The never-ending debate between the zoom and prime lens users only seems to get more heated with every argument for and against. As a user and enjoyer of both, I figured it would be only natural for me to weigh all the pros and cons of each in a somewhat unbiased article.
The ideal lens should cover every single focal length, have an aperture of f/1.2, and fit in your pocket, all while weighing less than a can of Coke. We will leave the price question for now, just because I have a great way of buying equipment for cheaper I will talk about later. There is no such thing as a perfect lens for every occasion. The flexibility of zooms is hard to beat with primes; however, the image quality, speed, and sharpness of primes are simply not possible with most zoom lenses. Weight-wise, zooms tend to be heavier than primes; however, there are many exceptions to this. My personal experience with lenses is primarily with Canon EF lenses, as well as Schneider Kreuznach lenses. I am certain that other manufacturers have equivalents to what I own for Canon and Phase One.
What Lenses Have I Owned?
I have gone through a few lenses in my career—everything from niche lenses for film cameras to classics such as the original 24-70mm f/2.8 for Canon. My first lens ever was a 28-70mm kit lens made for Canon cameras in the late ’90s and early 2000s. While a terrible lens, it was my first, so it deserves a mention. In terms of lenses that I used for serious work, those would be the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8, Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 II, Canon EF 70-200mmf/2.8 IS, and Canon 50mm f/1.4. The lens I used the most was by far the 24-70mm f/2.8—it is actually the only Canon lens that I have, as I sold the rest of my Canon kit. When it comes to Phase One, I really have used one lens only, the Schneider Kreuznach 80mm f/2.8. I have also used the 35mm f/2.8 lens for Phase One. In terms of lenses that I would potentially be interested in for the medium format system, it would be the 55mm and the 150mm. As for the Canon system, I would potentially want to get the 50mm f/1.8 because it is cheap and can be used for BTS footage. Other than that, I am happy with the equipment I have, and buying new equipment—the way I like to buy it—is a hassle.
Zooms Versus Primes: Pros and Cons
Zoom lenses are flexible when it comes to getting several compositions from the same point. They are preferred by photographers who travel, shoot events or weddings, or have to work in dynamic environments. The downsides are that they are typically heavier, slower in their aperture, and not as sharp. The last point is more relevant with older zoom lenses such as the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS. The original version of this lens was notoriously unsharp in the corners. It was also a very heavy lens that I did not enjoy bringing with me on long trips. It did allow me to capture images that would not be possible with any other lens, as it gave me a lot of reach. Back in my event days, I would primarily use this lens, as I was too shy to take a more hands-on, in-your-face approach.
Which One Did I Prefer—Was It Primes at the End of the Day?
I generally preferred zoom lenses over primes when I shot events, as they gave me more flexibility in terms of composition, while the f/2.8 aperture was more than adequate for getting enough light in the lens. The same can be said about the 24-70mm f/2.8 and the 16-35mm f/2.8. These lenses were the backbone of my event photography, and I used them extensively to capture and tell stories about the events I was assigned to cover. Transitioning from event photography to fashion, I almost completely stopped using the wide angle and the telephoto lens, instead switching to the 24-70mm f/2.8. In itself, this lens was used predominantly around the 50mm setting, meaning that I was basically using it as a prime lens. To be honest, studio photography can be easily done with a single prime lens that suits your style the best. Since my style is very clean and clear, the 50mm is the perfect focal length. Some time ago, my friend gave me a 50mm f/1.4 to try and didn’t ask for it back for quite some time. I used that lens only if I was shooting full frame. The camera was lighter, although I did not make a lot of use of the f/1.4 aperture—neither in studio nor on location. You see, in studio I have 2,400 W of flash power and just about any modifier you could want available to me, so power is not a problem, while on location, I choose to shoot around f/4 maximum, often going down to f/7.1 or even f/8. If you look at my work, you will rarely see me use bokeh, as I find it too distracting and tend to prefer to use clean walls or textured elements in my background. All in all, I can say that now I would be using a prime lens on my full frame camera, as I rarely shoot at a focal length other than something between 40–60mm. It fits my style the best, and I connect with it the most. Why primes? Well, because they’re a lot lighter. I think that if I am shooting on a full frame camera, I should go with a prime lens to have a lightweight setup. The heavy lifting can be done with the medium format system that I also love and use.
