Talk:Prime lens

Bad Assumptions
It is pretty obvious from reading the article that the default imaging system used is 35mm still photography - ie. 50mm is a "standard lens", but nowhere do I see that in the discussion. Most of us who have used cameras with different formats get this, but the uninformed reader who sees this for the first time will not...

There is a lot of variation in format out there - from 1/4" consumer camcorder lenses to medium format or larger still camera lenses and a 50mm lens would be a telephoto lens in one format or a wide angle lens in another format. How to make this more understandable?

The reason this is a can of worms is that APS-C sensors have a much smaller sensor area than a full frame sensor (and not even the same between manufacturers), yet the manufacturers are selling lenses marked with the numbers appropriate for full frame (yet the actual focal lengths do not match the numbers). I use both an APSC-C Sony Alpha58 (APS-C) and an Alpha99 (FF) and regularly interchange lenses, so I can easily see the differences when using the same lens.

At the very least, you need to have links to other pages where this topic is discussed!

52.119.115.152 (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Prime lens vs. fixed focal length lens
I've read that the term prime lens to mean "fixed focal length" (rather than a zoom) is a (relatively) recent adoption, and that some people don't like using it this way. They say a prime is the major lens attached to a camera, to distinguish it from any attachment lenses such as teleconverters, etc. So you could have a zoom lens as a prime lens, for instance. They would use the term "FFL lens" to mean what this article calls a prime lens. People who know more about photography, is this usage sufficiently widespread to make it worth adding to the article? --Bob Mellish 16:55, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Bob, I've never heard the term prime lens used this way. Prime is a FFL lens, calling zoom lens a prime would be confusing. Teleconverters are usually referred just as teleconverters or extenders (without the word lens), and most of other attachments (i.e. extension tubes, filters, etc.) are not lenses at all. Azov 22:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree with Bob. I've been active in SLR photography for 30 years, and this is the first I've come across "prime lens" being interchangeable with "fixed focal length lens". Just because some people have recently been misusing the term does NOT mean Wikipedia (or any other source) should dignify the misuse of the term by endorsing that misuse.  Akulkis (talk) 04:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not familiar with this alternative meaning of "prime lens" either. If you can find a relevant, verifiable source that uses the term differently, then the source can be cited and a note added to the article. --MarkSweep &#x270D; 00:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I haven't been able to find a reliable source. The discussion I was reading is here: (refers to a WP article, which is why I noticed it), and it's clear the person making the distinction has something of a bee in his bonnet about the terminology. Anyway, it's pretty clear that prime = fixed focal length is the dominant meaning nowadays. --Bob Mellish 01:04, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Can anyone point me to someone calling the lens on a fixed-focus, non-zoom lens on a P&S a "prime lens"? If you believe FFL = Prime, then you could. Azov, I consider losing the true meaning of "prime lens" (which is "primary lens" not "best lens" as if it were graded meat), is something that should not be taken lightly. We already have terms for "zoom" and "FFL." We also need to differenciate between the primary lens and converters that are attached to them--which is where "prime" rightfully comes in. Don Williams 23:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I re-worded the statement pending verification. Could somebody find a reliable source confirming that it indeed is a "true meaning" (or at least that the term has ever been widely used in this sense)? Azov 02:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)


 * "Prime lens" has been used to mean the camera lens, as opposed to some other lens used with it (such as a close-up lens or tele converter), for at least 50 years that I know of. That is long before zoom lenses were in general use and therefore long before there was any need to coin a term meaning fixed focal length (FFL) to distinguish non-zooms from zooms. The misusage started more than 10 years ago to my knowledge, and was probably the result of someone seeing "prime lens" used in reference to a lens that just happened to be FFL, who then wrongly assumed that's what it meant. I am not aware of any camera maker ever using "prime" in lens literature to mean FFL. Certainly Minolta and Nikon have not. There are, however, several lens makers who catalog variable prime lenses (i.e., prime lenses of variable focal length) and use exactly that term, "variable prime," to DISTINGUISH these lenses from FFL lenses. These lens makers include Zeiss, Schneider, Century and others. One of many sites listing variable prime lenses is here: http://www.lucamera.com/2000/variable.html

Since it is obviously confusing if the same term is used to mean fixed focal length AND variable focal length, the misusage should be avoided, notwithstanding its current popularity. "Prime lens" is correctly used when "prime" is taken in the sense of "primary," "chief," "original," "first in order," etc., which are all dictionary definitions for the word "prime." It makes no difference whether the prime lens is FFL or zoom; one is just as much prime as the other. There is NO dictionary definition for "prime" meaning fixed focal length, or fixed anything else. Jack Falstaff 03:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)


