How big is your Prime

Graham

Graham

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,448
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,
I was just wandering how big (or small) does a prime need to be, I have various sizes, starting at 24mm, 28mm, 50mm, 135mm and a 200mm.
I would like to know if you have other sizes apart from the norm and what you use them for.
Thanks and heres a few photos of mine.

#1, 28mm
View attachment 11893

#2, 135mm
View attachment 11894

#3, 200mm
View attachment 11895
 
I have 3 primes for my Nikon SLRs and 1 for the Fuji (but am considering ditching that since it will be a third way to cover the 18mm length and not much faster than the f/2.8 zoom - the prime is f/2) The Nikon zooms are an 8mm fisheye for fisheye shots, a 50mm f/1.8 for low light and a 105mm macro for macro.
 
Good explanation nod. :D

A fisheye lens for fish eye shots and a macro lens for macro. :D :D

I used to have the 50 1.8 when I had Sony but now on Nikon I have the 35 and much prefer it. For me a prime lens is about making your camera lighter and smaller so the 'cheapo' primes suit me down to the ground. A massive prime isn't for me.
 
mine are fairly normal I'd say - all fast primes 35,85,135,200.. but now I have my 'foundation' set :D in the future i could get some 'fun' ones? :D

Lenses by dancook1982, on Flickr
 
WOW dan, you have an "impressive" set there :D
What do you use the bigger ones for ?
 
I have the Sigma 30mm and Canon 50 1.4 and 85 1.8. Got the 85 most recently and now the 50, which used to be my favourite, doesn't get much use on my 7D which I never thought would happen. Have been out with just the 30 and the 85 in the pocket which is lightweight combo. and a creative challenge. Would love something long and prime but can't afford/ justify the need at the moment.

J
 
I have loads of them spread across 3 systems. 24, 28, 30, 35, 50, 55, 58, 85, 105, 135, 200, 300 & 400mm. Went the mirror lens route for a 500mm. Bought the longer ones for air shows, wildlife & astrophotography.
 
Mike.P said:
My Pentax 15mm LTD, 21mm LTD, 35mm LTD macro, 40mm LTD, 70mm LTD and 50mm f1.7

Click to expand...
Thats a nice little set you got there.
 
Just two a Canon 60mm macro just for use on my 7D and my favourite a 24mm TS-E Mk11 for Architecture and Landscapes
 
minnnt said:
Good explanation nod. :D

A fisheye lens for fish eye shots and a macro lens for macro. :D :D

I used to have the 50 1.8 when I had Sony but now on Nikon I have the 35 and much prefer it. For me a prime lens is about making your camera lighter and smaller so the 'cheapo' primes suit me down to the ground. A massive prime isn't for me.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, I wasn't being sarky! I use the Nikon primes on an FF body so the AoV is similar to the 35mm on a Dx crop body. Being f/1.8 rather than the f/1.4 (or f/1.2) variant, it's not heavy! It was also dirt cheap since it's an old screw driven version - a lot sturdier than the later AF-S versions (in fact, I've been talked out of upgrading to the current f/1.4 version by 2 different sales advisors on sharpness grounds!)
 
I only have primes at present. 35, 85, 150 [macro] and 300 + 1.4x TC

I never feel that I'm missing something. Maybe a wide will be added at some point in future.
 
I was taught at Paddington College when I studied photography in the early 80s that a prime lens was any single focal length that wasn't a zoom lens. Back then zoom lenses were very expensive and quite often slower. Today, zoom lenses are faster and now offering apertures of f/1.8 such as the new Sigma 18-35mm so I'm not sure that is still as relevant today. It's an interesting question.
 
I would naively suggest that less moving bits mean better optical quality but that may not be true. Would a Canon L series zoom outperform a nearly-L prime such as the new Sigma 35 1.4 or Canon 85 1.8??

J
 
I use 3 primes, 35mm f2, 85mm f1.8 and a 135 f2 a lot. Mostly for those shooting conditions in low light where I cannot use a flash or use long exposures.
Amost always used wide open.
I also use zoom lenses when I have more light to work with (subject dependant).
 
