>supposed to only use primes
>dude le zoom with your feet
OK so how do I take photos of things further away than I can walk?

>listening to preset Hawkers

>>4433648 (OP)
Try running or use a telescope.

>>4433648 (OP)
It's just boomer advice for retards that are just starting out. The point being that different focal lengths look different so zooming is a stylistic decision and can't just be done out of convenience. You are smart enough to see the flaw with the logic so you graduate

>>4433648 (OP)
>OK so how do I take photos of things further away than I can walk?
Get 3-5 prime lenses to cover that zoom range, duh!

>>4433671
Bro this 400mm prime is so much lighter and sharper and more sovl than a shitty 100-400mm zoom
>Carries 100mm, 200mm, 300mm, 400mm prime at all times
>Still misses a shot changing from 400 to 300mm

>>4433648 (OP)
modern lenses for mirrorless cameras are so good nowadays that you don't need primes

>>4433690
Correct. Primes are now only for super wide apertures, or higher corner performance (not always even the case).
I kind of sneed a prime wide for astro, but honestly modern ultrawide zooms aren't even much worse, I just don't want to pay for them.

>>4433692
Or size

>>4433648 (OP)
With a zoom.

"Zoom with your feet" applies to the 24mm to 85mm range because you're also controlling perspective. But more perspective effects and magnification need different lenses.

>>4433690
Incorrect. Zooms are, no matter what, larger, heavier, and more expensive to achieve the same quality. When people say shit like this I imagine the canon boomer blobfags.

Maybe if you're shooting a wedding, this makes sense, but wedding photography is gay and I'd rather never make money with a camera ever once in my life than shoot a fucking wedding because I am not desperate enough to sell my soul for cash.

>>4433713
What kinds of photos do you shoot?

>>4433764
Dogs, cats, rocks, leaves, and my girlfriend

Wedding photography gets you a front row seat to two fat mexicans making out

>>4433766
And you need primes over a 28-70 f2 for dogs, cats, rocks, and leaves?
If that's the type of clients you book, sure

>>4433777
I need primes because my camera is a day to day thing, not a job. Such is life when you enjoy photography.

A 28-70 f2 is a massive lump that is impossible to carry when my gf and my dog and me go to some national park

An 85mm like lens in her purse and a 35mm or something around my neck is more enjoyable, and actually higher quality with more 3d pop and tonality.

>>4433784
Sounds like you need the hit the gym

>>4433786
I do, so there's zero padding over my ribs. It must be hard for a fatty to understand what it's like to carry a front heavy camera, resting at an odd angle, without an extra inch of fluff.

>>4433784
>3d pop
Schizo detected

>>4433792
3d pop is only denied by reddit tier "science fans"
>uhm if 3d pop is real why doesnt dpreview have a chart for it?
It takes a genuine understanding of science to accept it as objective fact
or, just look at a picture

Experience editing helps too, you learn to spot when boosting saturation and contrast is futile and would create a rockwellian mess because the color/shading isn't there to begin with

>>4433791
I carry more than you do at weddings for 8-10hrs lol
>>4433795
> just look at a picture
Awesome, can we see some examples that have 3d pop?

>>4433796
>i carry a big camera while having a front row seat to two fat mexicans making out
Cool, I'm not tryna be you bruh. No cap.

>>4433795
If you can successfully explain 3d pop using actual terminology and not "le character" or "muh rendering", without confabulating it with contrast or sharpness, I will consneed.
But you can't because 3d pop isn't real.

>itt. 19th 3d pop thread of the month

>>4433800
Calling it contrast is inappropriate around gearfags because they get the idea that they can pull curves or sliders around to do the same thing, which does not work

>>4433799
>zoomer
Isn't there a tik tok thread you should be jerking off to right now, kid

>>4433799
You couldn't be if you wanted to bruh

>>4433764
I work for the GNAA and shoot gay pornography of black on black sex.

>>4433801
Isnt that the difference between macro and micro contrast?
>>4434004
Most based income haver otb.

>>4433648 (OP)
Drive a car.

>>4434552
cars cost even more than a mirrorless camera this is cost prohibitive

>>4433784
Based prime poster. The "zoomers" will cope and seethe cause their composition is zoom lens until frame full and leads to bad shit that will not be remembered. Zooms have gotten good but primes have gotten even better and smaller. Almost every good picture was taken with a prime for a reason.

>>4433648 (OP)
You're not supposed to use only primes. Use primes for very specific things, like macro, portraits, street photography.
You should have a general purpose sharp lens that will do everything, like the Nikon 24-120mm F4. You might want a 24-200, but it will be big.
You definitely want a telephoto that meets your needs and what your budget allows. Might be a prime.

>>4436663
You are supposed to use only primes. Most hobbyists only use a prime for their general purpose shooting and don't buy a zoom other than the kit lens unless they branch out into professional photography, wildlife photography, or boomer UWA landscape photography.

>but bro what if you miss a shot
See this is for when you have a client on your back requesting things. I don't care if zooms are sharp enough, no one does, no one wants to carry a camera that is the size of a small dog and has 75% of its weight several inches in front of the strap attachment points when they're shooting for fun and can afford to miss shots.

>>4433648 (OP)
Compose so them being smaller in the frame is no biggie
Realize why everyone uses a 35mm or 50mm as their default prime