9/19    Do you guys use a prime lens (fixed length)? Which ones do you use
        and which ones are useless?
        \_ I don't understand why 35mm f2 is $300, but 35mm f1.4 is $700.
           The difference is minute. Why would you pay double for slightly
           better bokeh capability?
           \_ You're not paying for bokeh, you're paying for speed.
              If you're shooting in low light, that can make a huge
              difference in the feasibility of getting a good shot.  -tom
        \_ I love 50mm on 5D (really 50mm) and 28mm on 350D (~45mm
           equivalent).  Other than that, I use 100mm macro a lot.
           135mm is possibly the best lens I own, but I haven't had a
           chance to use it very much.  I also like my 85mm (not the
           expensive f/1.2L, but just f/1.8).  It should be obvious by
           now that I like primes.  I also have 200 f/2.8.  I stick to
           zooms on the wide end, though.
           \_ What can you do with a bunch of prime lens that you can't
              do with modern zoom lenses today?
              \_ shoot at 2.8 and wider. 300 f2.8 is really expensive.
        \_ I use a Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens quite frequently. I am considering
           getting the Canon 24mm f/2.8 b/c the 50mm isn't wide enough for
           my outdoor photography.
           \_ In the old days, 50mm was the defacto prime lens because
              it was a natural 1:1 ratio with what the normal human eye
              would see. Today, 50mm on a DSLR is really 75mm, because
              digital CCD is smaller than 35mm film by 1.3-1.6X. Therefore,
              50mm on a DSLR is simply too focused.
              \_ This is precisely why I want to get the 24mm f/2.8.
           \- nikon and canon both have 50mm reasonably fast lenses [f/1.8]
              at good optical quality [so-so build quality] for very cheap
              ~$100. so it's a decent investment. the 1/3 stop faster 1.4
              has much better build quality, but is about 3x as much. lens
              pricing can be kind odd with lenses with similar specs being
              in different quality tracks [e.g. nikon 18-35 vs 17-35].
              i also have a 105/ 2.6 prime 1:1 macro ... which is a decent
              i also have a 105/ 2.8 prime 1:1 macro ... which is a decent
              portrait lens. so fast primes with shallow DoF have their uses
              [fast zoom are really heavy and expensive]. I have to say I dont
              use my 24mm prime much any more ... but it is small and good
              quality. Also note it takes a much smaller filter than my
              18-35zoom ... so stuff like that adds up both in $ and weight.
              \_ what f-stop is your 28mm? A Nikkor 28mm f1.4 costs $3000
                 \- if you are talking to me: my *24*mm is a landscape lens.
                    not f1.4. what is a wide angle f1.4 for? as you no doubt
                    know, the purpose of the 24prime is less distortion than
                    the zooms in that range ... and much, much lighter [some
                    what of an isue when climbing/on expedition].
                    \- oh i see: the 28 f1.4 is a way to get ~50mm on a DX
                       sensor. as ken rockwell says: "Because it was
                       so expensive, no one bought them. Because no
                       one bought them, Nikon stopped making
                       them. Because Nikon stopped making them,
                       photographers and collectors now want it"
                       Those are people with too much money.
                       \_ Yes you got it, that was what I was asking.
                          I really want one too, I want a 28mm prime.
        \_ I have a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 MF  that I used on my FM2, N70 and now
        \_ I have a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 MF that I used on my FM2n, N70 and now
           D80.  Quality was good, but now a very small bug (insect) seemed to
           have crawled inside the lens and died on one glass surface, although
           I have no idea how that could have possible happened.  However, I
           don't notice any quality degrade in the 4"x6" pictures.
           don't notice any quality degrade in my 4"x6" prints.
           \- If you are in the Yeah Area, Horizon Electronics in Union City
              [?] can fix this for you. However, you may be better off just
              buying a Nikkor 50 1.8D ... or ignoring, if as you say it is
              small enough not to affect anything. If plausible you can ask
              for the "professional discount" ... plausibility I suppose
              depends slightly on documentation [business card] or gear
              [i.e. F5 vs D80]. I would just get a D lens for the D80 AF
              if you want to stay with FullFrame lenses. BTW, this is one
              semi-win for Nikon: no physically incompatible mounta change...
              semi-win for Nikon: no physically incompatible mount change...
              although in the case of people our age, Canon mount change
              decision would have probably been a plus.
              \_ what age is that?
                 \- If you didnt learn to shoot on a Canon F-1, then it
                    applies to you ... your photographic life would have
                    likely been all in the EF era.
           \_ Don't you notice a big zoom difference (1.5) going from film
              to D? It's more like 75mm.
              \_ Yes I do.  The angle of view is smaller on the D80. -- PP