11-28-2010, 06:00 AM
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
so primes are only important for very low light or very shallow dof applications.[/quote]
Or plain good image quality... almost all zooms have so much CA in the corners it's off-putting to anyone who has used good primes. The only prime-like zoom is the 70-200 2.8 IS II. Yes, even the Nikon 14-24 has more CA than what good primes in that focal length have. And no... CA can't be "fixed" without losing detail, regardless of what people might like to think. Same applies to geometric distortion that zooms always have a lot of.
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
In the film days you needed the speed of primes simply for getting shake free results because you wouldnt shoot film faster than ISO 100 (onslide ) or iso 200 on negative for optimal results.[/quote]
Agree
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
In addition the quality of zooms has improved a lot over the years, which means the 15-85 is practically at its optimum wide open (save for vignetting, which can be corrected in post).
[/quote]
I agree that zooms have improved, etc. but I can't see how that makes being stuck at f/3.5-5.6, on a zoom out of all things, acceptable. I mean, I rather use a P&S if I can't take a fast aperture lens on my DSLR because that's the kind of shots you can do with a 15-85 3.5-5.6 IS that a fast prime can't do.
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
Your old primes normally needed to be stopped down two stops to deliver that performance.
[/quote]
Which is not bad because if you stop a f/1.4 lens down by two stops it'll become a f/2.8... which is still better than a f/3.5-5.6 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />
GTW
so primes are only important for very low light or very shallow dof applications.[/quote]
Or plain good image quality... almost all zooms have so much CA in the corners it's off-putting to anyone who has used good primes. The only prime-like zoom is the 70-200 2.8 IS II. Yes, even the Nikon 14-24 has more CA than what good primes in that focal length have. And no... CA can't be "fixed" without losing detail, regardless of what people might like to think. Same applies to geometric distortion that zooms always have a lot of.
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
In the film days you needed the speed of primes simply for getting shake free results because you wouldnt shoot film faster than ISO 100 (onslide ) or iso 200 on negative for optimal results.[/quote]
Agree
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
In addition the quality of zooms has improved a lot over the years, which means the 15-85 is practically at its optimum wide open (save for vignetting, which can be corrected in post).
[/quote]
I agree that zooms have improved, etc. but I can't see how that makes being stuck at f/3.5-5.6, on a zoom out of all things, acceptable. I mean, I rather use a P&S if I can't take a fast aperture lens on my DSLR because that's the kind of shots you can do with a 15-85 3.5-5.6 IS that a fast prime can't do.
[quote name='jenbenn' timestamp='1290858090' post='4491']
Your old primes normally needed to be stopped down two stops to deliver that performance.
[/quote]
Which is not bad because if you stop a f/1.4 lens down by two stops it'll become a f/2.8... which is still better than a f/3.5-5.6 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />
GTW