Pros don't use primes

[jamiebonline]

So... a title a little (or a lot) more ridiculous as my previous thread 'Pros don't use crop bodies'.

When I started in photography, like most people, I had a kit lens. I soon found out that I could have a much sharper lens with a wider aperture, for not much money. For me it was the nifty fifty. Also quite common. Because the 50mm 1.8 from Nikon, which is no doubt an excellent piece of glass, was only about 250 euro, it seemed like a no-brainer to get it as I was interested in taking portraits using a D7000. I knew the bokeh would also be good.

I have been investigating and trying lenses ever since and I am fascinated by the massive cost difference between a 70-200 2.8, which is pretty standard for portrait photographers and the 85mm 1.8. You can literally get five of them for the cost of the current 70-200 from Nikon. Five of them? And what's more the bokeh is better at the 85mm focal length and so is low light performance. But I felt like I will never look like a pro unless I have the standard 70-200 or something similar. So I spent a long time thinking I needed one. Now I am starting to think, I don't need it even as I am getting paid work now.

Zoom lenses are obviously very convenient to have especially at an event but in many cases in portrait work, you can simply move closer or farther from the subject. It won't give you the same result of course in terms of angle of view but five times difference in price... A great example is the typical wedding lens, the 24-70. The current Nikon one is more than 1,500, I believe. That is enough money to buy four primes covering the range. You could easily cut that to 3 and save money. Get a 17 (if there is one), 35 and 50 for example. Plus... better bokeh and better low light performance too. What is so terrible about them? That you have to move? That you need to change them?

SO... how many of you pros prefer primes? Do you feel at a shoot, you should have something big to show off to clients? Do nifty fifties not look 'pro' enough? Do you feel that changing primes during a shoot is a pain? Maybe you have two bodies with two primes of different focal lengths around your neck. Maybe you think 1.4 is more suitable than 1.8. That basically the less you spend, the less good the gear is and therefore the less 'professional' the results. I know a lot of starter photographers feel intimidated by the big lenses esp the 70-200 and don't have the money to get one. Maybe the pros and the industry don't want them to be more reasonably priced cause then every second person might have one. It wouldn't make you a great photographer but it might undermine the distinction in consumer terms too between the entry-level beginner stuff and the pro stuff.

Thanks for your contributions

 

[shreds]

None of that.

You just use the most appropriate lens for the job and if that means getting the shot as opposed to not, then you don't mess around swapping lenses. That why (apart from redundancy) that most pros will have two or maybe three cameras with different lenses pre set up.

I learnt that lesson the hard way a long, long time ago, even though I had two cameras with me. I quickly changed a lens, as I left the chapel, and once outside must have fired off eight shots before I realised the lens bayonet had not connected properly, yet all the electrical connections were managing to bridge the gap. Result: eight unusable shots. Luckily I got away with that one, but now I get an assistant to change the lens whilst I use the other camera.

Its not the size that matters. (!)

In a church I often find that a 50mm f1.4 is the most appropriate due to low light levels and wanting to keep the ISO to the minimum.

The prices of the bigger lenses reflect the challenges of creating a zoom that does not distort or create unwanted effects such as aberration etc. Primes are less technically complex and so the prices are usually less too. Unless you buy into the Zeiss quality, which for weddings is not usually justified by the fees.

 

[WattieTattie]

I think for the most part "Pro's" use zooms for the exact same reason the vast majority of us do.
Versatility.
But even then that can go a little south.
I was doing some shots at a pre commonwealth games gig and one of the "Pro's" didn't have anything wide enough to get a particular group shot and there is no prime wide enough for that shot either.
Technology has also moved on that much that you no longer need £5k cameras and an array of lenses provided and this is a very important point, "You have time to edit".
You can correct a multitude of sins nowadays that you could not 10 years ago.

I did a little shoot of an event last week and was shooting mostly with my Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 and my Nikon 85mm f1.8 @ f2.8 to f3.5 and @ iso 6400 and got images I would never have got 5 to 10 years ago.

