ditching the zooms - the prime only experiment

Although the weather seems to have taken its toll on the K5 (see separate forum entry!), I had set myself a challange. Could I survive a 2 week holiday with just primes.

Not wanting to restrict myself to a 3 lens set-up, I chose to restrict myself to one small crumpler bag. Previously capable of holding a now sold Sigma 8-16, smc 50mm 1.7 and 18-135 (mounted). Just to give you an idea of size.

Well I was downsizing, so in the one pocket that previously held the 8-16, I had in:
15mm f4 Ltd
28mm f3.5 (manual)
40mm f2.8 Ltd

I had the vivtar 200mm f3.5 mounted (manual).

Hmm, that left space in the small pocket - so I threw in the 18-135, jut in case, you know in case I hated the setup or it rained.

This was cheating a bit, as if I wanted to switch the 200mm for any other lens, I had nowhere to put it (so I brought its case).

I had hardly had any use out of the 15mm or 200mm before going so thought I'd share my experiences with these lenses as a "trying to ditch the zoom prime convert".

So how long did I last with just primes
....2 days. Big fail...maybe. A recent thread on the 18-135 brought up much praise for this lens and the weather meant it got more than just a look in. However, the reason after 2 days? Trying to get pictures of atlantic terns in flight. No way would I get them with the 200mm manual. The other primes were too short and I needed that quick focussing. Got some pretty decent shots I would never have got without it.

In the end though, I was mildly surprised by which lenses got used the most and my feelings towards them.

So, in no particular oder, oldies first:


28mm f3.5
Not bad, not great. Used quite sparingly because to be honest who normally needs both a 28mm and 40mm on a wildlife holiday...And when either of these would do, out came the 40mm. A bit of magenta tint, but easy to sort out PP.

It did fill a gap though, and together with the 40mm and 15mm, fits 49mm filters - so the ND's fitted it. Stopped down reasonable sharpness, but nothing outstanding. Nowhere near my 50mm 1.7 manual, for example. Good enough to get compliments, but not the wows.

200mm f3.5
Got it for 3 things. To see if I really needed a prime at this focal length, and shooting lazy puffins and far-away whales.

This lens is far from perfect. Wide open, it's a CA fest. Stop down, and down, and down again and the CA is gone around f5.6. But now it's not really fast enough for lower light. It's not razor sharp, but for the price more than sharp enough! And built like a tank. Mine looks like it just came out the factory.

I could defintely do with this focal length. However, following the puffins, a zoom would have been handy - and I admittedly reached for the 18-135 again - which actually proved to be the sharper lens, albeit at around 100mm, stopped down.

I think I might have to start saving up for the 60-250. The 200mm would be nice, but I can see when I might want longer, and I can see when I might prefer a zoom.

For puffins it was fine. For faster than expected whales....out comes the 18-135mm.


Now for the Autos:

40mm Ltd.

No surprises here. I knew the lens and it did the job I needed it for. Sharp for landscapes for stitching where I didn't want too much foreground, and it helped me out in the dusky light. No worries about darkness in the summer, so no desperate need for a faster lens really.

I opted not to bring the 50mm 1.7 and this also worked as a stand-in portrait lens.

I'm still unsure about the focal length - but it's a keeper alright! So small it easily slots into the pocket, how can you not take it with you if you have it.

Problem for me was it mostly stayed in my pocket, mainly due to...

15mm Ltd
Wow. Delivered only the day before I left, I never had a chance to use it, but I was blown away. Not becuase it is the perfect lens, it isn't. In some regards my 8-16mm was sharper. I hear the 12-24mm pentax is also sharper corner to corner. Both are big heavy lenses though. Yes, it can get a bit soft around the edges - and not just if you are pixel peeping (checking for focus on screen for example). Contrary to some reviews I've seen, you can make it flare - but you do have to be taking into the light, and nothing like the sigma. There is vignetting, and there is distortion - visible mainly when you foolishly place people in the corners and such like. But again, nothing like with the 8-16mm.

However all of these are small issues, mostly resolved by stopping down a little. Some have commented on the star like sun you can achieve by stopping down and shooting stright into it. I actually tried to avoid this, as I was getting stars of reflections off glass - but that's just practice and getting to know the lens.

What amazed me most was the versatility. It stayed on the camera easily 80% of the time - 15mm is such a great focal length, and with such a light, well designed lens. Wow. There is also such a simple fix to get the cokin filters to fit so that's not a problem - although I somehow doubt square cokin graduated filters would work given the size of the objective. I didn't try.

If I had to keep only one lens it would honestly be a fight-out between this and the 18-135 (which I wasn't supposed to be using).

I would say of all the primes, it was the only one that offered that little something extra something that the 18-135mmm couldn't replicate at a pinch.


18-135mm
Won't say too much as there was a recent thread on this. But, excellent all-rounder and the saviour when the weather turned bad or the subjects started darting around like crazed wasps. Couldn't replace the 15mm but a perfect lens to compliment it with for a 2-lens set-up.


A zoom free future?
ot for me. Not while I still have the 18-135mmm. A great back-up turned bad-weather go-to. I'm tempted to exchange the 28mm for maybe a longer portrait like the 70mm, though. The 200mm was a good experiment, but unfortunately likely to be an expensive one as I look enviously to the 60-250mm, a zoom. If only it was f2.8...

At least you tried (sort of ) and broke out of the comfort of using just zooms. I enjoy using primes more than zooms, but a good zoom can add so much flexibility to many situations where getting the shots is more important than enjoying the use of lovely primes. My Tamron 17-50 gets use for holidays and weddings etc, but for everything else it's primes.

Having said that, I've done a couple of holidays (London, Paris) using virtually only primes, and found the experience quite liberating, though there's a huge temptation to take too many lenses. I took the WR 18-55 for something wider and in case of rain, but now I have the 21mm, the width is less of an issue, though 18mm is considerably wider than 21.

I would go one further and say I enjoy using manual primes more than anything, if only focusing was easier on the digital. There's only so many times I can make the wife repose when she's still a tad out of focus despite all my efforts with the lens opened up...

I know I could buy a new viewfinder glass but I@m holding back on that as I'm not sure just how much of the error is me!

My problem is if I decided on an all prime lineup I would want:

15mm
35mm macro
50mm
70mm
100mm macro
200mm f2.8
300mm f4

My bag wouldn't be any lighter

Interesting stuff Ian - that 18-135 does get a lot of recommendations - must get myself one!