Any advantage to 40mm limited over 35mm limited?

[nixcamic]

I was looking at getting either the 40mm or 35mm limited lens and was wondering if the 40mm offers any advantage over the 35mm besides being smaller and cheaper? (the 35 has the advantage of macro and wider FOV) They both are said to be extremely sharp in reviews, just wondering if anyone had any more input.

[JJJPhoto]

Originally Posted by nixcamic

I was looking at getting either the 40mm or 35mm limited lens, the 35mm lens and was wondering if the 40mm offers any advantage over the 35mm besides being smaller and cheaper? They both are said to be extremely sharp in reviews, just wondering if anyone had any more input.

Both lenses are very sharp. About the only thing (besides size and price) that the DA40 has over the DA35 Macro is focus speed when "hunting."

The 35 is designed as a macro lens so it has a HUGE throw from minimum focus distance to infinity. In other words, if you miss focus with the 35 the lens has to rack focus all the way from one end (infinity) and back to the other (minimum focus distance) in order to find correct focus again. If the DA40 hunts for focus it doesn't take as long for the lens to travel from one end of the focus to the other.

However, this only applies when you're in low light or in a tough focus situation where AF is having a hard time getting a lock. In general, both lenses focus very fast.

[soccerjoe5]

From my experience playing around a bit with both: same as JJJPhoto's experience. The 35 is pretty fast in AF except in tough AF situations where it hunts and since it has a huge focusing range it can take a while.

I have a hard time choosing between the 2 but I think I'm going for the 40 since it's almost half price where I'm from to the 35. And it's really neat having such a small lens, much more discrete.

[deuces]

One subtle difference is the 30.5mm filter thread on the DA40's hood. Cheaper filters!

Hm, so I guess there's the lens cap thing as well. Screw-on vs slip-on. One's too hard to take off, the other's too easy.

[Sean Nelson]

Originally Posted by JJJPhoto

The 35 is designed as a macro lens so it has a HUGE throw from minimum focus distance to infinity. In other words, if you miss focus with the 35 the lens has to rack focus all the way from one end (infinity) and back to the other (minimum focus distance) in order to find correct focus again.

Some folks complain about the lack of a focus limiter on the DA35, but I haven't found it to be a problem. In fact, I think if it did have the limiter I'd leave it turned off anyway. I'm not an action photographer and the lock-to-lock focus time doesn't seem bad to me. And on the rare occasion where it misfocuses I find it very easy to guide the AF system in the right direction by using the quick shift ring to refocus.

Originally Posted by deuces

Hm, so I guess there's the lens cap thing as well. Screw-on vs slip-on. One's too hard to take off, the other's too easy.

Yeah, I hate the slip-on caps. But I LOVE the built-in hood - it's terrific! I just stored the slip-on cap and use one of my old 49mm spring-loaded caps - it works great.

[GaryM]

Originally Posted by nixcamic

I was looking at getting either the 40mm or 35mm limited lens and was wondering if the 40mm offers any advantage over the 35mm besides being smaller and cheaper? (the 35 has the advantage of macro and wider FOV) They both are said to be extremely sharp in reviews, just wondering if anyone had any more input.

The autofocus performance edge goes to the DA40, due to having a much shorter throw range. The DA35 can be fussy at times, and I get more focusing errors with this lens than any other I own. Great lens though!

[nixcamic]

I'm rather in to macro photography, but I also love the price and size of the 40mm. Ah decisions, and here I thought I might not have this problem because pentax have a "less complete" lens lineup than other companies. I just need to get a better paying job.

[roentarre]

Da 40mm is cheaper and capable of doing close up but not 1:1 macro.

[nixcamic]

Does anyone have a close up shot with the DA 40 for perspective on how close it actually gets? I realize there are magnification numbers on the pentax site, but a picture is worth a thousand words (or numbers, in this case)

[jsherman999]

Originally Posted by nixcamic

Does anyone have a close up shot with the DA 40 for perspective on how close it actually gets? I realize there are magnification numbers on the pentax site, but a picture is worth a thousand words (or numbers, in this case)

I think this is about as close as it gets:

[creampuff]

Originally Posted by JJJPhoto

。。。
The 35 is designed as a macro lens so it has a HUGE throw from minimum focus distance to infinity. In other words, if you miss focus with the 35 the lens has to rack focus all the way from one end (infinity) and back to the other (minimum focus distance) in order to find correct focus again. If the DA40 hunts for focus it doesn't take as long for the lens to travel from one end of the focus to the other.

I beg to differ. The focus travel of the DA 35mm is actually pretty short.
It focuses pretty fast from minimum focusing distance to infinity.
Most focus issues arise because of at higher magnifications, it may be difficult for the camera to lock focus as there may not be something contrasty for the AF to target on.

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Originally Posted by creampuff

I beg to differ. The focus travel of the DA 35mm is actually pretty short.
It focuses pretty fast from minimum focusing distance to infinity.
Most focus issues arise because of at higher magnifications, it may be difficult for the camera to lock focus as there may not be something contrasty for the AF to target on.

I'd like to second that. About 150-160 degrees. That is not much for a macro lens.
At low light low contrast, close focus it can hunt, but does that quite fast anyway. Looks like the screw drive focus goes on a high gear in this tiny lens. Noisy though. That is actually the only disadvantage so far, but I take that as a price for the small size and rather rapid focus (certainly a SDM version would have been much bigger, not a limited).
As for lens hood, so far I've used it quite a lot without lens hood, and no flare problems yet.
Here are some macro examples with the DA35.

[ogl]

DA40 is smaller, lighter and much shorter.
It has better resolution at borders at all apertures and sharper at center from f4.5.
It has better bokeh than DA35.
It is better as universal lens.

[ogl]

Originally Posted by JJJPhoto

Both lenses are very sharp. About the only thing (besides size and price) that the DA40 has over the DA35 Macro is focus speed when "hunting."

The 35 is designed as a macro lens so it has a HUGE throw from minimum focus distance to infinity. In other words, if you miss focus with the 35 the lens has to rack focus all the way from one end (infinity) and back to the other (minimum focus distance) in order to find correct focus again. If the DA40 hunts for focus it doesn't take as long for the lens to travel from one end of the focus to the other.

However, this only applies when you're in low light or in a tough focus situation where AF is having a hard time getting a lock. In general, both lenses focus very fast.

I can't say that DA35 is VERY sharp. It's good at center, and it has worst border resolution between FA31, FA35, DA40 and FA43.

[tomtor]

Originally Posted by ogl

I can't say that DA35 is VERY sharp. It's good at center, and it has worst border resolution between FA31, FA35, DA40 and FA43.

and the da35 produces beautiful colored contrasty 3d-ish images, but who would want that?

My (and ogl's) fa77 has the worst border performance of all pentax lenses wide open, but it creates lovely images.

If you like the da40 focal length and are not bothered by its minimum focus distance than get it because it is an excellent allround performer, allthough I find it a bit too small for a big k10/k20 body.

The da35 is also a great lens, it all depends on your priorities.