Roger,
Most of us are not professional photographers. Clearly, most of my pictures
are taken with primes, but I find enormous value in zooms. I'd rather have
a camera with me with the 35-70/3.5-4.5 zoom on it, to capture that once in
a lifetime shot, then either not have the camera or have the wrong lens
mounted.
For my daughter's sports, for example, anything other than a zoom would be
pretty much useless. I'm trying to capture my daughter's lives, not sell the
print, and if there are compromises involved, so be it.
You should also consider that not everyone can afford a complete set of
primes. I am fortunate to own a significant collection, but I still
recognize the value of a dollar. I went twenty years with a Quantary
28/2.8, a Zuiko 50/1.8 and a Vivitar 70-150 and never once felt like I
should just chuck it all and stop taking pictures.
I would also challenge that the lowliest zoom still produces better, more
enlargeable, images than even the best of the digital cameras. E-10 and D1
included.
Under your argument, we should all just buy disposable cameras and be done
with it, if we don't always use primes.
Tom
> In a message dated 8/7/01 9:29:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
berndm@xxxxxxxxx
> writes:
>
>
> > I've been using my 3.5-4.5 35-70 for quite a long time now with rather
> > satisfying results, but recent comparisons with my primes have shown me
> >
>
> Obviously if you care about the quality of your images, primes are the way
to
> go and forget how to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Also, you may
find
> that a check of your eyesight, focusing zooms at highest resolution,
stopping
> down to f11, etc., may all give more satisfactory results. Or, leave all
> images on contact sheets and present your contact sheets in a very "chic"
> manner.
>
> Roger
>
> Roger Skully
> robinsnestphotography.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|