 * It's been several years since this topic was visited, so I thought I'd chime in here in 2015. Working within a local independent FILMMAKING industry, I have been seeing the idea of a PRIME lens meaning not-a-zoom lens. And isn't that exactly what the opposite is? I was just in a sort of beginners filmmaking class/event, and a person who ran it seemed to say that there are two main types of lenses, zoom and prime, which, again, made it sound exactly like prime means not-zoom which – all things being unequal – seems to mean not-a-moving focal length, as with zooms. Words are allowed to change with time, but some recent articles, manuals, books, and catalogs that are using the term "prime" may be doing so in some newer way than primary camera lens. Maybe someone with more recent experience can put some of those citations/links here for us to look at, and someone can also then add newer links to the article? Thanks! Misty MH (talk) 21:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Conforming to Wikipedia policies
Jack & Don, thank you for pointing out the alternative meaning of the term. If you could provide a link to the catalogs you mentioned (preferrably published on a lens manufacturer website or, say, a major photo store, or something of this sort) - I think it would be totally ok to remove the disputed flag.

As to the references to "true" or "correct" meaning of the term - I don't think there's an established authority to assert correctness in this field, thus such references are unverifiable and may not be included in Wikipedia articles. The same goes for our guesses about why most photographers nowdays use the term "prime" as a synonym for "FFL": it's just a guess, and we have to stick to the facts. Azov 19:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Here is a catalog that correctly calls a zoom lens a variable prime lens

http://www.cinequip.com/Category_detail.asp?Category=Lenses

Don Williams 21:36, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "Correctly" is a value judgment Wikipedia is not meant to make. Talk to any dictionary compiler, and they'll tell you that there's no such thing as "correct" - what matters is being understood, and a dictionary is supposed to be descriptive of language as used, not prescriptive.


 * Whether or not the term "prime" originally meant a lens directly attached to the camera body, rather than a supplementary conversion lens - this use is obsolete in the still camera field. Nobody or almost nobody uses the word in this sense in the recent period - at least 20 years.  Thus, the definition of a prime lens as a fixed focal length lens is the operative one.


 * If we can document this alleged older definition sufficiently, it is worth mentioning as well, but it cannot be described as 'correct'. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 18:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Matthew, because many people say "bad" to mean "good", should we change all Wikipedia entries to reflect this? A source material should not always cater to the lowest common demoninator. Don Williams 20:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

May I recommend a compromise? I can think of two options.

(1) We could make this page a disambiguation page, and move the present article to fixed focal-length lens or whatever is the proper wording.

(2) We could adjust the intro paragraph to reflect the changing usage of the term. How about something to this effect:


 * In film and photography, the term prime lens is commonly used to refer to a photographic lens whose focal length is fixed, as opposed to a zoom lens, which has a variable focal length.


 * Although the term originally referred to a lens directly attached to the camera body (as opposed to a supplementary conversion lens), regardless of whether or not the focal length varied, usage has changed, and what was once called a "variable prime lens" is now generally referred to as a zoom lens, and the term "prime lens" reserved for a fixed focal length lens.


 * etc etc


 * Choice (2) seems like a good compromise to me. Don Williams 19:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * 2 sounds good for me. I'd ideally like some more sourcing to show more use of 'variable prime' historically, and to see if it was ever used for still cameras (all the examples I've seen have been for movie).  It would be nice to find how far back the use to mean solely a fixed focal length lens has been in use - I suspect over 20 years. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 20:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I could change "commonly used" to "colloquilly used" Akulkis (talk) 05:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I did some edits before looking here, but it seems that what I did was pretty much in the spirit of what you guys were converging on. Feel free to work on it. Dicklyon (talk) 05:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Educational illustrations
Illustrating this article with hunks of plastic made by Nikon and Canon doesn't add much educational content, even with captions about their specs. I have replaced these with two photographs that provide useful illustrations about the topic of this article. One is a high-quality metal-barreled lens with clear markings and an inset diagram of its optical design. The other is a pair of lenses with visibly large apertures, larger than any (commonly available) zoom. --Stybn (talk) 17:11, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Prime lens. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061020095949/http://www.arrimedia.com/productlist.php?catalog_id=193 to http://www.arrimedia.com/productlist.php?catalog_id=193

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Opinionated "differences" section?
The differences section could be a little more encyclopedic. Vaughan Pratt (talk) 17:26, 13 September 2021 (UTC)