Joseph Tainter wrote: > > I agree with this. I am annoyed, though, by those who write or say that > you are not a serious or conscientous photographer if you use zooms. (I > don't claim that this was said on PDML, but we were pointed recently to > an article that did say something like that.) > > I once waited 6-1/2 hours for the right light to photograph a scene. > Then I photographed it with the FA 20-35 f4 and got a fine image. Am I > less than a serious photographer?
Good point, Joseph. I think a serious photographer should be defined as someone who takes photography seriously *as a whole*. People who obsess about equipment are often not serious photographers. The serious photographer who *does* obsess about equipment is probably not someone who rejects all zooms, but appreciates the virtues of some and the weaknesses of others - as he/she does with zooms. Needless to say, I would put myself into that category! I have used both primes and zooms for the last 17 years - before that I used only primes because the affordable zooms of that time were so very bad. Since then, I have used some superb primes, and some superb zooms, and I recognise the virtues and weaknesses of both. In theory, primes are nearly always optically superior, but the best zooms are so very close that it hardly matters any more. But to suggest this on any photo forum is to invite derision from the "prime loyalists" and support from that proportion of zoom fans who couldn't recognise a bad lens if they saw a poster-sized print from it. This only confirms the worst prejudices of the prime loyalists and war breaks out. Better not to mention it really. I'm glad I didn't! ;-) Seriously though, in my case, some of my best ever lenses have been primes, but others have been zooms. I'm glad to say that one of the best zooms I have ever used is my first choice lens at this time and it is on my first choice camera body. That's the Pentax A 35-105mm on the Super A (Super Program in the USA). I also *love* my K 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.7 and my Tamron 90mm f/2.5 macro, but the results from the 35-105mm are so good that I need only carry the zoom except in poor light. Let no-one tell me that the A 35-105mm is a poor lens because it's a zoom. It is a fine lens, and one I am delighted to be able to use. But don't tell anyone I said that! John ;-))
