Hello. I apologize for the trivial question about fixed and zoom lenses. I know most of pros an cons of both of them but your opinion and advices are important for me. I will tell some information about my work and background and then describe my dilemma.
I've been a paid reportage photographer for 7 years. For now, my employeer gives me the equipment. There're lenses Nikkor 20/2.8, 24-20/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 200-500/5.6, cameras D4, D5. They are all certainly superior ones. Though, 20/2.8 is quite slow for quick events but big depth of field forgives some mistakes in the focusing. I work in the field of press photography, and these zooms are the best choice.
Local news photography became boring for me, and I decided to change my career. Today I'm taking a course of photography storytelling, working for magazines. At the same time, I learn marketing and self-promotion in order to earn money by private commercial assignments. I can't say for all the countries but in my environment, If I rely only on personal stories , I surely won't be able to get enough money for buying food, paying mortgage, upbringing a son, personal tours as a photojournalist etc.
I have to upgrade my own photo set If I begin freelance. I have got Nikon D3, AF Nikkor 20/2.8, AF 35/2D, AF-S 70-200/2.8. The 35mm lens is really an amateur one. In addition, it's an old example and requires regular mending. Also, I have a little experience of shooting with 50/1.8.
I wouldn't like to earn money by press photography in the future, but I clearly understand that all my background will lead me to performing orders of covering any events such as conferences, openings of exhibitions, presentations, new factories, sports, holidays etc. So, I need modern equipment for this type of work. And the dilemma starts here.
Reportage zooms 24-70 and 70-200 are one of the best, of course. But my hearts wants to buy fixed lenses like 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4. It would be great to purchase something like 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8, 20/1.8, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 135/2.0... But I can't afford this way just now. I have to choose what to buy first. And I can't solve the contradiction by my own.
Why do I want to buy fixed lenses?
1. They are lighter. For me, working with 24-70/2.8 (even the old one - G version) and 70-200/2.8 VRII is grueling. A big camera with these zooms pulling the neck and hands very much.
2. They are smaller. It's very easy to hurt a zoom while working at a dynamic action. I have broken my 24-70 for three times.
3. Their aperture is wider. If I use high-aperture lenses, even my "old man" Nikon D3 can show good results. I'm spoiled with non-noised 6400 ISO on Nikon D4 and 12800 on D5 while Nikon D3's working maximum is 3200. Higher numbers of sensitivity are quite terrible. I will buy a better camera (may be, a used Nikon D4 or a new Nikon D850) but it's a question of tomorrow. Lenses are primary.
4. Their picture are more beauitiful. No comments.
5. They force to be stylish. Every focus length isn't only a width of view but also a a language style. Something like a writing manner for a literary man. When one rotates a zoom ring, they changes an image impression thoughtlessly in the most of times. Usually, a hand sets the most wide angle to take a picture even If the photographer could make several steps backward and use more suitable focus length. Especially If I want to creat series, stories, it's important to keep style.
6. The 85/1.4 lens is really cool for portraits. My 70-200/2.8 can also produce very good pictures, but 85/1.4 does it even better. I think - may be, I can earn money by making portraits? In this case, I can use 85mm...
7. Most often zoom lenses is used in two extreme lengthes - the minimum and the maximum. I use my 24-70 in the range from 24 to 35 mm and on 70 mm for 90% work time. 70-200 is used in 70 and 200 mm for 98% times.
Why do I afraid of purchasing fixed lenses?
1. It's actually very easy to skip an important scene while working at fast-pacing action. Two steps forward of two steps backward? Who knows where the VIP will stop to shake hands? Or it's ordinary situation when all the collegues stayed near to me and waited a moment - and suddenly rush forward for the picture. They rotate zooms - I haven't time to change fixed lenses.
2. Fixed superior AF-S Nikkor lenses are much more expensive than one zoom lens.
Why do I think that zoom lenses is the most comfort decision?
1. I have got a very good tele-zoom 70-200/2.8, and even one wide- or standard zoom like 16-35/4 or 24-70/2.8 will cover 95% cases of everyday workflow of a reportage photography. It isn't so beautiful as fixed lenses but easy one.