There is also the build quality and robustness issue as well.

 

[Blank_Canvas]

But I felt like I will never look like a pro unless I have the standard 70-200 or something similar.

So... a title a little (or a lot) more ridiculous as my previous thread 'Pros don't use crop bodies'.

Do nifty fifties not look 'pro' enough? Do you feel that changing primes during a shoot is a pain?

I think you're obsessing to much about 'looking the part' - there are no rules. Lens choice ultimately comes down to personal preference and what is right at the time. Concentrate on the image and getting it right rather than the equipment or trying to emulate looking like a stereotypical pro.

 

[Marc]

Do you feel at a shoot, you should have something big to show off to clients?

Doesn't matter what you use, someone will always come up to you and tell you that their compact camera is better because it has more megapixels!

 

[TheBigYin]

Concentrate on the image and getting it right rather than the equipment

This. The image matters, all else is superfluous.

 

[minnnt]

I bought lots of stuff trying to make me 'look the part' and thought that a big huge lens would make me a better tog. In reality it didn't and it cost me a fortune.

 

[theurbanclown]

Most pros I know use primes, including myself.

Anything about how it looks is nonsense. Results matter.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Why does it matter what the lens or camera looks like. Its how you command the scene (to control group portraits) and how you compose, expose that matters.

I've done a few events (now) and find primes easier for candid style work as you can grab the shot quicker rather than zooming in and out and missing a moment. That might reflect poorly on my abilities but it works well for me.

Big zooms are heavy and you'll get w*nkers cramp walking around with 2x D800;s with a 70-200 and 24-70 attached to each with flashes. 2 bodies, 2 primes and a flash is easier to manage over an event.

 

[UaeExile]

I hope you don't mind me saying, but you seem obsessed with perception Jamie.

 

[flavio]

I think most pros and amateurs use a combination of primes and zooms depending on the situation, it really is the case that one size does not fit all
or there is no one solution!

 

[Andrew Davies Photography]

Jamie makes a credible point tbh.

Firstly - I shoot weddings with a 35 and 85 prime on two bodies but also use a 16-35 and a 70-200 on occasions when needed.

However there is a common perception among the general public that the guy with the big white lens will take better pictures. That carries across from Canons marketing of such and scenes everyday people see of football togs and press togs etc which they relate to. So whilst in essence its nothing to do with the size of the lens ( To us photographers ) to the outside world its almost a fashion statement and a badge of professionalism to have the bigger lens.

So for me its about how you want to appear - the less confident photographer will probably be happier with that big white lens on which makes them feel more important and gets noticed , the funny upside to that is not only can primes mostly take better photos but the use of long lenses actually takes a lot more skill - shooting at 200mm @ 2.8 in a church with no flash for instance - a disaster area for an inexperienced photographer , shooting at 85mm f2 - not so bad.

 

[GeeJay57]

Pros use whatever tool is needed to get the job done. Pros don't care whether they look like pros, because they are pros. If one uses a camera in a fluent and professional manner, most observers will consider that you might be a pro.

As for me, I currently have 1 prime (100mm f/2.8 macro) and 3 zooms (10-20mm, 15-85mm, 100-400mm). I wouldn't mind a 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 or f/1.8. Recently (reluctantly) sold my 300mm f/2.8 might get another one day.

 

[G.K.Jnr.]

Pros use whatever tool is needed to get the job done. Pros don't care whether they look like pros, because they are pros. If one uses a camera in a fluent and professional manner, most observers will consider that you might be a pro.

Got it in one.

George.

 

[jamiebonline]

I hope you don't mind me saying, but you seem obsessed with perception Jamie.

haha yes well I am playing devil's advocate a little. I actually don't care so much now. I did in the past though. I think it is natural for a newcomer to look at all the fancy gear and feel unsure of themselves. To consider the tools more than the craft or the art itself. Goes with other disciplines too. Starting in paid work, I think it is also natural to curb the nerves by having big gear. It's human even if misguided.

