Are Prime Lenses Better Than Zooms?

I shoot primarily with prime lenses for my professional photography jobs as well as for my own personal projects. I find prime lenses offer some important advantages that help me achieve better results in my shots. I discuss why I prefer prime lenses over zooms in this video.

Timestamp
0:00 Intro
0:24 So Much Rain
0:55 Disclaimers
1:36 Shooting An Event
2:11 Images Reel 1
2:41 Smaller Size
4:51 Better Low Light Shooting
6:32 Images Reel 2
7:01 Shallow Depth of Field
8:53 Better Low Light AF
10:53 Images Reel 3
11:22 Beautiful Rendering
12:41 Conclusion/END

Follow me on:

Music in video:
Music | "We Got Something" by LiQWYD

[robinwong]

If you are a Malaysian, do check out our amazing Singer-Songwriter @BIhzhu and follow her on her social media!

[amermeleitor]

I mostly agree with you, but in the long telephoto the zoom is just more practical. Trying to compose a image of a tiger, or a shy bird, or a bear, with a 800mm prime is a problem if you need to walk back to fit more in the image. A zoom is a bless with long telephoto.

[c.augustin]

I think this "organic" look is actually due to less perfect correction (or having the "right" errors corrected or left). This is what gives (older) Leica lenses their "Leica look" – not perfection, but the "right" imperfections to make them look good (or unique). "Perfect" lenses can be really boring … 😁

[mugilandag]

Watching this right after shooting a wedding engagement event with EM5III and 25mm f1.4

I stick with M43 system for their prime lens choices 😃

[TimK-]

Reason #5 was what did it for me, once I realized the difference. I have only 2 zoom lenses now, but I usually prefer using any of the 7 primes I carry - ranging from a fisheye to a 500mm Tamron mirror lens. I've found that the greater depth of field in micro 4/3's is a huge advantage. My entire subject is in perfect focus. With my full frame, I have to stop down the lenses 1 to 2 stops to gain the same depth of field - losing the background bokeh, and sacrificing a lower iso setting. It's a lose-lose situation. Doesn't matter if I have 36 amazing megapixels, when it's not as good as my perfectly stabilized Olympus 16 mp.

[FrancisBrooks-obny]

I love your enthusiastic no nonsense delivery. You’re a great ambassador for micro four thirds. Cheers!

[JohnAudioTech]

As a budget MFT user who likes compactness, I primarily use the 12-32 collapsible compact zoom. I also have the Oly 45/1.8 prime for when I need a mild telephoto and some background separation. No matter what you shoot, one has to admit that MFT has a nice collection of tiny budget primes.

[themostar]

I have used a 25mm 1.8 for many years. Just upgraded to the 12-40 mm 2.8 zoom and could immediately feel a difference and joy in the versatility. As such, I've put the 25mm on sale and will start saving for the 40-150mm 2.8.

[ceaabe]

I also love my prime lenses. Pro: Faster, better low light capabilities. Con: Often change lenses.

[gerhardsteinhofer]

I fully agree. I love my 17mm f1.8, 25mm f1.8 and 45mm f1.8 trilogy on my OM-D E-M10ii. Very small and lightweight combination. A few weeks ago bought the same body again (used). So I have not to change lenses. My favorite combi with two bodies is 17mm and 45mm. With only one body, I prefer the 25mm most. I also have zoom lenses, but I really rarely use them. Only outside under good lighting conditions.

[stephenbrasure]

I'm just starting to use the prime lenses I own more often but I've always been amazed at the images captured by the Olympus 45 mm 1.8 lens! And many of the Olympus prime lenses can be quite inexpensive if you purchase them used which makes them great options for photographers on a tight budget.

[davebellamy]

When it's raining can be a good time to take a PRO zoom that's weather sealed so you don't have to change lenses.

[photosvein]

:D So glad you said depth of field and not calling it bokeh!
So many does not know the difference :(

Also many claims 35mm (I dont support the "full frame" naming) has better dof because bigger sensor, but sensor size is not a part of more or less dof.
Its also kinda a moot point because MF would run over 35mm when it comes to dof so different tools for different jobs.

[Mithadon]

Hi Robin. Thanks for your insight. I'm a beginner and have never used a prime lens. But the 45mm 1.8 is in the mail!! I'm very excited to see and try it.
Something that might help me a lot is seeing your system for changing lenses. How do you organize your gear on your person? How quickly can you swap prime lenses?
Charles

[repmidwest]

I'm definitely on team PRIME LENS. They force you to move and explore the space/angles. They are great for low light. Great bokuh. And you can throw on a telephoto adapter for a 2X extra reach and only lose a single stop of aperture rather than multiple stops with a zoom lens.

[gregm]

The place where prime lens use tends to fall on its nose is when shooting corporate events where the client wants on-site, daily uploads. Things are happening way too fast very often, and you simply don't have time to change lenses, or crop images before uploading. Clients don't care about bokeh and DOF -- they want good expression and good framing. Too many times I have been getting some 'artsy' shot with a prime fisheye, or some other wide angle prime, only to have someone say, "Here, quick, get a shot of this Board member and his wife!" To me, good quality zooms were essential to most of my corporate work. My Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 was my 'bread and butter' lens for a lot of my corporate work, and I still think it is one of the finest portrait lenses I've ever owned.
Now that I am retired, I use primes a little more often, but I still personally prefer zooms.

[alfredmartinezifernandez]

If you are an urban fotographer it will be better prime lenses, but if you like hikking through the mountains, as me, I think it's better zoom lenses. In the mountain you could make great photos with bad weather and this conditions is not a good idea change lenses.

[systemanaturae]

Nice video clip Robin. Agree with all you say. Except with wildlife. I often only have a slit second to zoom in or out to get a shot ha ha!! Having said that I have some great wildlife photos using my 300mm f4 pro prime lens. The biggest problem is what to take when going out on a wildlife trek when I have no idea on what will occur. In this situation my 150-400mm pro lens will win every time 😊😊. Only slight issue is long distance shots and heavy post production cropping. In this case the only camera worth considering is the Sony a1. For street and portrait I tend to use my Pana G9 with 42.5mm or 15mm prime lenses or for zoom my 8-18mm and 12-35mm lenses. Currently waiting for Jimmy Cheng’s evening London photo walk?? Regards Brian 👌✌️😏

[tobiasnickel]

I have a question: why are there no 0.95 autofocus lenses? because it is to difficult to nail? but I would say that because there is more significant out of focus, it is more easy to find the sharp spot. I would love to hear your thought.

[yourvitamin]

I got some knowledge thank Robin you are the reason why I love Olympus 🎉