Quote:
Originally Posted by Exclusivs
Understood. Do Prime offer any advantage over example regular EF - other then fact they are set. Are image quality overall better?
|
There are some excellent primes under $200, which is not the case with zooms. However, if you shoot in Raw and use Digital Lens Optimization in Raw conversion, you can close the gap substantially. The L-series zooms are very good at all focal lengths, particularly with DLO, but the some primes are simply incredible.
The 500/f4L has legendary image quality and the new 11-24mm f/4L looks astounding in the test images I've seen, but those are very expensive lenses. You can buy an EF 40/f2.8 STM for around $150 and get IQ that competes with the L-series. The non-Ls are not as robust, but you're not buying lenses with a bar fight in mind.
A 24/40/50mm prime is a way to get started, with good quality and low cost. With my first SLR, in the 1960s, generally, most of us started with a 50/f1.8. Zooms were not so great, in general, back then, so we mostly shot only with primes.
The IQ of zooms is now competing with the best primes, so we're free to have one lens cover many focal lengths. Shooting with a couple of high quality zooms that cover a wide range, like 24-105mm plus a 70-200mm, along with 1.4x and 2.0x covers an broad range of situations. That's what I carry, plus my ultra-wide 15mm and, when I expect the subjects that demand it, my 500mm. All L-series, except for the 15mm. I NEVER carry my 40mm and should probably sell it.
Dave