So recently I've got a Fuji X-Pro3 and I've been asking on Instagram whether I should go
for a set of fast primes for it, or the so-called Fujicrons with a more compact design. More
than half voted for the fast glass and I had to admit that actually I wanted to go for Fujicrons,
but honestly, these voting results weren't of any surprise to me since nowadays photographers have
strong stereotype about the need of having the fast glass, which mostly starts melting down as
soon as the question has been asked "why?" Today we'll talk about why you don't need fast glass.
Welcome back to Aperture Valve guys, so the fast glass, huh? It's almost same old sh** as with full frame
being idolized. Let's try to deconstruct this issue so you also better understand why are we even
doing this episode. So where does fast aperture come from in the first place? Digging a bit back
into history we can find out that people knew that controlling the aperture can improve quality
of the image all the way back in 1500s. Almost 400 years later in the end of 19th century it
was noticed that aperture also controls depth of field. Therefore, controlling aperture value became
more significant. The actual f-stops that we know now were standardized in 1949. Soon after that
1.4 & 1.8 primes became more common, but nobody was thinking of getting that sweet ass bokeh back then.
The main point of such lenses is filling your viewfinder with light and letting you focus
easier. After that the automatic aperture function was introduced. In the end of 20th century the new
thing came up that f***** around the whole marketing: bokeh. Ever heard of it? Let's be honest - Japanese
have sh**loads of dedicated words to describe some random stuff. Bokeh was one of them and slowly
it got into English-speaking photography community, and here we come to an explanation why fast lenses
are so hyped today. You see, bokeh is one of the very first reasons you'll hear in response to "why you
need such a wide aperture?" and besides hype it has absolutely nothing to do with things like logic,
objectivity or common sense. Bokeh is quite a recent thing in terms of history and it got so well
marketed, that new people who get into photography rave only about it. It is the main drive for them
to switch from phone to point-and-shoot, from APS-C to full frame, from f2 to 1.4, but keep in mind -
this is not your decision, this decision is made for you by camera companies, who
market their new fast lenses, by photographers, who are ambassadors of these companies,
and by some youtubers, who would say whatever it takes to make the viewer follow their affiliate
links to buy these same lenses. And the first thing you'll hear will be "it's professional,
if you want to be professional, best choice for pro and blah blah blah..." Let me tell you, if you're so
obsessed with having Pro - I have a great camera for you. "A new and improved Pro camera system makes the
12 Pro the photographer's iPhone. The larger iPhone 12 Pro Max takes these innovations even further."
Seriously though, there are really few professional fields where fast apertures like 1.2 or 1.4 are used
constantly. You can think of astrophotography, some wildlife/sports, motion picture or x-ray
imaging. If you think portraiture is something that craves fast aperture then oops: fail again.
Most of real pro work in commercial, fashion and editorial photography is done at small apertures. I
remember the first time I heard about it was from Lindsay Adler's master class where she said that
she uses f16 for her portraiture. And if you start to follow some real, I mean REAL professionals in the
industry, you will see that no one shoots fast glass there. Well, I'm not saying they never use
it, but trust me: the handful times they do does not make it pro. Now let's face the big ass elephant in
the room: wedding photography. Since in reality there is no such profession as photographer,
photographers who I consider pros are people who have been doing it for their whole life, who
made it their full-time career and know nothingbut photography. These are the only people worth
listening to. People who at some point decided to turn their hobby into a way of making extra money -
they can have opinion, but telling other people what is pro and what is not is a little bit out
of their league. So I know that many of them use fast glass, but believe me - they can do the same
kind of work shooting at f2, it's just their own personal preference, which is up to them to justify.
I did some commercial work in the past and let me tell you: clients don't give a f***. You can
shoot a 10 year old DSLR with 8mpx crop sensor for big boards - nobody cares, as long as
you capture what they like. Couples don't care whether you shoot them at f1 or f4, they only
want you to portray their very special moment. Shooting fast glass makes it easy for you, not
more precious for them. Any kid can shoot pretty pictures at wide aperture - it takes a real pro
to prepare and compose a creative shot and shoot it at f16. Does fast glass produce better quality?
