>>3466743I agree somewhat.
It's already been discussed that simply walking forward or backward is not always an option. Nor is it always desirable. If I can fill the frame with the desired composition and perspective, I'm essentially "cropping", but optically, and using 100% of my sensor's effective area.
I've got a 14-24 Nikon lens, and I bought it after extensively researching the alternatives like prime lenses. But at such wide angles, the difference between each individual mm in focal length grows exponentially greater, not to mention this lens was actually outclassing other options stopped down (where I shoot), including that $3000 Zeiss 15mm.
Lastly, I shoot in rainy weather enough that taking the lens off and replacing it with another just isn't an option. Oh, and it's not lazy at all to do what you need to do to get the shot you want. If I have a prime and it's the best tool for the job, I'll use it. But if a zoom lens does the job better, I'll do that.
So no, primes are not always better, or more desirable.