A Word on Medium Format Lenses
The medium format system I have is from Phase One. They offer both prime and zoom lenses for Phase One. Mind you, both of these lenses weigh a ton and a half. I prefer to have a semi-lightweight lens on the Phase One, so I went for the classic choice: the 80mm f/2.8. The zoom lenses for Phase One are only useful if you are doing landscape or car photography. Essentially, if tripods are an option, you might as well go with a zoom lens. Otherwise, I don’t recommend it, as the zoom lenses for medium format systems are notoriously heavy. A really good system that recently came out is the one from Hasselblad—their lenses and cameras are super lightweight and super sharp. I cannot recommend the new Hasselblad stuff enough for everyone who wants to explore medium format but is not going to be using it in a work setting, as Hasselblad cannot be tethered into Capture One, rendering it somewhat ineffective when it comes to working with digi techs and the lot. What you have to know about the medium format system is that both zoom and prime lenses are heavy, as medium format itself is a bulky and heavy system.
How Does One Afford These Lenses?
You’d be surprised to know, I rarely—if ever—buy new equipment. Sometimes I might do it just because my accountant is saying I need to spend some cash, and I might buy a lot of storage, gaffer’s tape, and other expendables. Other times, I have to be smart with my spending, meaning I buy everything used—from cameras to light stands to paper backgrounds even. If the deal is good, I will hunt for that deal. Hunting for deals on websites like eBay can take months. For example, I am chasing a guy who is selling a flash for a ridiculous price. The best way to save big money and still get the equipment you need is to buy it from MPB. MPB is a website that purchases used equipment, checks it, photographs it, and sells it to you. Sometimes, the deal on MPB is much better than the deal you might find on eBay, as their pricing is quite competitive. Considering you are getting a piece of equipment for much cheaper than new—without the risk of buying from a stranger on the internet, the wait, or the hassle—paying even a slightly higher price is only fair. What’s even better, replacing your equipment has never been easier. Say one day I get tired of my EF 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. I can simply sell the lens and buy another from MPB in a few clicks. It’s a super convenient service with great customer support and quick turnaround times. It’s something I personally endorse and can’t recommend enough to photographers and creatives. They have a large stock, meaning that getting the piece of equipment you need has never been easier.
Closing Thoughts
Be it primes, be it zooms, lenses are tools after all, and there isn’t a perfect one-fits-all answer to this debate. It’s a personal preference of every artist. This is why I recommend trying out different lenses, renting them, and then saving some money when buying it with MPB. As a champion of used equipment, I know I will be buying my next lens from them.
I’m not entirely sure what debate there is to solve, not that the conclusion solves anything anyway just giving the inevitable ‘there is no one answer’. It’s impossible for an individual to come up with a one size fits all answer when people all have different preferences/needs anyway.
I still have my first Minolta A-mount FF lens from 1993, that I bought for my Minolta 7000i. It was a 35-70mm f/3.5-5.8, I think. I use it on my a7III. I kept it around and use it for sentimental reasons. My Minolta 7000i and the rest of its lenses were lost in a Philippines typhoon, in 2006.
I also have a handful of A-mount APS-C lenses. They get used mostly with my old mirrorless cropped Sony. I replaced my 7000i with a pre-Sony a7D with a full 6.4 MP. I still have and use it and the few lenses i purchased for it. The a7D was a disappointment compared to film.
History lesson over.
Back in 1993 when I purchased my first camera with its f/1.8 nifty fifty kit lens and then bought a zoom, the superiority of prime lenses has declined and the quality of zooms is light years ahead of what it once was.
Companies are grinding far superior glass to what they once were. Sony's new f/2.0 50-150mm zoom, for example. It doesn't have the DOF of an f/1.2 prime, but it's getting closer. You could practically shoot a whole wedding with that 50-150mm. I wouldn't, but a person could.
Between my primes, zooms and adapters, I have every mm from 12 to 1200 covered. I mostly use my zooms, but my primes have a purpose, too.
I'm going to mention, but not expound on the quality and capabilities of what new sensors are doing to help close the gap in picture quality between lenses.