Not dwelling on the notions of image, I am curious what pros use primes and what for and if they can cope ok with them at a wedding or a portrait or fashion shoot. This helps me

 

[Phil V]

haha yes well I am playing devil's advocate a little. I actually don't care so much now. I did in the past though. I think it is natural for a newcomer to look at all the fancy gear and feel unsure of themselves. To consider the tools more than the craft or the art itself. Goes with other disciplines too. Starting in paid work, I think it is also natural to curb the nerves by having big gear. It's human even if misguided.

Not dwelling on the notions of image, I am curious what pros use primes and what for and if they can cope ok with them at a wedding or a portrait or fashion shoot. This helps me

I'm not sure it's 'natural for a newcomer', but it's certainly common in some circles, it's totally misguided to the point of fantasy, but still fairly common .

First point:
Stop arsing about in the gear sections of forums and go read the stuff in the Business section, you'll soon learn what's important (it's not gear, it's not even how well you use the gear).

Second point:
see point 1.

** Just to lay my cards on the table... I get irritated by people asking questions about 'turning pro' in the gear or general sections, and properly wound up when they're in the 'Beginners' section.

 

[TheBigYin]

Stop arsing about in the gear sections of forums and go read the stuff in the Business section, you'll soon learn what's important (it's not gear, it's not even how well you use the gear).

^^^ This... and I'd add a little emphasis ... "go read the stuff in the Business section". that is READ lots of it, then read it again, then read it a third time to understand WHY someone who's only picked up a camera the week before gets a bit of a shoeing for wanting to "be a pro, innit". Then when you understand the basic reasons why people work as they do, THINK about how that'll apply to your work, go out and try it... and maybe at that point you'll be able to ask a valid question that will get truly helpful answers from our regular business contributors... I'd warn you though - it's a business section, populated by people who earn their living with a camera, and if you ask questions intended to "get a rise out of people" like your last two threads, you really, really won't like the answers you'll get.

 

[addicknchips]

haha yes well I am playing devil's advocate a little. I actually don't care so much now. I did in the past though. I think it is natural for a newcomer to look at all the fancy gear and feel unsure of themselves. To consider the tools more than the craft or the art itself. Goes with other disciplines too. Starting in paid work, I think it is also natural to curb the nerves by having big gear. It's human even if misguided.

Not dwelling on the notions of image, I am curious what pros use primes and what for and if they can cope ok with them at a wedding or a portrait or fashion shoot. This helps me

you are right about newbies wanting good, pro looking gear. Nobody starts out thinking they are going to become a pro with their kit lens. And like any hobby or the like, you want to have the best gear. And like it or not perception is a big thing. True you need to get the results with the gear, and are ultimately judged on your results. But even the best skilled pro wedding shooting would not have the balls to turn up at a wedding with crap looking gear and fancy telling the groom "trust me, ill make this work".
perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe pros do use crap non pro looking gear because they are masters of light.

 

[Phil V]

... Maybe pros do use crap non pro looking gear because they are masters of light.

Reminded me of a story told by 'Lord Ascough of Lytham*', when he used to shoot Leica and everyone else was lugging masses of gear, he would often be allowed to shoot whatever he wanted by the officiant who mistook him for 'uncle bob' because he wasn't 'loud and carting all that pro gear'.

*thanks for @Serendipitous Sid for the nickname, always makes me smile... and here's the man himself for those unfamiliar.

 

[addicknchips]

In short, use whatever works best for you to get the job done to the desired standard.

 

[ricky1980]

To OP you kinda argued your cases for yourself really. Buy just not made the right conclusion,

Zoom f2.8 = versatility but at a cost for low light performance as well as bokeh and maybe some IQ. Heavy also

F1.4/f1.2 primes = excellent low light performances, excellent IQ and Bokeh. And lightweight when compared with zoom. But lacks the versatility meaning a lot of lens changes or multiple cameras with lenses attached.