Thank you in advance for your patience. I'd be grateful If you share your opinion. May be, somebody from you was in the same situation.
I've been a paid reportage photographer for 7 years. For now, my employeer gives me the equipment. There're lenses Nikkor 20/2.8, 24-20/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 200-500/5.6, cameras D4, D5. They are all certainly superior ones. Though, 20/2.8 is quite slow for quick events but big depth of field forgives some mistakes in the focusing. I work in the field of press photography, and these zooms are the best choice.
Local news photography became boring for me, and I decided to change my career. Today I'm taking a course of photography storytelling, working for magazines. At the same time, I learn marketing and self-promotion in order to earn money by private commercial assignments. I can't say for all the countries but in my environment, If I rely only on personal stories , I surely won't be able to get enough money for buying food, paying mortgage, upbringing a son, personal tours as a photojournalist etc.
I have to upgrade my own photo set If I begin freelance. I have got Nikon D3, AF Nikkor 20/2.8, AF 35/2D, AF-S 70-200/2.8. The 35mm lens is really an amateur one. In addition, it's an old example and requires regular mending. Also, I have a little experience of shooting with 50/1.8.
I wouldn't like to earn money by press photography in the future, but I clearly understand that all my background will lead me to performing orders of covering any events such as conferences, openings of exhibitions, presentations, new factories, sports, holidays etc. So, I need modern equipment for this type of work. And the dilemma starts here.
Reportage zooms 24-70 and 70-200 are one of the best, of course. But my hearts wants to buy fixed lenses like 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4. It would be great to purchase something like 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8, 20/1.8, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 135/2.0... But I can't afford this way just now. I have to choose what to buy first. And I can't solve the contradiction by my own.
Why do I want to buy fixed lenses?
1. They are lighter. For me, working with 24-70/2.8 (even the old one - G version) and 70-200/2.8 VRII is grueling. A big camera with these zooms pulling the neck and hands very much.
2. They are smaller. It's very easy to hurt a zoom while working at a dynamic action. I have broken my 24-70 for three times.
3. Their aperture is wider. If I use high-aperture lenses, even my "old man" Nikon D3 can show good results. I'm spoiled with non-noised 6400 ISO on Nikon D4 and 12800 on D5 while Nikon D3's working maximum is 3200. Higher numbers of sensitivity are quite terrible. I will buy a better camera (may be, a used Nikon D4 or a new Nikon D850) but it's a question of tomorrow. Lenses are primary.
4. Their picture are more beauitiful. No comments.
5. They force to be stylish. Every focus length isn't only a width of view but also a a language style. Something like a writing manner for a literary man. When one rotates a zoom ring, they changes an image impression thoughtlessly in the most of times. Usually, a hand sets the most wide angle to take a picture even If the photographer could make several steps backward and use more suitable focus length. Especially If I want to creat series, stories, it's important to keep style.
6. The 85/1.4 lens is really cool for portraits. My 70-200/2.8 can also produce very good pictures, but 85/1.4 does it even better. I think - may be, I can earn money by making portraits? In this case, I can use 85mm...
7. Most often zoom lenses is used in two extreme lengthes - the minimum and the maximum. I use my 24-70 in the range from 24 to 35 mm and on 70 mm for 90% work time. 70-200 is used in 70 and 200 mm for 98% times.
Why do I afraid of purchasing fixed lenses?
1. It's actually very easy to skip an important scene while working at fast-pacing action. Two steps forward of two steps backward? Who knows where the VIP will stop to shake hands? Or it's ordinary situation when all the collegues stayed near to me and waited a moment - and suddenly rush forward for the picture. They rotate zooms - I haven't time to change fixed lenses.
2. Fixed superior AF-S Nikkor lenses are much more expensive than one zoom lens.
Why do I think that zoom lenses is the most comfort decision?
1. I have got a very good tele-zoom 70-200/2.8, and even one wide- or standard zoom like 16-35/4 or 24-70/2.8 will cover 95% cases of everyday workflow of a reportage photography. It isn't so beautiful as fixed lenses but easy one.
Thank you in advance for your patience. I'd be grateful If you share your opinion. May be, somebody from you was in the same situation.
Last edited: