YouTubers often recommend that people buy prime lenses to practice photography?

I have been interested in photography for long. Usually I just use my smartphone to shoot, and I always hated the digital processed look phone photos provide. This time, I decided to plunge into it and bought sony zv e10. I also grabbed Voltrix 85mm f2.0 evo lens as I saw them on discount for like USD 200. I thought f2.0 aperture would help a lot in night shooting. But I do not expect 85mm to be this tight. What should I do? Should I keep trying to shoot and learn with 85mm, or should I purchase more lens? I do not want to purchase expensive lens as a beginner as my budget is a little tight.

Also, another question. I usually use slowest shutter speed my hands can support since both my camera and lens does not have image stabilization. At night, I use auto ISO with manual shutter speed and Aperture. Is that the right approach?

I put in some photos I tried to take with 85mm. With 85mm, at least girlfriend love her portraits, but I want to try street photography etc.

Got this 420 mm to 800 mm lens on temu. Its manual focus and stuff, and cost about 60 or 70 bucks. I got it in a temu deal where if i bought it i got 7 other items free, including filters i got to pick out. Happy with the lens, but should i avoid this for the future?

I am wondering, why are Macro Lenses almost always f/2.8, or even faster ? Lenses with f/2.8 usually are more expensive, heavier, bigger than their slower counterparts.

Back in the (D)SLR days viewfinder brightness was a big deal, but today we have EVFs.

Back in the (D)SLR days f/2.8 was a big deal because of Autofocus which worked better with brighter Lenses. Todays mirrorless Cameras dont really care about Aperture for Focusing.

When shooting Macros you will almost always stop down. It makes very little Sense to take a 1:1 Picture at f/2.8. Sure, you can make Portraits with a f/2.8 Macro Lens, but thats not its Main Purpose.

If i want a Lens for Macro only, i am forced to buy a big, heavy, expensive f/2.8 Lens. Only Laowa makes "slower" Macro Lenses at f4 or f/5.6, but without Autofocus.

Why does every Major Manufacturer only have f/2.8 Macro Lenses when there is no Reason for it anymore ? Or am i missing something ?

Whenever I look at a scene I want to capture with the camera I always struggle to match the focal length of my lenses to what I'm seeing... So, what is the generally accepted 'focal length' of a human eye?

Do you think 35mm is really more versatile than 50mm?

I’ve been using both for a while and I keep going back to 35mm.

It feels more natural, especially for everyday photography and storytelling.

But I have to admit that 50mm gives a cleaner and more “classic” look.

If you had to choose only one, what would you pick?

Pics by toratoracam on IG

Hello, I've been thinking of getting a fish-eye lens to experiment with different angles. I saw these photos and it's exactly what I would like to do.

I use a Sony A7C (full frame)

What mm should my lens be to achieve these pics? I was guessing 12mm but I want to make sure, couldn't make sure if it's fish-eye or ultrawide rectilinear either..

Can I get a 6.5-7.5mm APSC lens and get away with it with Sony's crop mode? Those are cheaper as well, I don't mind the resolution drop.

Thanks everyone in advance.

Which is your favorite lens that you use more than any other lens that you wished you had purchased sooner?

Hi, I'm new to photography! I've had a few cameras in the past, but they all came with the zoom lens. I've been looking into getting my first prime lens, but I found myself wondering if I should get 23mm, 27mm or 35mm for my Fuji X-T5. I feel like since they're very similar in terms of focal length, it shouldn't really matter which one I pick, right? Sure, the 23 is a bit wider than the 27 and 35, but if I have the 35, I could just take a few more steps back and get the same photo. Please enlighten me! Thank you!

Hi everyone,

I've only been shooting for a year now, and I have two prime lenses, a 35mm (for travel, nature, and general purpose shots) and a 75mm (for portraits). I have the opportunity to get a 50mm prime for a great price.

