I'm curious how many of you here shoot with prime (fixed, non-zoom) lenses and how many use manual focus only lenses?

Over the past year, I've started selling my Canon USM lenses (17-40mm and 24-70mm) and purchasing more basic lenses, like the Zeiss 35mm f/2. Of the 5 lenses I now carry, only two of them are auto-focus, and only one of them can zoom: the 70-200 f/2.8.

My camera bag is a lot heavier than it used to be, but I've noticed a massive difference in my photos lately. Because I'm forced to move around more and put more work into each shot, I've noticed I have been coming out with less images, but more keepers. It's really helped me get out of the 'run and gun' mentality.

Manual focus is actually easier to use than I expected. Sure, it can be difficult to photograph moving subjects, but not as bad as I thought. If the lens is chipped, the focus confirmation lights still work. For what I shoot mostly, which is still life and long exposure, the auto-focus is never used anyways.

Sometimes I miss my old zoom a/f lenses, but never when it comes to abandoned photography.

Anybody else use basic primes or manual lenses?

I no longer shoot with a digital SLR (my only digital today is one of those prosumer point and shoot Sony RX100) but my favorite lenses I ever used on digital were Nikon primes. I don't like the lenses made for digital so with Nikon I liked the fact you could use just about any old film lens. My main one was a Nikon 50mm 1.4D. It was AF and MF but an early era one. LOVED my shots with that. The 50mm 1.2 was also a great lens, though I never needed anything at 1.2 with it. There were some fine 3rd party ones too, I always liked early Rokinon models.

I always kept an UWA lens (Tokina 11-16mm) with my Nikon as I do like really wide stuff but many of my favorite shots were with the primes. That's also the main reason I shoot medium format film, all my lenses are prime and damn good quality stuff.





This is with a Nikon D40 and an early 28mm Rokinon MF lens.



These two were with a Nikon D7000 and a Nikon 50mm 1.2 MF.






And then this one was with a Canon 5D and a Canon EF 24mm.



Honestly, it really just depends on the scene and what I'm going for. There's a time and a place for each type of lens.

Also should add that I totally get the taking less images once you get all the MF gear and such. When I first started shooting abandoned stuff I would take 100-200 shots per trip. Nowadays, regardless of film or digital I take between 1 and 6 shots normally per location but they all come out exactly as I want because you really learn to appreciate taking your time to get a great shot.

I use both exclusively while exploring. Nothing quite as nice as the Zeiss but for a long time my standard kit was just a Rokinon 14mm and an old Olympus 50mm macro, occasionally with a Vivitar 24mm f2 that now lives on my film Nikon. I just added a thrift-store Nikon 24-85mm f2.8-4D zoom, but seeing as it's adapted to Canon I still focus it manually.

I stick with these primarily because I pretty much learned photography from the ground up with manual lenses, either on film cameras or adapted to a DSLR. While I have a few auto zooms, I really almost never use them. Manual primes have always been the most affordable option, and I just really enjoy using them more. Using the 50mm macro especially always makes me work really hard in getting my framing and aperture just right, so much so that I think it gives me overall the most satisfying results of all my lenses.

The Canon focus screens were never very good for manual focus like the Nikons I played with.

AF works well if you know what it sees; high contrast areas like the eye or hair. Getting a lock on at the depth you want is the trick.
You need to present enough area of the target in the AF zone with no higher contrast targets next to it. That can get tricky with faces as the hair competes with the eye for AF lock.
AF works best with a f/2.8 or faster lense.
For accurate AF both the cam and lense need to be calibrated correctly. Best to send to Canon for this.

For stills a 535 red laser pointer works like voodoo. You'll get solid accurate AF locks even a hundred yards out in complete darkness. Better than manually focus in very low light.

The manual lenses I have are:

Zeiss 35mm f/2


Zeiss 18mm f/3.5


My newest baby is the Rokinon 85mm f/1.2. It totally kicks the Canon 85mm f/1.2L to the curb in pretty much every respect except A/F, and is devastatingly sharp wide open. I bought it brand new for $800, instead of $2500 for the Canon version!



The Rokinon lens is by far the hardest lens I've ever used, but it's incredible when you nail the focus. I use live view and a tripod for 90% of my urbex photos anyways, so it doesn't matter much.

My next plan is to get an adapter so I can use my old M42 mount Helios 44. Apparently they have some pretty gnarly effects. I've had one sitting on my old Zenit E for years, and didn't give it much thought.

Zeiss lenses aren't as unattainable as people think. I sold my 17-40mm f/4L lens for $700, and then turned around and bought the Zeiss 18mm lens for $900. I later sold my 24-70 F/2.8 for $1000, and used the money to buy the Zeiss 35mm f/2 for $600, and put the extra cash towards the Rokinon 85mm lens. Basically, I updated my kit, by selling 2 lenses and buying 3 way better ones, with only $600 out-of-pocket. (I do a lot of stock photography sales, to fund my gear addiction, haha)

Due to its age and needing minor repairs (bad remote port), I've been migrating away from my D-SLR as the primary camera.

Lately my love has been a 6x9 system built on the Polaroid 600SE -- essentially the Mamiya Universal but neutered to just the three lenses that shot Polaroid packfilm full-frame. I just acquired a Mamiya Super 23, the predecessor to the Universal, that will succeed this camera and open up a far wider range of lenses (Mamiya Press lenses and those for the 600SE are not interchangeable). I have a viewfinder back and shoot it like a view camera.

Both are manual everything and use rangefinder focusing -- my vision isn't that great so I need a focusing aid of some kind. I currently have the 127mm f/4.7, and 75mm f/5.6; I need to find a 75mm for my Super 23 before I start using that more. My carry is now extremely heavy but I've been very happy with both lenses.

Shot with the 127:










Shot on the 75

99% of the time I only use two lenses. 50 mm 1.4 and 14-40L for wide shots. There isn't anything else I really need when I go out. I do carry a 28 mm prime, but i almost never use, I should really sell and put it towards a shift tilt lens.