>>2655969"I know that it is a common prejudice that a zoom is softer than a prime. But in reality this is not necessarily true at least not if you just say 'the zoom' but actually the zoom is many lenses. So a well made zoom at least in the middle of the focal length range is very often better than corresponding prime lenses because the optical efforts, just the number of lenses and the special tricks with lenses, complicated high performance glasses or so, is higher in the zoom than generally in the prime lens. This comparison brings us to our main topic the otus. The otus can only be bigger (I think he meant better) by spending more effort, more lens elements. The traditional prime lenses, the small size was always the most important issue. So one limited the efforts a little bit and accepted the quality limitation. So zooms in the middle of their range can be excellent of course they show compromise sometimes in the end of the range in the middle they can be excellent provided that the make is good but because of the higher complexity across the dangers of misalignment of lenses are a little bit higher."
https://youtu.be/9cnEnRADDLo?t=6m15sSo he says a zoom can better if you use more elements to make corrections which is not always done to some primes to keep sizes down. So a big expensive zoom with lots corrections will be better than a prime in part of the range. To say this means zooms are better than prime goes against what he is saying.
