Thinking of going all primes - thoughts?

[996GT2]

i actually would like to get that 28-300L from canon... because then I wouldn't have to change lenses so often! The difference of sharpness is almost negligible to wedding/headshot clients...

But you'd be carrying around an unwieldy 4 lb lens all the time!

Plus, there are always times when you need f/2.8 or faster...

 

[ProfJohn]

I think the idea that using just a prime will make you a better photographer because you have to work at it more is bogus.

A good photographer with an 18-200 will take better shots than a hack with a bag full of primes.

Also, let's keep in mind that someone people have a skill at taking good photos and others don't. I think the OP would better off focusing on base skills than buying some fancy primes and hoping to get better results.

Unless you are looking for something very specific I don't think a prime is going to make much of a difference. Some of the best photos I have shot were taken with the worst lens I ever owned.

 

[FriedToast]

Agree with Kriori that you need to upgrade the photographer, not the equipment. Once you know more, then you'll have a better handle on what equipment you need/want. I know as my head has filled with information, the way I shoot, what I shoot and the equipment that I choose has changed.

Recently (a trip to China and several trips to Tokyo), my kit consisted of D700 + 24mm f1.4 + 50mm f1.4 + 135mm DC f2 with an S90 in my pocket. I probably get considerably more dust on my sensor, but I love my primes. That being said, I did just pick up the 24-70mm f2.8 the day before yesterday. Figured I might use it more as my travel lens. It's not always easy to carry around a load of lenses when abroad.

Since you're a Nikon user, you might want to check out bythom.com. Some good informative articles there. And I think Thom generally pushes the "it's not the equipment" line to his audience.

Also, regarding your flash, check out Strobist.com if you haven't already.

Oh, regarding your 700 shots... you haven't even warmed that camera up yet. I agree that I could burn that off in two days. Having said that, shooting more doesn't mean better shots- generally a lot more throw-aways. However, when you're trying to beat down the learning curve, I think shooting a lot (while paying attention to the settings you're using/changing) is a positive thing. Later on down the road, once you're comfortable with where you're at, you can cut down the frequency again (say to a film-shooter's level).

 

[ProfJohn]

I've decided to just buy both lenses, test them, and sell them if the manual focus becomes too unwieldy. I used a coupon so hopefully I can try them without taking too much of a hit if I unload them.

In case anyone's wondering about these lenses, there's discussions on most of the photography forums, but several good threads with lots of pictures of the Canon version are:

14mm f/2.8
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=909272

85mm f/1.4
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=781777

Most seem to be shot on full-frame sensors but there's some crop sensor ones too.

What type of photos are you trying to copy?

I looked at both threads and I saw some nice photos, but nothing amazing or that couldn't be produced with the 35 prime you have now. It looks like he is just taking lots of photos with a very narrow depth of field to make them look dramatic.

 

[JohnnyRebel]

I'm a relative newbie to photography.

Which is why you do not need to be buying more lenses right now. You can take great pics with what you have. Take some time to learn photography and to develop as an artist.

If you can't take sat pics with what you have, you still won't after you spend money for new lenses.

JR

 

[CptObvious]

What type of photos are you trying to copy?

I looked at both threads and I saw some nice photos, but nothing amazing or that couldn't be produced with the 35 prime you have now. It looks like he is just taking lots of photos with a very narrow depth of field to make them look dramatic.

One is, I'd like to take street portraits with very shallow depth of field. My 35mm can do this, but only if I'm fairly close to the subject. My 55-200 seems to be better for portraits but I don't think the aperture goes wide enough to blur the background as much as I'd like.

Random example photo of the Samyang 85mm (rebranded Rokinon, same lens) I'm looking at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bluemonkey08/5233782437/in/pool-1010496@N20/

 

[finbarqs]

i'm planning on getting the fuji x100 for street photography! Selling my Leica D-Lux 4!