Zooms v Primes

ethan

ethan

ethan

Soldato
Joined
16 Sep 2005
Posts
7,853
Location
What used to be a UK
I'm thinking of ditching my Tamron17-24mm ( though I'm still undecided) and replacing it for the 16mm viltrox f1.8. I would potentially be using it in full frame mode and aspc mode on a A7riv. Anybody have any thoughts on this?
 
General consensus is that primes are faster and sharper across the entire frame. Zooms are generally more compromised, with the most modern ones typically remaining sharp at all focal lengths but often have softer corners/strong vignetting until they are stopped down. Zooms don't need swapping out when you change focal length, can be annoying and in some environments can let dirt in.

Without knowing what kind of photography you're into, such an ultrawide lens might be a bit too wide for a general walkabout lens. Go through your photo library and see if you can identify the focal length(s) where most of your photos are taken.

I've tried a number of lenses so far but definitely think primes can make you think a lot more about the composition. If you can move with your feet for the photo, you can make any focal length work :)
 
Last edited:
For the most part I'm a landscape shooter. I have the 24-70mm GM. I'm lacking a sharp astrophotography wide angle-which is why I thought about buying the 16mm Viltrox f1.8. It's also very good value. Looks like I've just answered my own question lol.
 
You have to compare reviews and tests for specific lenses really, in general primes are better yes but there are good and bad for both.

I would imagine that prime should be a fair bit better image quality overall than that Tamron zoom at its widest focal length.
 
Last edited:
I personally ditched zooms over a decade ago. I find the constraint that primes introduce makes me think more about the image. (the weight saving and image quality are nice bonuses!) Probably the only time I would miss a zoom thesedays is taking images of the kids sports activities.
 
ethan said:
For the most part I'm a landscape shooter. I have the 24-70mm GM. I'm lacking a sharp astrophotography wide angle-which is why I thought about buying the 16mm Viltrox f1.8. It's also very good value. Looks like I've just answered my own question lol.
Click to expand...

I often answer my own questions when I do my favourite thing of going around in circles! Definitely looks like a good two lens setup for those focal lengths you will have covered.
 
To be perfectly honest, these days a decent zoom is just as good as a prime, unless you're being totally anal and zooming in on the corners to find flaws.

I tend to just leave my Tamron 20mm f2.8 on my A7C, for videography and landscapes, don't feel I ever need a zoom.
 
ethan said:
In addition went for a Loxia 2.8/21mm which I'm loving at the moment. I even favour this over the Voigt lander 50mm f1.2
Click to expand...

Tried out a Loxia 21 about a year or so ago but decided against it at the time. Regretting that now as it was about 150 cheaper than the nearest condition one I can find now!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom