[bsamcash]

So I have a question about these two amigos.

It seems to be the popular opinion that the 31/1.8 is the superior lens. Now, I do not want to put words in anyone's mouth, but it is at least the more valuable (over twice the price in some cases), and I'm wondering why this is.

I have the 43 but I have never even seen the 31 in person, so I can't make a comparison myself. So maybe someone can help.

Is it something as simple as its field of view on APS-C? Is it a more esteemed formula?

What are your thoughts?

[bassek]

At least the FA31 has more elements (9 in 7 groups) compared to the FA43 (7 in 6). So I would assume this is a materials cost and assembly cost issue as well.

Seb

[Deimos]

I have both. I first bought the 43, then the 77 and last the 31.

They are all great lenses with their own character. The 31 and 77 imo are higher class than the 43, its hard to explain but they are, both in build and in optics (and output).

The 31 is really excellent, it just makes nice images. The IQ, rendering, bokeh, colour, etc are just fantastic. Once I bought it, it became my most used lens by miles, and I have some nice ones (my flickr is almost entirely FA31 shots these days). The 43 on the other hand at least on APSC is just not as versatile and doesnt make nice images *all* the time like the 31 does (the normal FOV helps), the 43 can be a bit fussy depending on the scene. I actually like the 43 best for closer shots and portraits and for its very small size.

But yes the 31 is special, I wondered and doubted before I bought it, especially considering the cost (and I paid over $1k for mine) but the proof is in the pudding. It will be interesting when Pentax finally releases a FF to see the FA ltds in their original FOVs

[bsamcash]

At least the FA31 has more elements (9 in 7 groups) compared to the FA43 (7 in 6). So I would assume this is a materials cost and assembly cost issue as well.

I figured that might have something to do with it. Though, I admit to being rather ignorant when it comes to optical formulas.

It will be interesting when Pentax finally releases a FF to see the FA ltds in their original FOVs

Do you think that if this does happen that the 43 will grow in popularity? It is likely my naivety, but i find it hard to imagine a lens which renders better than the 43--it's so contrasty and sharp. It reminds me of the Yashica Electro 35 GSN. That lens was magic.

[LeRolls]

I'd have to agree with Deimos on this. The 43 was the first Limited I owned and for a long time it was my favorite lens but once I got my hands on the 77 and the 31 that all changed. To me the 43 is still a fantastic piece of glass that is quite special and I still use it on a regular basis (something that can't be said for most of my DA Limiteds). It's just that the 77 and 31 are little bit more special.

[Deimos]

Do you think that if this does happen that the 43 will grow in popularity? It is likely my naivety, but i find it hard to imagine a lens which renders better than the 43--it's so contrasty and sharp. It reminds me of the Yashica Electro 35 GSN. That lens was magic.

I think it will, I cant wait for it to become more or less a normal FOV lens again, especially given the small size. It has always been popular with Canon FF shooters on their 5Ds.

[bsamcash]

The 43 was the first Limited I owned and for a long time it was my favorite lens but once I got my hands on the 77 and the 31 that all changed.

Well I guess I had better start saving up!

[Sandy Hancock]

The FA31 also has an aspherical element, which is more expensive to manufacture.

[Na Horuk]

I think the 43mm is the closest to "nifty fifty" territory, which means it might be easier to manufacture, and it also has a lot of rivals. There are many good 50mm lenses out there, with fast aperture and affordable prices, so it would be more difficult to sell a $1700 43mm lens. There is a difference between 50mm and 43mm. of course, but its not as big as with the 31mm.

[yorik]

For me it's the opposite - I prefer the 43 fl to the 31 fl on aps-c. I look forward to trying all three on full frame some day.

[6BQ5]

I only have the FA 43mm. It works great on an APS sized sensor. Pixie dust abounds ... but if you really want an avalanche of pixie to fall on your images then you have to use it on a film body.


IMGP3405 by Never Off, on Flickr

My greatest regret with this image is that I used Ektar 100 film.

[bsamcash]

There are many good 50mm lenses out there, with fast aperture and affordable prices, so it would be more difficult to sell a $1700 43mm lens.

This is probably the most reasonable explanation.

I prefer the 43 fl to the 31 fl on aps-c.

Interesting. Is it the field of view, or some other reason? What are your usual subjects?

My greatest regret with this image is that I used Ektar 100 film.

It's not too late! Ektar 100 is some wonderful film. I used it and a K-r to shoot my niece's birthday a few years ago, both with the F 50/1.7, and I ended up loving the film shots much more. Beautiful colors and warmth.

[6BQ5]

It's not too late! Ektar 100 is some wonderful film. I used it and a K-r to shoot my niece's birthday a few years ago, both with the F 50/1.7, and I ended up loving the film shots much more. Beautiful colors and warmth.

My FA 43mm is a low contrast lens and it softens portraits while retaining the sharpness and pixie dust. I thought I could pseudo-bump the resulting contrast and saturation up a bit by using Ektar. Although it wasn't as high as when I use a vintage Tak on my Spotmatics, the contrast and saturation was still too high for me. I feel like I'm fighting with the histogram a lot to bend it.

[Driline]

I have both. I purchased the FA 43 first because it was the less expensive of the 3 Amigo's. It took me awhile to figure it out, but once I did the Pixie Dust came quickly. I find the FA 43 better for outdoor flower or plant images. I'm still "learning" the FA 31. So far it's better in low light inside and of course the FOV is much wider. Since I've purchased the FA 31 it has not left my camera. I really need to go back to the FA 43 and do some more comparison. But what I will say is that one certainly does not replace the other. You need both A hard concept to grasp I know, but once you've used them you will understand. I'd love to obtain the FA 77, but so far I've been unwilling to give up my DA*50-135 since it has the same focal length.

[emalvick]

The cost of the 31mm has kept me from obtaining that one limited. I have the 43 mm and a 30 mm Sigma lens that I'm very happy with. Other threads and comparisons have me fairly confident that my 30 mm is adequate for that focal length.

However, there is something about that 43 mm lens I just love. I know it might be odd, but I mostly use it for landscapes, and I think some of my love comes from a bit of a unique perspective it gives for landscapes. Slightly telephoto and wonderful bokeh. Perhaps the 31 mm would be a good landscape lens, too. The 30 mm is not, but it is wonderful for indoor people shots. I need to keep LBA in check, too.