[Genki]

Which Lens are better to K3: Pentax 43mm - Pentax 55mm - Sigma 35mm Art - Sigma 30mm Art

Better in Construction
More Reliable and Long Durability
More Sharpness
Better Image Quality

Attached Images

     

[Adam]

Apples and oranges IMO, since they're all different focal lengths.

But if I were to choose an overall "best" lens, it would be the Sigma 35mm.

[Genki]

I Agree with you.
Thanks Adam

[Paul the Sunman]

The Sigma 35 is many times larger and heavier than the FA 43. It also routinely overexposes on a K3. The IQ is excellent. Are you willing to carry it around with you and deal with its quirks?

Different focal lengths though! If you have the 18-55 or other short/mid zoom, walk around and deliberately shoot at each of your focal lengths (30, 35, 43, 55) for a while to see which you are most comfortable with.

[virusn3t]

Before BH send the K1s, a was very eager to buy a "normal" lens, beetween the 43mm or the 55mm, or go big and replace my Tamron with the DFA*, after a week, finaly i bought none, (i was able to resist the LBA!), i will wait until a new prime appear, DC, WR, fully compatible FF, [and avoid the slow focus, prone to failure SDM (according to the users) 55mm; and the none WR and more "noiser" 43mm], my Tamron didnt disappoint in the K3 (it shine from F4 and above) i think they will do very well on the K1....

About all these lenses, i prefer the FL of the 31mm in APSC so i will go with the 35mm, as it suppose is better than the Sigma 30

[Genki]

The Sigma 35 is many times larger and heavier than the FA 43. It also routinely overexposes on a K3. The IQ is excellent. Are you willing to carry it around with you and deal with its quirks?

Different focal lengths though! If you have the 18-55 or other short/mid zoom, walk around and deliberately shoot at each of your focal lengths (30, 35, 43, 55) for a while to see which you are most comfortable with.

I have all three lens, 43, 55 and sigma 35. But I am start to think that is time to downsize my equipment.
I like a lot 55m very sharp but I have some concerns about durability. Sigma is very heavy and extreme sharpness and looks better build. The 43 is a nice lens and very well build, but I still more impress with Sigma 35. About Sigma 30mm, I don't know yet if is better than 35, I am still thinking to buy one.

[Genki]

The Sigma 35 is many times larger and heavier than the FA 43. It also routinely overexposes on a K3. The IQ is excellent. Are you willing to carry it around with you and deal with its quirks?

Different focal lengths though! If you have the 18-55 or other short/mid zoom, walk around and deliberately shoot at each of your focal lengths (30, 35, 43, 55) for a while to see which you are most comfortable with.

I didn't test yet this Sigma 18-35mm, but I have concerns about sharpness in zoom lens, that's the way I prefer to use normal lens.

Attached Images

 

[Sperdynamite]

I'm going to be a bit contrarian and say I cannot recommend the Sigma 35/1.4 Art. I had one for a while, and sold it. It's extremely heavy for a lens, and with the K-3, it'll be a front loaded beast. While it is very sharp, it is also quite boring in it's rendering, with contrast that makes you go...'meh'. IMO people should get into the Pentax brand because their lenses seem to me to be designed with aesthetic rendering first, and measurbation 2nd. The 43/1.9 is an old design by modern standards, but extremely sharp, especially when stopped down even at 2.8. It also has fabulous rendering and contrast, a tiny profile, and mechanics that are simpler than the Sigma (simpler = more reliable). "Image Quality" is a meaningless term when you consider that all the variable that make up the quality of a photograph. Even if the 35 is a hair shaper than the 43, I prefer image qualitIES of the 43. The best lenses balance sharpness, contrast, and rendering to make a whole. The reason why the Otus line is still better than the Art line, even though sharpness may be similar, is that the Zeiss bring the rendering too and balance them both.

As for the 55, well if you want a Portrait lens thats the one to get. The 43, 35, and 30 are more general purpose. Also, consider the 31/1.8 Limited! If you're looking for something wider than the 43 that's the one to get. Sharpness and rendering for days.

[clackers]

I didn't test yet this Sigma 18-35mm, but I have concerns about sharpness in zoom lens, that's the way I prefer to use normal lens.

I used my work colleague's the other day on a Nikon 3200, Genki. It's prime sharp, don't worry about that.


No problems autofocusing with his copy, but Pentax versions might be more problematic. Pricing is good.


The Sigma 30mm Art is available for a really cheap price these days - its reputation is for being super sharp in the middle and not great at the sides. Probably makes it good on APS-C for pictures of a central subject with dropoff towards the edges, but on FF 30mm is typically an environmental focal length (not sure what your particular shooting style is), and that's undesirable behaviour.