So if you have someone to change your lens for you and carry your camera for you then prime it. If you work by yourself then you probably want to carry the zoom. Or a prime on a body and a zoom on another...so 2 bodies which is probably the most common for single person shooters.

 

[jamiebonline]

I wad not trying to get a rise out of people. I just wanted to read a lot of opinions. The crop thread was very interesting reading for me. Now I feel like I annoyed some people. Oh well. Thanks for the business link. Hope some people found something useful here.

 

[Blank_Canvas]

I wad not trying to get a rise out of people. I just wanted to read a lot of opinions. The crop thread was very interesting reading for me. Now I feel like I annoyed some people. Oh well. Thanks for the business link. Hope some people found something useful here.

I've read the whole thread again. I don't think anybody is annoyed or wound up. It's actually quite tame compared to dome of the stuff that goes on in OOF.

 

[Steve Smith]

I think the perception is not the same as the reality. Professionals in any trade tend to use what will work rather than what will impress others. If the item which will work is more cost effective than a flashy new item, then all the better.

I am strictly an amateur as far as photography is concerned, but I do play music on a semi-professional basis. I usually use a £1,600 Gretsch guitar (picture to the left) but occasionally I use a £90 Squier Telecaster.

When I use the cheaper guitar, the audience doesn't notice any difference and I enjoy the change. This is a bit like the difference between using the cheap, zoom, kit lens and an expensive prime.


Steve.

 

[Phil V]

I wad not trying to get a rise out of people. I just wanted to read a lot of opinions. The crop thread was very interesting reading for me. Now I feel like I annoyed some people. Oh well. Thanks for the business link. Hope some people found something useful here.

You haven't annoyed people, try to have a read of the posts without covering them in your own lack of confidence. We're trying to put your questions into perspective.

To nick @Pookeyhead 's strapline: cameras don't take photographs, people do.

Then to add, running a successful photography business is about 10% down to photography?

How 'important' are your concerns about what gear pro's use in light of the above?

And this is out of character for me but; if you think the above is the reaction of 'annoyed people' you probably lack the balls required to run a business.

How will you feel after meeting 3 prospective couples on the trot when they've decided to go with someone else? Will you be able to go to a 4th meeting full of enthusiasm and confidence? What about when the drunk groomsman decides winding up the photographer seems like a fun pastime? Or the mother of the bride decides you're there as her personal photographer for the day making constant requests whilst you're busy trying to shoot 'your job'? Or the chief bridesmaid decides to start organising the guests because 'this is what my photographer did'?


In short, whether it's shot on a 70d with a 70-200 or a 5dIII with a 135L is fairly irrelevant compared to whether you got the shot under pressure, whether you got a great shot, and indeed whether you had the business nouse to get the opportunity to get the shot for the right fee in the first place.

 

[Toggerman]

However there is a common perception among the general public that the guy with the big white lens will take better pictures.

Something like that happened to me twice last year (that I know of). I started the year with Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 and I also had a Sigma 120-300 OS for some parts as well, all on Canon bodies. I went to 1 motorsport event, signed on, loads of media tabards everywhere. If I pass someone I don't know I nod my head and say 'alright' and hopefully strike up a little conversation. There was a lady in a media tabard with a white L lens and when I nodded, she looked at my camera swinging to my side, laughed through her nose and turned her head, I was utterly gobsmacked, I never had that kind of response before.

Something similar happened a couple of weeks later when my wife and I were at a different event and there was a chap, again with a couple of white Ls, and I can't exactly remember what he muttered but the wife and I turned and looked at each other in horror and I then told her about the previous woman.

 

[Blank_Canvas]

As a young 'Phot' in the Army I was taught that the 'job' was 80% preparation and planning and 20% shooting. I think this remains true today and that's even before the post processing starts. As a pro your judged on your appearance, you cameras and your work. Everybody judges you, fellow photographers, guests and your work is a lasting reminder and a testimony to your ability.

Ultimately, the final image is important but an engaging persona is vital. To use the restaurant analogy - nice ambiance, great food but the night ruined by rude or aloof water / waitress. As a pro photographer you need to be the full package but also tough as bricks or at least not take things personally.