To add to my previous post I consider my primes to be Fujinon 18mm, 23mm, 35mm and Zeiss Touit 50mm. My personal favourite is the 23mm which is outstanding. As a general rule of thumb I prefer a greater depth of field and shoot with a small aperture around f/16 but like to open it up to for portraits depending on what the background is.
 
Last edited:
I have primes at 4.5, 8, 10, 10.5, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, 45, 50, 65, 85, 90, 100, 105, 135, 150, 180, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 and 800mm.
;)
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
I have primes at 4.5, 8, 10, 10.5, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, 45, 50, 65, 85, 90, 100, 105, 135, 150, 180, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 and 800mm.
;)
Click to expand...

And a really bad case of curvature of the spine after carrying them all ;)
 
StewartR said:
I have primes at 4.5, 8, 10, 10.5, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, 45, 50, 65, 85, 90, 100, 105, 135, 150, 180, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 and 800mm.
;)
Click to expand...
Stop showing off Stewart....................:LOL:
 
I have 3 primes. 50mm f1.4 G-series Nikkor, 105mm f2.8 Micro Nikkor and 400mm f2.8 VR AFS Nikkor.

Also 3 f2.8 Nikkor zooms also cover the range from 14mm to 200mm.
 
Last edited:
2 old ones, a 28mm f2.8, and a 50mm f1.8 E.
 
Jimi-the-fish said:
I would naively suggest that less moving bits mean better optical quality but that may not be true. Would a Canon L series zoom outperform a nearly-L prime such as the new Sigma 35 1.4 or Canon 85 1.8??

J
Click to expand...

As a hobbyst who shoots with a couple of L zooms (70-200 F4 and the 100-400) as well as the Canon 85mm f1.8 it is very hard to pick the difference in reasonable light levels or if you can use long exposures.
Mostly my 85mm f1.8 is used in very low light where I cannot use long exposures.

Most of my work is for the web or prints up to ~ 10x8 (A4).
 
Last edited:
I never saw the point in primes when I was shooting 4-5 years ago, but I've got to admit as my skills have developed, as my work has changed and my style with it, I've started buying primes and will soon start selling off/mothballing my zooms.

I'm now in a position where I have the Sigma 35mm 1.4, Nikon 85mm 1.4G, Nikon 200 2.0 and Nikon 400mm 2.8. Once Sigma come out with the rumoured 135mm 1.8/2.0 or Nikon update theirs I will sell my 70-200mm. I haven't used my 24-70mm in about 8 months but can't bring myself to sell it as sometimes, work will dictate that I need a zoom. The only zoom I will probably never shift is the 14-24mm.
 
I have 2 primes are opposite ends of the scale. A Canon 100mm/2.8 for macro and a Canon 500mm/4 for wildlife. Love prime lenses but have to say the results from my Canon 70-200/2.8 are certainly comparable to similar length primes I've tried.
 
Sigma 50 & 85, will wait for the 135. Canikon high end zooms are generally only F2.8, big and heavy, slow when you consider primes can do F0.95+.
 
smaller the better, if I wanted big lenses i'd use zooms

think the new sigma 50mm is stupid!
 
I have a few primes that get used for different things. On my EOS M I use a 22mm as a walkabout lens (it is very small and light but gives good results) and a 40mm for digiscoping. On my Canon DSLR I use 50, 85 and 135 primes for portraits, 100 and 150 for macros and 300, 400 and 500 for wildlife. There is a lot of cross over though as I regularly use the macros for portraits and the 300 too. The 300 also gets used for the odd bit of sport (local football).
 
I do have one question tho, the 135mm prime I have (shown above and below) TBH I`m not really sure of the make, i`ve googled it but come up with nowt, anyone ever seen one of these before, It has a lens hood incorporated like on some other older primes ( like my Vivitar 200mm above)
Written on the lens ring is, SUPRA Multi- coated AD 1:2.8 f=135mm 52mm diam just to help, ????
View attachment 11952 Thanks all for your input.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top