[GeneV]

giving the fact that difference between the 35mm/2.4 and the 40mm limited in my case (due to location) is smth like 100$ - which one would you buy as a everyday lens?

It depends upon what you will be doing with it and what body you will be using. If your body of choice is a K-x or the like, I'd go for the DA40 for the "tiny" factor. I love being able to slip that combo into a large coat pocket. This is really just a personal preference as to whether the price difference is worth it between any of the superb offerings Pentax has in the 35-43mm range.

[Fer]

It depends upon what you will be doing with it and what body you will be using. If your body of choice is a K-x or the like, I'd go for the DA40 for the "tiny" factor. I love being able to slip that combo into a large coat pocket. This is really just a personal preference as to whether the price difference is worth it between any of the superb offerings Pentax has in the 35-43mm range.

Also I still think the 40 mm being a limited, it's almost certain to provide overall higher IQ than the 35mm/2.4. I know that my DA 70 has something special IQ wise that this 35mm does not have. For $100 more I'd go for the 40mm unless you're sure the focal length is tad too long for your liking

[greymda]

then again, i think 5mm is not so much difference. am i correct?

[paperbag846]

They aren't *that* different - you certainly don't need both. Other than form factor (which might be more significant after you put a hood on the 35), the reason I would go with the DA 40 would be the number of aperture blades, for a smoother OOF rendering when you are stopped down. Some say that the DA 40 has really nice colours, but it looks like the 35 does as well!

I would agree that the form factor of the lens is going to be a big deciding factor. You might notice an IQ difference too, but I don't really think the focal length difference is so significant.
Actually what might help you is to look at the focal lengths of your other lenses. Try to space them out evenly?

[greymda]

well now i have:
1. 18-55 which came with my K-x
2. 50-200, bought quickly after #1, and used only once
3. fa 50mm 1.4, which literally lives mounted on body 99.9% of time

BUT: lately, i kinda lost my initial love with the 50mm and want smth different... thought on selling it and by smth instead (say 21mm or 40mm and 70mm).

[Fer]

You can always spend a couple of days shooting with your standard zoom lens set at 40 mm and ser if it feels right or if it doesn't, if you could get used to it

[paperbag846]

fa 50mm 1.4

Hmm, what do you want to do different? What kind of shots do you take?

The 35 and 40 will give you a natural or "snapshot" point of view, although my personal preference for that FOV is 28mm on ASP-C. The 21 will give you a nice dramatic FOV for people and landscapes, while the 70 will give you a mild telephoto that would be great for events, portraits (although the 50 would still be good for portraits). So what kind of things do you want to shoot?

My initial thought is that every kit needs some sort of fast lens. The 50 1.4 will open doors that a limited won't.

[greymda]

i need smth for street photography, use it when i'm traveling.
last time i was on such a trip, i found that i need more angle.

[paperbag846]

i need smth for street photography, use it when i'm traveling.
last time i was on such a trip, i found that i need more angle.

How much more? I'd say the 35 would do very nicely, or the 21 for expansive scenes. The 40 would be a great traveling lens because of it's size, but my concern is that you want something wider because you find the 50 so tight.

This is a tough one, so I would echo what those above me have suggested - try your kit as a prime at various focal lengths and see what works for you. There's not obvious best choice... and you might be getting frustrated with your 50 not because it is a bad lens, but working in 50mm alone CAN be rather restricting. See how you find 21mm, 35mm, & 40mm. You might find that one of them just "works".

I, for one, would not mind owning a DA 40 and FA 50 alongside eachother, but I would rather a 50 and 35 if it was the only two lenses I could use for a while.

[greymda]

it's the fact that i can buy a limited lens (40mm) for 350USD that attracts me... don't know when there will be another such chance.

[GeneV]

well now i have:
1. 18-55 which came with my K-x
2. 50-200, bought quickly after #1, and used only once
3. fa 50mm 1.4, which literally lives mounted on body 99.9% of time

BUT: lately, i kinda lost my initial love with the 50mm and want smth different... thought on selling it and by smth instead (say 21mm or 40mm and 70mm).

With that setup, I'd want the DA40 rather than the 35, because it is such a nice match for the K-x and I find I use it more than my FA35. However, with the FA 50 in the stable, I would probably get a wide prime before either of them.

[greymda]

yes, initially i wanted 21mm limited, but the price... i hope for some Christmas sales...

generally, do such sales for Pentax lenses exist ?

[paperbag846]

Pentax lenses are just like any other camera gear - the sales are otherwise known as "used" . I'm sure some Pentax stuff will go on sale for the holiday season, hard to say if it will be the limiteds though.

[Jonathan Mac]

I managed to snap up the only DA 35 f2.4 AL in stock at Amazon UK a few days ago. I've only had time to run some quick tests, but my impressions so far are quite positive.

I have no experience with either of the other two 35 mm lenses discussed in this thread, but this one does seem to be a step up from the 18-55 kit lens in several regards. In addition to the obvious advantages offered by the extra stop (DoF control, low light shooting), I'd definitely say the 35mm f2.4 focuses faster than the kit lens, both in good and poor light conditions. I have not done proper tests to confirm this impression though.

In terms of sharpness, it also looks much better than the kit lens and well into "prime" territory. It's very sharp wide open, and I'd say almost as sharp as my M 50mm 1.7 (which is outstanding) at f/5.6 and f/8. The only thing I've disliked so far is some occasional, severe chromatic aberration in certain images at f2.4-f2.8, but I don't have the same photos shot*at smaller apertures to compare.

If anyone's interested, I posted some of these shots with 100% crops in this thread:
DA 35mm F2.4 AL - Primeras impresiones

The only problem I can see is some purple fringing in high contrast, but that´s nothing unique.

As you´re in my neck of the woods you could always lend me the 35 to try... In Spain this lens is pricier than in the UK, I might pick one up at christmas when I´m over.

[Steve Beswick]

To those who are deciding between the DA L 35 and the DA 40, keep in mind that the price difference between these two lenses is likely to spread in the near future, once the 35 is in stock at more places.