 

[RedRobin]

I'm an amateur (wildlife is all I shoot) and I sold my Canon prime 300mm and 400mm L lenses so I could buy a Canon 100-400mm L II zoom. Why? - Simply because I now need not keep swopping lenses and also because this zoom lens has a much shorter Minimum Focus Distance and I was experiencing quite a few situations where wildlife was too close instead of the usual to far away.

I also have and am keeping my Canon 100mm L Macro lens. That's all I need.

And I don't care two figs what anyone thinks of me - I'm out there to enjoy myself and that's it.

 

[addicknchips]

As a young 'Phot' in the Army I was taught that the 'job' was 80% preparation and planning and 20% shooting. I think this remains true today and that's even before the post processing starts. As a pro your judged on your appearance, you cameras and your work. Everybody judges you, fellow photographers, guests and your work is a lasting reminder and a testimony to your ability.

Ultimately, the final image is important but an engaging persona is vital. To use the restaurant analogy - nice ambiance, great food but the night ruined by rude or aloof water / waitress. As a pro photographer you need to be the full package but also tough as bricks or at least not take things personally.

Spot on! I know of at least 3 people who would not recommend weddinf photographers because they "slimey", "creepy" or just "plain weird". Despite being good at the job.
It's a lot more than just the photos.
So take note you weirdos!!

 

[ukaskew]

Start shooting motorsport with a Fuji if you really want some attention (in real life and online!)

You can forget 'looking the part', and you will stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[RedRobin]

Start shooting motorsport with a Fuji if you really want some attention (in real life and online!)

You can forget 'looking the part', and you will stick out like a sore thumb.

....Or if you were to join the pro photographers at an American ball game and you had the 'wrong' camera gear!

 

[Phil V]

...

Something similar happened a couple of weeks later when my wife and I were at a different event and there was a chap, again with a couple of white Ls, and I can't exactly remember what he muttered but the wife and I turned and looked at each other in horror and I then told her about the previous woman.

We sometimes come into contact with the pro's who follow the WRC, they run the whole gamut of over prepared to 'you're joking', when it comes to gear.

Whilst most have the usual gag of gear and monopod, the 2 that make me smile are:
The old timer; overweight with a billingham carried over one shoulder, hobbling from 40 years of carrying all that gear, his knees are knackered.
A guy in his early twenties sprints past him to get his chosen spot right on the inside of the bend, in his hand a single camera with UWA. He knows exactly the shot he's getting, and is prepared for that alone.

My guess is that they'll both get a marketable shot of each car, neither is right, they're just 'different'.

 

[Pookeyhead]

SO... how many of you pros prefer primes?

I will use the most appropriate tool for the job. If I'm in a studio taking a portrait, I'll use a prime. If I'm on location doing something more variable, I'll probably have a zoom. Cameras are just tools. Real pros appreciate this. It's a tool to do a job, not something to fetishise.

Do you feel at a shoot, you should have something big to show off to clients?

No.. What the **** do they know?

Do nifty fifties not look 'pro' enough?

What the hell are you talking about? Who cares how pro you "look"? You are your work. The end.

Do you feel that changing primes during a shoot is a pain?

Sometimes, yes. Sometimes getting out of bed in the morning is a pain in the arse too, but I often have to do that too. I use what's appropriate. If I'm swapping primes it's because primes is what I need. If not.. I'll not be. If I need a 24mm 1.4.... then I obviously need a prime. If not, of course I'll use a zoom... why wouldn't I? It's easier.

Maybe the pros and the industry don't want them to be more reasonably priced cause then every second person might have one.

Why the **** should I care? I LOVE it when amateurs buy pro gear, as it brings the price down. Fill your boots sunshine... we all benefit. It does mean that we have to put up with some bull**** like Nikon recalling cameras because of a few oil spots (A working pro would just clean the ****ing sensor, not send it back), but apart from that, amateurs buying pro gear is a fantastic thing... they sell more... when they sell more.. they get cheaper. Why would any professional object to an amateur buying pro gear? You think I'd worry about whether you have the same equipment as me? I'd worry if you had the same PORTFOLIO as me.... not gear.

