I think there is a lot more to this than just, convenience vs. sharpness and weight/cost. There is a greater range of "look" and shooting conditions that I can do with fast, prime telephotos than with slower zooms. The flexibility of greater control of DOF and lower light levels is more important to me than adjustable focal length. This is due, in large part, to having shot a long time and knowing what I like in an image and what I don't. I have 180/2.8 & 85/1.8 primes and a 70-300-4/5.6 zoom, and I use the primes much more. Now I don't always carry both of them. I usually have a 50/1.8 and a 28-105 zoom with me, so I don't take the 85 unless I know I'm going to need/want it. A 80-200/2.8 zoom would be handy, but they weigh way more than the 180/2.8 (45oz vs. 25 oz). The 70-300 is pretty much only used for zoos and a light camera bag. I have found that over time I can get by with fewer lenses (for shooting, rather than collecting) than when I was finding my "style".
(Note to newer members on the list: If you're confused about when did Pentax start making 180/2.8 & 50/1.8 lenses, they didn't. Most of my shooting is now done with Nikon, because used, AF 180/2.8 & 85/1.8's are common, and you can buy both for under $600. ) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
