My current lens lineup is the FA 50mm, DA 10-17mm, and I'm waiting for my DA 12-24mm to come this week. I also own the DA* 55mm and DA 18-250mm but hardly used it since I gave my K200d to my friend as an attempt to lure her into the Pentax world. So far so good, she's impressed at what good lenses can do for pictures rather than what brand is on the camera (she may still end up going Canon and shooting with kit lenses but at least I tried). Anyway, on to my point...
Normally I just shoot landscapes, cityscapes, architecture and portraits and since I'm a bit of noob I'm now realizing I need a macro to get ridiculously close to those bugs in the flower shots which none of my current lenses can do, obviously (or have I not tried hard enough?).
I currently have my eyes on the 100mm WR as my first macro to add some focal range to my collection. I'd say I would like to get as close to the subject as possible but would the 100mm focal length be too much anyway? I probably would have to let go of the FA 50mm 1.4 if I considered the D FA 50mm 2.8 but I don't see it being something I want to do.
This leaves me at my other option at the DA 35mm. This is also attractive to me since it's a limited lens but then again I plan on getting the DA 40mm in the future as well. I'll probably end up with all 4 limited at some point but not so soon.
Looking at all the pics here and flickr is making this decision tough. Should I go with the 100mm or the 35mm first? I honestly need input on this one.