Ditch my 17-50 for primes..

[SmOcKxY]

Been thinking about this for some time already..I have a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for when I do landscape/architecture photography..and the rest of the time I'm on the 17-50mm f2.8..it's been serving me very well so far and I've gotten great photos with it..the only complain with it is that it is on the heavy side..bringing on a long overseas trip is quite a pain..

I've been thinking of ditching it and getting myself some primes..namely a 28mm f1.8 USM and 85mm f1.8 USM to complement the 50mm f1.8 that I already have..if I haven't mentioned I'm on APS-C size sensor..I'm thinking that the 28mm would be a nice and light lens to walkaround with esp during my upcoming Europe trip..and I'll bring along the 11-16mm as well to get some nice wide landscape scenery shots..but the 28mm will be the main one..

That being said..I do shoot some events for my friends and the 17-50mm comes in really handy..recently shot a wedding as main and the couple were really happy with the photos..just wanna ask for opinions..especially from Prime Lovers here..any trouble covering events with primes only and is it less convenient?

Any thoughts on this guys? This is not a prime vs zoom discussion though..just wanna hear what you guys think of my idea..heh heh!

 

[dundee]

I shoot primarily with primes (17, 24, 35, 50, 100, 135)

Using primes will certainly add weight to your bag, the best primes tend to be rather heavy. What you do gain is significantly better colour and contrast.

If you want to go for prime lenses, I would suggest the 35/1.4L, you wont look back.

 

[juzride]

is replacing 17-50 with 2-3 primes lighter for travel?
my guess is that thou 28 will be ur main prime, chances are that 50 and 85mm will be in the bag too when u're doing ur walkabout.

 

[ionicbeam]

versatility should be one of the considerations.. changing lens on the go may not be a good idea

 

[SmOcKxY]

I shoot primarily with primes (17, 24, 35, 50, 100, 135)

Using primes will certainly add weight to your bag, the best primes tend to be rather heavy. What you do gain is significantly better colour and contrast.

If you want to go for prime lenses, I would suggest the 35/1.4L, you wont look back.

I would love the L primes but that is just too much money..cannot afford!

The thing I would like to ask is do you shoot events or functions with just primes? Any limitations?

 

[SmOcKxY]

is replacing 17-50 with 2-3 primes lighter for travel?
my guess is that thou 28 will be ur main prime, chances are that 50 and 85mm will be in the bag too when u're doing ur walkabout.

I definitely will not bring the 85mm out of the country..i've never had the incident where i have not enough reach on my 17-50mm lens when I travel..I will definitely bring the 11-16mm for scenic shots..the 28mm + 50mm together weighs less than the 17-50mm..it's more like when the camera is hanging around your neck..it definitely hurts after awhile..gonna be walking like 8-10hrs easily for 2 weeks!

 

[SmOcKxY]

versatility should be one of the considerations.. changing lens on the go may not be a good idea

Versatility is my main concern when I'm called upon to shoot functions or events..that's why my dilemma here..if i dun have such engagements I will go to primes for sure..

 

[dodgethis]

Keep the zoom for the events. You do not want to be caught in a situation where you're caught with your proverbial pants down when you're changing lens or moving about to get into a closer or further spot to get the framing right.

 

[dundee]

I would love the L primes but that is just too much money..cannot afford!

The thing I would like to ask is do you shoot events or functions with just primes? Any limitations?

It depends on what kind of event!

If you are covering an concerts / low light stuff / sports then primes for sure, the larger aperture really helps. Something like basketball with a slow zoom is just painful.

I would take a wide zoom to a wedding dinner kind of thing though.

But hey if you are doing it for yourself, then the primes will give YOU a better result every time, even if you have to give up some shots.

 

[dodgethis]

Those who say that you have to use primes for concerts because of their large aperture have probably never shot concerts before. Believe it or not, you can use F4 to shoot a concert and still get a well exposed shot.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150974427381022.408755.91683256021&type=3

Most of the photos in this set are taken with a 16-35 f2.8 II, 70-200 f2.8 MkII and a 400 f4 DO, and were still stopped down slightly to get a sharper picture. A 35mm f1.4 was used as well but that was stopped down. I have been in the pit a few times and trust me, a prime severely handicaps you because things happen so quickly, the zoom can and will save you.

 

[WBalance]

It's all about personal preference. In this case, it's the convenience of a zoom vs the IQ/aperture of various primes. Its not only the weight of the lenses, it's also about the convenience of changing lenses while on the move

 

[raydio]

Those who say that you have to use primes for concerts because of their large aperture have probably never shot concerts before. Believe it or not, you can use F4 to shoot a concert and still get a well exposed shot.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150974427381022.408755.91683256021&type=3

Most of the photos in this set are taken with a 16-35 f2.8 II, 70-200 f2.8 MkII and a 400 f4 DO, and were still stopped down slightly to get a sharper picture. A 35mm f1.4 was used as well but that was stopped down. I have been in the pit a few times and trust me, a prime severely handicaps you because things happen so quickly, the zoom can and will save you.