Stop obsessing over gear, and stop worrying about boll*cks like this... take some photographs.

 

[woof woof]

My My. Have I logged on to DPR?

Me thinks a calming cup of tea is needed before "someone" busts a blood vessel.

Not that I'm in any way qualified to post in this thread but I'm doing so anyway

Impressions do matter. Sometimes I know that from my own personal (not in photography) work history. It'd be nice if we lived in a world in which the worthy always got the job but the fact is that other things will matter too so the only question is the extent to which they matter.

If you turn up with a scruffy wooden box but get the job done and do it well I'm sure that some people wont care but some would still rather hire the flashy guy with the shiny camera. If you're lucky that sort of customer wont be in the market you're in

 

[RedRobin]

There's one aspect of buying what the pro's buy which I don't think has been mentioned yet :

It's the boost to self-confidence that such gear can potentially give you. It doesn't guarantee you anything but it's just a feeling which contributes something. You still need the skills but you also need Lady Luck by your side.

 

[Phil V]

...If you turn up with a scruffy wooden box but get the job done and do it well I'm sure that some people wont care but some would still rather hire the flashy guy with the shiny camera. If you're lucky that sort of customer wont be in the market you're in

But here's the thing...
When you're pitching for the job, they don't see the scruffy wooden box, they see you and your images, and mostly what they buy is... You.

Let's face it, unless we're really comparing is the top and the bottom, to the average social photography client, we're all 'good enough' but who gets them to sign is the 'great person' with the right price and product, your marketing strategy is about a thousand times more important than your camera.

The gear is that unimportant... As long as you can use it to get the images you want.

 

[Pookeyhead]

But here's the thing...
When you're pitching for the job, they don't see the scruffy wooden box, they see you and your images, and mostly what they buy is... You.

^This.

You... and your work. They'll never know what equipment you've used when they hire you. They hire you on the strength of your imagery, and you as a person.

There's one aspect of buying what the pro's buy which I don't think has been mentioned yet :

It's the boost to self-confidence that such gear can potentially give you. It doesn't guarantee you anything but it's just a feeling which contributes something. You still need the skills but you also need Lady Luck by your side.

I never got that argument. How does having a "Pro" camera make you more confident? I'd know that it wouldn't make my photography any better, so where would the confidence come from?

 

[Phil V]

And this is why your questions should be asked in the business section...

There's one aspect of buying what the pro's buy which I don't think has been mentioned yet :

It's the boost to self-confidence that such gear can potentially give you. It doesn't guarantee you anything but it's just a feeling which contributes something. You still need the skills but you also need Lady Luck by your side.

To avoid this complete nonsense.
Apologies Robin, but the confidence comes from knowing you can deliver the brief because you have the knowledge and skills required. What's the Jack Nicklaus quote about being lucky?

Of course it's nice to have good gear, but it's so insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Pookeyhead]

I've posted this before, but it's appropriate in here.

This is a screen grab of Lightroom, showing my folder that has professional work in it... filtered by camera. My most used camera for professional work is a Nikon D7000.

 

[woof woof]

But here's the thing...
When you're pitching for the job, they don't see the scruffy wooden box, they see you and your images, and mostly what they buy is... You.

Yes, they initially buy you (and there's hopefully more to it than luck) but then you turn up on the job and they start judging you all over again so you might get the first job and it might be your last with that customer. The next guy might be the one with the flashy new camera or the shiny new suit, if the man with the money cares about such things.

My point was that customers buy a package and there are people in all walks of life and in all positions who let what to you and I might see as the daftest things enter into the equation.

Thankfully I don't have to care about any of this and honestly I'd hate to have to use my limited photographic skills to make money as I think it'd ruin a good hobby Over and out...