Certainly not. Even the best most expensive lens is doing better stopped down. Does fast glass give
you unique look? Well, not anymore really. Even damn phones can blur out your background. Driving 3
hours to some beautiful place to take a picture of a person for money with that beautiful place
in the background being blurred to nanoparticles - is that so unique nowadays?.. I see so many people
posting pictures with the bokeh being the subject of the composition, but shouldn't it be just the
supporting factor of your photograph? And by the way, to all who think that they need fast glass
to "isolate the subject": you don't need a fast lens, you need a long lens. These days cameras do so well
with auto focus, high ISO and image stabilization, I see less and less reasons to get fast glass at
all. Considering the fact that they are also much bigger, heavier and more expensive. Fast lenses are
really overrated and the misconception of these lenses being the top tier is unfortunately backed
up by the strategies of camera companies. Just like they do with the APS-C and full frame models
in their lineup. You can hardly find a decent pro APS-C body these days, why? Well, because the company
wants you to move from your entry level crop body to feature packed more expensive full frame model.
So people jump to assumptions that APS-C cameras are crap, shame on you for that by the way! Same with
lenses: they on purpose make fast primes and zooms of high quality with weather sealing, latest tech
and trillion of smart coatings just so that people who are looking for a good lens have to pay more;
and on the other hand, the slower lenses they make cheap and plastic, lacking all the great
available technology. Just like with camera bodies, slower lenses are just customers' transfer point
to more expensive fast glass. Think about it: if you want to buy let's say a 50 mil prime, for any
system: you'll come up with a bunch of native and third-party options with f1.2-1.4-1.8, most of
them will be quite expensive and chunky, but what if you want just a tad slower option? Can you find
a decent f2-2.8 prime without compromises? All you will be able to find is nifty fifty, which is
great for the price, but normally is far from perfect. I think most people will be happy with f2...
Imagine an f2 lens without compromises, which would be definitely smaller and cheaper than faster
options. That would be top seller probably. Only Leica doesn't really f**** care about what you think
and can make a f2-2.8 and even f3.5 primes that, oh surprise! Are simply incredible, with superior
image quality and compact designs. It would be great if camera companies would devote their time
creating more quality lens options, instead of pushing everyone to buy their best of the best
1.4 bricks... So, to sum it up, there are many ways for you to stay away from needless fast primes.
You need low light? Use your super duper high ISO or image stabilization, both in body or optical. You
need something more creative? Instead of shooting wide open, try to think of something more creative
than a simple change of aperture! Bokeh shots are really everywhere now and you won't find any
originality and creativity there. You need better quality? Simply going to more expensive glass might
not be the solution - learn more about how aperture works, find the sweet spots of your own lenses,
read about dual gain and master your camera settings, finally!.. Using all that you'll see
how many shots can be done without fast glass and how many really need it. If it's 9 out of
10, why bother spending money on these monstrous lenses, big expensive filters, larger heavier bags?..
I could remind that, of course, it doesn't apply to everyone - but knowing people in general, I
understand and most will refer themselves to those 5% who really need to own fast class,
so let's avoid that, okay? Long ago I figured for myself: the portion of shots where I really needed
a wide aperture was so little, that there is no any practical or logical reason to keep fast
lenses at all. I can get the whole kit of lenses instead of just one fast prime. I got three must
have primes for me: 16mm f 2.8, 35 f2 and 50 f2. Also thinking to get a pancake, can decide between
18 f2 and 27 2.8... I've already spent some time with all of them and the next episode will be
devoted to this Fujicron gang, showing some samples shot on X-Pro3. Meanwhile, I'm expecting a burst
of steaming hot piles of fanboy sh** in comments about where I should stick my opinion so - go ahead.