the combination of practice and reading is pretty hard to beat. And for sheer gutsy determination it's hard to go past old Ansel Adams. I've been reading him lately and marvelling at how he lugged that monster of a camera and heavy wooden tripod up and down mountains in the middle of winter just to take one shot! And at the other end of the scale I get inspired by Cartier Bresson, who did most of his work with not much more than a Leica and his 50mm and 90mm.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the results of your efforts. Excellent thread, mate.

[Wombat]

I didn't mean to play the man, sorry.
I see what you mean and understand that my comment could be read that way, but when I referred to "spreading dogmas" I honestly didn't think of Wheatfield.

I fully concur with your statement that everyone is entitled to their opinion and has the right to voice it without being attacked.

Thanks, and well said.

And Wheatfield, you just blew my effort at reconciliation out of the water! Why don't you two call a truce, agree to disagree and shake hands on it? This forum's too precious for harsh words.

[Wheatfield]

So what is above IQ on the list?

Getting the customer in the door, selling the service. In my end of the business (portrait studio), lighting is more important than IQ, as is the PR that goes along with being one of the higher end studios in my market area. Getting a salable picture is more important than the IQ, as long as the IQ is up to a reasonable standard.
We don't sell out of focus pictures, but we aren't hitting the sharpen button at all, either. The three main photographers are using various Nikons, ranging from D70s up to D300s, and we have one guy with a D3. They are all using zoom lenses, one is a Sigma consumer zoom, a couple of Nikon consumer zooms, and a couple of their higher end zooms.
On the rare occasions I shoot something for them, they always comment on how much crisper the images that I produce are, generally I am shooting with the A*85/1.4 or the A50/1.4, sometimes with the Nokton 58/1.4, or the 70mm or 77mm lens.
It kinda depends on my mood and what kit I have along with me. Normally I'm not using AF lenses.

That's not very helpful. You are side-stepping a crucial question I asked. Please don't tell me not to side-step a question (which I didn't) and then dodge the crucial one yourself (without saying "please").

I'd still stick with primes, they fit the way I work better than zooms, or what you've described, which is one small step away from a zoom.

Note, my comments regarding zooms vs. primes are aimed at the person who is just starting out as a student of visualization. The beginner or student is better off with as simple a kit as possible, and to learn how to see light, how it interacts with 3 dimensional objects, and how the world gets translated to a 2 dimensional objects rather than going after every money shot that is out there.
The money shots can come later, and will be better if the person has a good handle on the basics of composition.
You can learn this stuff on a zoom, but I do think it will be learned faster with a prime that approaches the format's normal focal length (presuming you believe that there is such a thing).