My walkaround primes with the K-1 are going to be the Sigma 35mm Art and DA*55. Beautiful pastel rendering (3D even if you get the right background) and WR with the latter (and no, this vignetting was added in post!!!!):

[Genki]

I used my work colleague's the other day on a Nikon 3200, Genki. It's prime sharp, don't worry about that.


No problems autofocusing with his copy, but Pentax versions might be more problematic. Pricing is good.


My walkaround primes with the K-1 are going to be the Sigma 35mm Art and DA*55. Beautiful rendering and WR with the latter.


The Sigma 30mm Art is available for a really cheap price these days - its reputation is for being super sharp in the middle and not great at the sides. Probably makes it good on APS-C for pictures of a central subject with dropoff towards the edges, but on FF 30mm is typically an environmental focal length (not sure what your particular shooting style is), and that's undesirable behaviour.

When you talk about Pentax versions might be more problematic,which version The Limited Edition or regular ones that included DA55?

---------- Post added 05-04-16 at 04:57 PM ----------

I'm going to be a bit contrarian and say I cannot recommend the Sigma 35/1.4 Art. I had one for a while, and sold it. It's extremely heavy for a lens, and with the K-3, it'll be a front loaded beast. While it is very sharp, it is also quite boring in it's rendering, with contrast that makes you go...'meh'. IMO people should get into the Pentax brand because their lenses seem to me to be designed with aesthetic rendering first, and measurbation 2nd. The 43/1.9 is an old design by modern standards, but extremely sharp, especially when stopped down even at 2.8. It also has fabulous rendering and contrast, a tiny profile, and mechanics that are simpler than the Sigma (simpler = more reliable). "Image Quality" is a meaningless term when you consider that all the variable that make up the quality of a photograph. Even if the 35 is a hair shaper than the 43, I prefer image qualitIES of the 43. The best lenses balance sharpness, contrast, and rendering to make a whole. The reason why the Otus line is still better than the Art line, even though sharpness may be similar, is that the Zeiss bring the rendering too and balance them both.

As for the 55, well if you want a Portrait lens thats the one to get. The 43, 35, and 30 are more general purpose. Also, consider the 31/1.8 Limited! If you're looking for something wider than the 43 that's the one to get. Sharpness and rendering for days.

The 43mm is a beautiful lens, all metal construction, looks like older 35mm era film. But about sharpness I believe the lens lost a lot for the Sigma.
I did some test with different diaphagrma apertures and Sigma was better in all results. I like to sell two lens, but is hard to decided which one to keep.

[clackers]

When you talk about Pentax versions might be more problematic,which version The Limited Edition or regular ones that included DA55?.

No, the Sigma 18-35mm in K Mount.


Remember that Sigma reverse engineer the AF protocols of the camera manufacturers, and sometimes this works really well, sometimes it doesn't.


Some Pentax owners have been lucky with their copies, others frustrated even though they bought and used the special USB calibration tool.

[Genki]

No, the Sigma 18-35mm in K Mount.


Remember that Sigma reverse engineer the AF protocols of the camera manufacturers, and sometimes this works really well, sometimes it doesn't.


Some Pentax owners have been lucky with their copies, others frustrated even though they bought and used the special USB calibration tool.

I got, so is better to keep the Pentax lens instead Sigma have some better sharpness

[clackers]

I got, so is better to keep the Pentax lens instead Sigma have some better sharpness

Mind you, I wouldn't be put off by individual user horror stories. Sigma, Tamron and Samyang make some great lenses, and Pentax has a bell curve with Quality Control like any other camera manufacturer.


If you buy from a reputable source who accept returns without problems, and you don't mind the inconvenience to get the result you want, send back bad copies of any lens until you get a decent one. They cost a lot of money, you're entitled to one without defects!

[Sperdynamite]

When you talk about Pentax versions might be more problematic,which version The Limited Edition or regular ones that included DA55?

---------- Post added 05-04-16 at 04:57 PM ----------


The 43mm is a beautiful lens, all metal construction, looks like older 35mm era film. But about sharpness I believe the lens lost a lot for the Sigma.
I did some test with different diaphagrma apertures and Sigma was better in all results. I like to sell two lens, but is hard to decided which one to keep.

Is the 43mm SO SOFT that you really can't use it?

[Genki]

Is the 43mm SO SOFT that you really can't use it?

Just too small. Doesn't match with k3 design. Sigma 30mm and Pentax 55mm looks better with Pentax K3
What I like on 43mm is the construction with all metal, but if you talk about sharpness...
I don't know why they decided to build plastic lens. They all look junk stuff.
Just look Voigtlander or Carl Zeiss Lens, amazing metal construction in these days.