II have several primes and zooms - I too, usually only carry a couple of lenses with me, with the possibility of a third, depending upon where and what I am going to shoot. The two main lenses are zooms - a 12-24 f2.8 Nikkor and a 24-70 f2.8 Nikkor - each on their own body - the third lens is usually a 16mm Fisheye Nikkor. If I'm shooting Infrared then I have my 17-35 f2.8 on camera and may take a 70-200 or 70-300 with me. If I want to travel really light I take a D3/D700 with a 28-200 Nikkor lens on it. For wildlife I take 300 mm and 500 mm primes or one prime and a 50-500 Bigma zoom.
So where is this leading to as far as this post is concerned? Well I would suggest it is a matter of personal choice, prime or zoom. The important thing in all this is that unless your glass MAKER is a good one you might as well stick a milk bottle on the front of your camera and shoot through it ( Idea for someone ?
) Some of todays manufacturers are not up to making milk bottles - I know that there are some good ones out there but QUALITY is what is needed in your lenses, and you need to be tough if you get a dud. Yes, I've had a couple of dud Nikkors in my time but both were quickly replaced ( They came from Taiwan, NOT Japan ). And in spite of what some assert - faster prime lenses are not always the answer. You out there know your budgets and know what you like to photograph so my advice would be - always get the best lenses you can afford, be they zooms or primes....... and then learn to use them properly. As for Alex' last point - They used to nickname the 24-120 range of Nikkor zooms as "Streetsweepers" - a lot of journo pro's thought this range gave them the best opportunity of getting 99% of the shots they would need - as they made a living from this - who are we to argue with their years of depending on such lenses for their livelihoods?