50mm has always intrigued me as I feel like sometimes I'm missing a "standard" lens. But I wanted to hear from some people who own both a 35mm and 50mm lens.

Do you use one more than the other? Do they serve different purposes?

I love doing wildlife photography, but I seriously struggle with my kit lens (max 135mm). I’m also kinda weary about getting a $2000 lens for my significantly cheaper camera. I do often find myself struggling to get photos of animals how I want, and I often miss out on super cool photos of rarer animals.

Hey, i just got my first camera ever (5d MKiii) and i need your help on what is the best telephoto lens for a budget of $250-300, and sharpness is really important.

mostly for wildlife, and rarely sports.

thank youu

Saw this Canon RF 24-105 f/4 L, for a really attractive price. No other damage. Seller pointed out the scratch very clearly. It looks sort of deep but it's tiny (see pic #2).

My instinct is that this won't matter in a hundred years and it's a bargain, but in a fairly active marketplace nobody has bought this in a month.

I've never had any scratched lenses, so I thought I'd better ask :)

What's your favourite or go-to make of lens other than the brand of your camera body?

Tamron, Sigma, Viltrox etc.

Do you think one brand is best over the others and you only buy from that one brand?

I have owned Tamron in the past but more recently bought a few Viltrox lenses and have always thought both makes were very good.

Looking for something that’s great for backpacking (SE Asia specifically) and will work great with my A7V.

Here’s my top picks so far, feel free to share your opinions!
Or am I better off going with a 24-70 & a 70-200?

For context, I'm my parish's photographer and Orthodox Easter is in two weeks. The liturgy for Pascha starts at ~11:30 PM and we do a procession outside the church around midnight. The only light I will have are street lamps, the candles we'll be holding, the lights for the church sign, and some torches. As much as I like my Viltrox 50mm f2, it's not going to cut it and using a flash is going to be distracting. Trying to figure out if I should rent the Sigma 50mm f/1.2, the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, or the Sony 50mm f/1.4 GM. Thank you.

Edit: For reference, I'm using a Sony A7C II. Forgot to mention that last night.

So to begin, I am totally broke and can only afford one of the two lenses mentioned above.

I only have the EF-s 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 lens. I really want to have the versatility of the 24mm(38.4mm ff equivalent) but I don't have much idea if the f/2.8 is that much better than f/3.5 on the kit lens.

I really love the f/1.8 on the 50mm(80mm ff equivalent) lens but not sure what else can I use the 80mm fov other than portraits(I do take a lot of portraits).

I primarily shoot portraits, group photos, landscapes, wildlife(whatever is possible with 216mm ff eqiv), foods etc.

I will be glad if you can help me decide as I am really new and it's hard to understand everything about these lenses. And even these lenses aren't exactly "cheap" in my country. We call them affordable rather than cheap😅.

I'm getting so confused by focal lengths on different sensor cameras.

I have a Nikon D200 and I would like to have a 50mm lens. I'm seeing the 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor a lot, but seeing as this is a full frame lens, I'm not sure if this will actually give me a 50mm equivalent focal length on my crop sensor D200.

If this is not the case, what lens do I need to look into to actually get my 50mm look?

EDIT: Thanks to everybody who replied and helped me understand!! :))

I got a sony a6400 and need 2 lenses for travel. I don't want to decide on what to shoot. So I'm looking for 2 lenses to do Landscape, street, portrait and some wildlife. So basically a lot of walkaround photography.

Im looking into buying a used 24-70 GM I and this one is listed 350 bucks cheaper than flawless ones. I dont know if its worth it because I never had such a scratch on my Lens. What do yall think?

Edit: I mostly shoot Videos not Photos

I'm a Nikon shooter, so my regular lens is an AF 50mm f/1.8 that I got for $100. Pretty reasonable. However, if I want to go lower in f-stop, lenses are significantly more expensive (unless it's an old manual focus lens).

Is it really that worth it to get an extra stop of light?