Hi,
I come from a still photography background. I have always
used
I have always been more of a zoom person, because of
the versatility that it offers. However, it seems to me that
people doing video or cinematographic work do use primes
extensively. I want to start to doing video, and the budget-
ary option for me to get started would be to start with a
photographic camera that has video and then to add a zoom
with manual focus, but no primes.
A zoom, that may range of 28-85 mm. offers the equivalent
to three or four of the primes I would use the most like the
28, 35, and 50 mm. However, should I be or get interested in
using more the primes instead of the zoom? I mean, from the
perspective of a videographer, should I learn to work with primes,
so that my eyes get accustomed and 'educated' to working with
those specific focal lengths, or is it ok to stay working with a
zoom?
If you were to give a photo/video course to people, would you
recommend them to get trained or stress the need to work with
primes, or should they take whatever their creativity calls for : 'a
zoom here, a prime there; only zooms, etc.'
What advantages do you find working with primes? In still
photography people buy them in all focal lengths due to their
luminosity, ranging some from f/1.4 to f/2.8 the best ones and
more expensive ones! However, my budgetary constraints may
only allow me to buy used manual focus primes of the above focal
lengths, with a luminosities of f/4 or f/3.5, perhaps f/2.8 if the price
is good.
Would you get a prime or primes if they were not so luminous,
and their maximum luminosity stood between f/2.8 and f/4 ??
Thank you in advance for your thoughts and comments.
Kind regards,
igmolinav : ) !!!
I come from a still photography background. I have always
used
I have always been more of a zoom person, because of
the versatility that it offers. However, it seems to me that
people doing video or cinematographic work do use primes
extensively. I want to start to doing video, and the budget-
ary option for me to get started would be to start with a
photographic camera that has video and then to add a zoom
with manual focus, but no primes.
A zoom, that may range of 28-85 mm. offers the equivalent
to three or four of the primes I would use the most like the
28, 35, and 50 mm. However, should I be or get interested in
using more the primes instead of the zoom? I mean, from the
perspective of a videographer, should I learn to work with primes,
so that my eyes get accustomed and 'educated' to working with
those specific focal lengths, or is it ok to stay working with a
zoom?
If you were to give a photo/video course to people, would you
recommend them to get trained or stress the need to work with
primes, or should they take whatever their creativity calls for : 'a
zoom here, a prime there; only zooms, etc.'
What advantages do you find working with primes? In still
photography people buy them in all focal lengths due to their
luminosity, ranging some from f/1.4 to f/2.8 the best ones and
more expensive ones! However, my budgetary constraints may
only allow me to buy used manual focus primes of the above focal
lengths, with a luminosities of f/4 or f/3.5, perhaps f/2.8 if the price
is good.
Would you get a prime or primes if they were not so luminous,
and their maximum luminosity stood between f/2.8 and f/4 ??
Thank you in advance for your thoughts and comments.
Kind regards,
igmolinav : ) !!!
Last edited: