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 : ) !!!