I agree with this. I have been in theatre-like venues with a 70-200 f/4 IS and have gotten some great photos in low light conditions. I couldn't imagine doing the same thing with 2 or 3 primes in a crowded and fast moving environment.

 

[gundamseed84]

Depends... i shot a indoor performance whereby i have to bump up iso to 800 and beyond at f2 to get shutter speed of 1/35. Of course if I have bodies with high iso performance like 5d2 or 3 then fine. But not when one is using entry level bodies such as 500D.

 

[Evilcat]

There was a time when i was in your shoe.

I bought a 17-55mm for my 60D, but i wasn't really satisfied. It was great but not as great as primes... but the hassle of changing lens made me stick to 17-55 99% of the time.

After I upgraded to 5D3, I am happy. i'm contended even with kit lens 24-105L .. no more yearning for primes.

The solution is probably to upgrade the body...

 

[dodgethis]

Depends... i shot a indoor performance whereby i have to bump up iso to 800 and beyond at f2 to get shutter speed of 1/35. Of course if I have bodies with high iso performance like 5d2 or 3 then fine. But not when one is using entry level bodies such as 500D.

Then you ought to be better prepared for shitty lighting situations and knowing the limitations of your gear, then letting the client know beforehand. No client is going to want to hear "Oh I don't have a very good camera, so the photos you will getting are going to be blur", just before or after the performance. Shooting for someone means you have to be prepared for anything and if you know your camera is not going to cut it, it's time to ditch it and get something new.

That being said, the current Canon 18MP APS-C sensor is pretty dang good for noise performance. I have seen some of the photos a 550D can churn out at ISO1600 and it is impressive.

 

[raydio]

There was a time when i was in your shoe.

I bought a 17-55mm for my 60D, but i wasn't really satisfied. It was great but not as great as primes... but the hassle of changing lens made me stick to 17-55 99% of the time.

After I upgraded to 5D3, I am happy. i'm contended even with kit lens 24-105L .. no more yearning for primes.

The solution is probably to upgrade the body...

Yes, the body can make a huge difference too. I remember once I was in a large convention hall where a number of speeches were delivered. Lighting was not optimal. A friend of mine was there with me. He had an old Pentax (I don't remember the model) and I had a Canon 7D with 70-200 f/4 IS lens. The 7D is not known for being great in low light situations but it ran circles around my friend's old Pentax. I got some decent shots that day. He couldn't believe it!

 

[SmOcKxY]

Those who say that you have to use primes for concerts because of their large aperture have probably never shot concerts before. Believe it or not, you can use F4 to shoot a concert and still get a well exposed shot.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150974427381022.408755.91683256021&type=3

Most of the photos in this set are taken with a 16-35 f2.8 II, 70-200 f2.8 MkII and a 400 f4 DO, and were still stopped down slightly to get a sharper picture. A 35mm f1.4 was used as well but that was stopped down. I have been in the pit a few times and trust me, a prime severely handicaps you because things happen so quickly, the zoom can and will save you.

To be very honest I have shot and will be shooting often in lowlight and concert settings...I find that most of the time I'll be shooting at f4 and ISO around 800-1600 if I'm shooting subjects on the stage..they tend to be well-lit and so getting a decent shutter speed is no problem with f4..the problem comes when you are trying to shoot some reactions from the crowd..not the easiest thing without a wide open aperture..

 

[SmOcKxY]

Depends... i shot a indoor performance whereby i have to bump up iso to 800 and beyond at f2 to get shutter speed of 1/35. Of course if I have bodies with high iso performance like 5d2 or 3 then fine. But not when one is using entry level bodies such as 500D.

I've played with a 500D before..it can safely shoot at iso1600 and the noise is still acceptable..that being said..I almost always shoot RAW so noise is very controllable in PP..but for us APS-C sensors..bumping up to ISO3200 is really pushing it..I've gotten some good photos shooting at that iso but truth to be told some details are lost and that cannot be recovered in PP..btw I'm holding an old trusty 50D!

 

[SmOcKxY]

Thanks guys for your input..after considering what you guys said..I think I'll hafta keep the 17-50mm in my arsenal..it's just "better" for certain situations..for my own leisure and travel shoot..i would still love to use a prime..the problem is I cannot afford to go purchase a set of primes and keep the 17-50mm..problems problems!

Of course I would like to change the body..the 5d3 is just so tempting..alas I can't be spending too much money on photography or else the wifey will make noise..it is still a hobby more than something that puts food on the table..

That being said..I'm still considering buying a 28mm and leaving the 17-50mm at home for my upcoming Europe trip..hmmm....?

 

[Miao]

Do you know there are various composition possible by just using 1 prime len ?

Its fun to use only 1 len, it force the creativity out of you ...