|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 27th, 2007, 11:27 PM | #1 |
New Boot
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 8
|
newb question...
i notice a lot of people here use adaptors with (nikon) prime lenses. i know the benefits of primes are that they can achieve incredible dof and faster f-stops. now, my question is.. if one has enough available light, why don't shooters use the convenience of zoom lenses more often?
|
July 28th, 2007, 01:37 AM | #2 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: PERTH. W.A. AUSTRALIA.
Posts: 4,477
|
Justin.
For a given f-stop and focal length setting on the zoom, the same depth-of-field effect can be achieved. Prime lenses are chosen also for there being fewer pieces of glass inside, therefore fewer glass-to-air surfaces which may reflect stray light which loses deep contrast. Fewer pieces of glass also mean in most cases a sharper image. Some still-camera zooms may not hold focus through the zoom range. |
July 28th, 2007, 09:23 AM | #3 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Plus, many zoom lenses tend to breathe -- that is, they change focal length slightly when the operator changes focus, which isn't desirable. A prime lens won't do that, since by definition it can't change focal length.
|
August 1st, 2007, 07:23 AM | #4 | |
New Boot
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 8
|
Quote:
|
|
| ||||||
|
|