Zooms or Primes?

I'm debating getting a 200 or 300mm lens. I'm wondering whether I shouget a

canon zoom such as the 70-200mm f2.8 IS or a 200/300mm prime lens.

 

I will use it mainly for distance work in street locations. Candid shots.

 

I currently use a 50mm f1.4 prime alot and really love the image quality I get.

Your best IQ will be with a good prime lens. The zooms of course are more convenient but zooming with your feet isn't a usually problem in street photography. Another advantage to the primes, using the 200mm FL as an example, is you stand out less. It's hard not be noticed wielding that 70-200 2.8 IS, a great lens but highly visible. Subjects of candid street photography can be intimidated by a big, white lens staring them in the face. Good luck.

Primes. Excellent image quality, less expensive, MUCH easier to hand-hold. But do you really need such a long lens for candid street shots? The compressed perspective often looks too unnatural and quite paparazzi-esque. Have you tried the EF 100mm f/2 USM or EF 135mm f/2 L USM?

I have always thought street photography should be with close in with moderate wide angles. But if you want to shoot from a distance and keep a low profile whilst still keeping a wide aperture you might want to take a look at the 200/2.8L which is relatively small and light as well as black, contrast with the 70-200 zooms which either big or very big and white. The 300/4 IS is a great lens but better for wildlife or sports.

BTW the 200/2.8L is one hell of a sharp lens, you can crop from it wide open and still get very sharp results, does not even notice fitting a 1.4X TC (apart from AF slowdown) and is still very usable with a 2X TC.

Jay,

 

I love using my Canon 135mm f/2.0L for candid shots in the streets and at parks. The clarity, contrast, and bokeh is top notch.

 

//Chuck

135L f2

 

I did a photoshoot with the theme paprazzi style for a fashion designer, here is one of the photos.

 

[image deleted for being more than 511 pixels wide]

More of these photos here:

 

www.flickr.com/photos/andrewmoorephotography

 

I always use primes, i like working with a lens with a focal length.

 

A: Because you really get to learn the lens attributes.

B: Spend less time zooming around an spend more time looking for interesting angles.

 

200mmL Prime or 300mmL prime would be good also. The 135L has the advantage of being black small'ish, more discreet basically.

Good Luck :)

If you get run over by a truck because you are running across the street to get your position correct for a prime lens instead of using a zoom don't blame me. Zooms have flexibility which may enable you to get that quick one off shot but as others have mentioned they can have some drawbacks. If you do opt for a prime expect to do more cropping and resizing to get a nicely balanced photo.

Thanks for the advice guys.Think i'll head down the prime path.

Primes: Best image quality, but slow to use. You may miss quite some shots while changing lenses or while finding the optimal framing.

 

Zooms: Fast framing but in most cases lower image quality. Cheaper than a set of primes covering the same range.

 

Bottom line: Which one is better for you depends on what you are shooting. If you have got time to change lenses and choose the best lens, then you are probably better off with primes. If you do not have this time you will most likely miss quite some shots you would have got with a zoom. Therefore, if time is critical choose a zoom.

Zoom or prime is like red or wine wine. Each has its place...but, one does NOT replace the other.

What do you do if you prefer port? ;-)

Look at the 135mmF2L or the 200mmF2.8L and the x1.4MkII teleconverter: for all the reason listed my three main ones being: weight, black lenses, IQ wide open.

 

WW

My vote goes to 200mm 2.8 I love mine.<div></div>

I love a 200 lens. If you are set on a 200, would suggest the under $700 L-series fixed lens above the zoom if you want a smaller, lighter, and black-colored setup, and have a second body for a shorter lens. If only one body, the zoom may come in handy a lot. The zoom is big, heavy, and noticable, though. I wish canon would make the 70-200 in black paint as an option.

 

I would say that you should also consider the 135mm f/2. In those sorts of shots, you may find the extra light gathering ability more beneficial than extra reach, especially if you are using a cropped sensor anyhow. It is also a smaller and more convenient lens, and can be teleconverted to a 189 f/2.8. This lens gets my top vote for what you are talking about doing.

 

When I shoot concerts, I use a 55mm 1.2 with 800 or 1600 film, and often push up to three stops, and also carry a second body with a fixed 135 f/2 or 200 2.8. For the second body, I do one of two things: 1.) 100 to 400 film, a motor drive, and a handle-mount flash for tight face shots. 2.) If flash is out, a 135 f/2 with high speed film for the second body.

 

Another concert setup I use sometimes is a 35 f/2 on one body and an 85 1.2 on another.

 

For street, I most often use a Leica III with an f/2 normal lens and Fuji Press 800, complimented by an SLR with either the 85, 135, or 200 (probably a tie as to which gets used most).

 

Keith

Anything longer than the 135/2.0 is porbably going to attract attention.