Which is better for product photography: prime or zoom lenses?

[EtherArts]

Which type of lens works better for product photography — prime or zoom? Share your thoughts, experiences, and what you recommend for capturing the best product shots.

 

[3Rotor]

Personally, I choose a lens that works best for my needs in a given situation regardless if it is a prime or a zoom. Technology has come a long ways to where zooms are rivaling primes with the added flexibility. You have to evaluate your shooting environment.

Are you working in a studio?
How much space do you have in this said studio?
How large are your subjects?
Is this a lifestyle product shoot outdoors?
Are you working in varying subject distances?

You really cannot go wrong with either a prime or a zoom but one may be better suited than the other depending on your needs.

 

[paddler4]

I agree with 3Rotor. Years ago, zooms were inferior, but now there are superb ones.

I think 3Rotor's questions are on target. If you have very small objects, you will want a macro lens, and even though many zooms are labeled "macro", none really are. So if you want a zoom for small stuff, check the maximum magnification of the lens.

I do flower close-ups and macros, which have a lot in common with indoor (small) product photography. I have to use a macro lens. the drawback is that with any prime, you can only change the size of the product in the frame by moving either the product or the tripod. It's a lot easier to zoom.

 

[Lester Wareham]

The modern high end zooms tend to be very sharp, although the bokeh may not be as good as a prime lens due to slightly higher levels of astigmatism, also zooms tend to be more limited in terms of maximum aperture.

So in general I would say the only time to worry about it is if you composition relies on tightly limited depth-of-field and/or smooth bokeh.

Traditionally a 90 mm tilt and shift lens was often used in product photography so the photography had control over the plane of focus and could avoid issues like the camera kit reflecting in the product. But this is a specialist tool, I would not recommend it unless you really know you need it.

 

[stevejack]

Unless the zoom lacks certain features you need, I would pick the zoom every time. Leaving the camera where it is on the tripod and being able to zoom in or out to adjust your framing for different product sizes is a massive time saver.
There really isn't any reason not to use a zoom unless you need a wider aperture, but this generally isn't the case for product photography. Sharpness / distortion is a non-issue these days.

 

[paddler4]

So in general I would say the only time to worry about it is if you composition relies on tightly limited depth-of-field and/or smooth bokeh.

Or in one other situation: if the products you are photographing are small enough that you need more magnification than you can get with a zoom and instead would be better off with a macro lens.

Note that while AFAIK, none of the zooms labeled "macro" are in fact macro lenses, they do vary a great deal in terms of their maximum magnification ratios at any given focal length. So, if the products are moderately small, some zooms may provide adequate magnification. In that case, I would go with a zoom for the reasons that I and others have posted.

So, IMHO, the first question is how small the products are.

 

[Greyswan]

Which type of lens works better for product photography — prime or zoom? Share your thoughts, experiences, and what you recommend for capturing the best product shots.

It depends on the product. For myself. I preferred a zoom, because my products varied widely in size. For instance, I could be tasked to shoot a christmas tree ball, 5 foot mirror, or a 10 foot wide santa sleigh. Or cutlery. And one single lens would not be enough, you need a zoom range. I seldom needed a macro (true macro, like the 100mm).

 

[ImageMaker]

I didn’t have a macro lens so used my Nikon 70-200e f.8 FL lens. Worked just fine. I’d prefer a prime macro tho.

 

[Wilt]

'sharp' is not the only critteria. Prime lenses are generally better for freedom from distortion, barrel or pincushion. Zooms, particularly those that are WA-to-telephoto zooms, generally have distortion especially at its shortest FL settings.
Use of 'optimal working distance' will dictate best FL for a given amount of framing which is necessary for the product and lighting. Lighting is not merely 'illumination' but what is best for portraying 'form' and/or 'texture' in a product.

 

[Capn Jack]

'sharp' is not the only critteria. Prime lenses are generally better for freedom from distortion, barrel or pincushion. Zooms, particularly those that are WA-to-telephoto zooms, generally have distortion especially at its shortest FL settings.
Use of 'optimal working distance' will dictate best FL for a given amount of framing which is necessary for the product and lighting. Lighting is not merely 'illumination' but what is best for portraying 'form' and/or 'texture' in a product.

That was true some time ago, but new zoom lenses are comparable to primes.

 

[aeon]

Traditionally a 90 mm tilt and shift lens was often used in product photography so the photography had control over the plane of focus and could avoid issues like the camera kit reflecting in the product. But this is a specialist tool, I would not recommend it unless you really know you need it.

This would be my choice, and in time, will be my choice. From working with someone who uses one, I clearly saw the benefit when doing usual consumer products, food, and table settings.

The perspective control is beautiful. It sounds funny, but when you need that shampoo bottle to have perfect verticals, and look like imposing architecture, it simply cannot be beat.

It’s the middle stop before going full field camera, and into the weeds.

Cheers,
Ian