Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-26-2010, 10:57 AM   #1
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Prime kit recommendations

Hey everyone - some opinions on a good prime kit.

Right now I mostly shoot with a 28mm 2.8 and 55 1.8... the 50 1.7 I have does not see so much action (might sell it, might not).

However I want to fill out the gaps. The wide-side of things could use the DA 15 (I've been completely won over by the DA 15 thread) ...I just need to find a good deal on it.

The 35mm 2.4 also looks amazing, and I would quite like to add it to my collection. I tried reading through the DA 35 2.4 vs. FA 35 2.0 thread but I found it to be too much information! So I have 2 questions:

While I realize eventually something in the 70-85 area would be nice eventually, it's not my top priority.

Does this look like a good set up?

15 - 28 - 35 - (50/55)

or is the 28/35 similarity going to be too close? I've tried both focal lengths on my zoom and they ARE close, but I want to hear the oppinions of people who have used both and might have some insights into the other optical differences between 28mm and 35mm. Will the 35 2.4 be noticeably faster than the 28mm 2.8? It would be nice to have a fast 35 for indoors where the 28mm, in my experience, is rather dark.

Any alternatives you can think of?


Last edited by paperbag846; 10-26-2010 at 12:00 PM.
10-26-2010, 01:23 PM   #2
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
60 views and not one opinion?
10-26-2010, 01:31 PM   #3
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
OK, I'll give you my opinion. But take it with the fact I never shot 35 in mind please.
1 - is your 28 MF or AF.
if it's MF you can easily justify 35 as it will give you normal AF option.

28 vs 35 is tad close but not unbearably so IMO. I have 24-31 which is only 7mm (although on wider end the 7mm is bigger than in normal) and I think it's difference worth having. Ideal solution: sell 28, forget 35 and get 31ltd or Sigma 30/1.4 (I've never used it but from the owners it gets rather high scores...)

my 2p
10-26-2010, 01:41 PM   #4
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
Thanks! My 28mm is manual focus (so are my 50's) so I thought the AF wa enough reason to buy the 35. I'm thinkin of using the 28mm as a sharp tight landscape lens, and the DA 35 for people more. Do you folks think that sounds reasonable?

PS. Looked into the 31ltd and that is my one day, dream lens. The sigma, on the other hand, does not look too much more desirable to me than the 35. I'll look into it more thoroughly.

10-26-2010, 01:52 PM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 208
If you have a manual-focus 28, then I think the 35/2.4 will be "different enough" in how you use it to make it a worthwhile purchase. And for bokeh, the new lens is looking quite promising, at least compared to anything but the 40/2.8 or the FA Limiteds . . .
10-26-2010, 01:56 PM   #6
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Thanks! My 28mm is manual focus (so are my 50's) so I thought the AF wa enough reason to buy the 35. I'm thinkin of using the 28mm as a sharp tight landscape lens, and the DA 35 for people more. Do you folks think that sounds reasonable?

PS. Looked into the 31ltd and that is my one day, dream lens. The sigma, on the other hand, does not look too much more desirable to me than the 35. I'll look into it more thoroughly.
One thing the Sigma has over DA35 is 1.5 stop advantage and hence shallover DOF. But I'll agree SMC is SMC...

QuoteOriginally posted by Impartial Quote
If you have a manual-focus 28, then I think the 35/2.4 will be "different enough" in how you use it to make it a worthwhile purchase. And for bokeh, the new lens is looking quite promising, at least compared to anything but the 40/2.8 or the FA Limiteds . . .
definitely agree on this...
10-26-2010, 02:04 PM   #7
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
One thing the Sigma has over DA35 is 1.5 stop advantage and hence shallover DOF. But I'll agree SMC is SMC...



definitely agree on this...
I was under the impression that the DA 40 was not really a bokeh master, but desirable for it's compact size.

Would the upgrade from the 35mm to the 40 be a big jump in IQ?
10-26-2010, 02:06 PM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
If you have a K-X or a K-r, the choice is easy.

Get a DA 40mm!!!

Otherwise,

GET A DA 40mm!!!!

10-26-2010, 02:07 PM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
Don't know what your pocket book is like, but I'd suggest the FA 20mm F2.8. It is close to limited quality, excellent color rendition, contrast and bokeh and is also sharp sharp sharp. In addtion it is a nice close focuser.
May I suggest DA 14mm FA 20mm Sigma 30mm (or FA 31 ltd if you can afford it) and one of the fast 50's?

NaCl(the only trouble with the FA 20mm is that it's expensive and sometimes hard to find)H2O
10-26-2010, 02:19 PM - 1 Like   #10
Pentaxian
mattb123's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Colorado High Country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7,031
I'm also a fan of the 40, but if I was buying now I might go for the new 35 instead. As for bokeh, here's some with the da40. It's not as creamy as say the SMC A 50, but not bad IMO. This also may not be the best example, but it was the best example I had handy!

10-26-2010, 02:26 PM   #11
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
Don't know what your pocket book is like, but I'd suggest the FA 20mm F2.8. It is close to limited quality, excellent color rendition, contrast and bokeh and is also sharp sharp sharp. In addtion it is a nice close focuser.
May I suggest DA 14mm FA 20mm Sigma 30mm (or FA 31 ltd if you can afford it) and one of the fast 50's?

NaCl(the only trouble with the FA 20mm is that it's expensive and sometimes hard to find)H2O
Yes I like the look of the FA 20 but that will have to wait for now. I think I like the DA 15 over the 14 for its absurd flare resistance.

Now this sigma 30mm... I have read very little but it just does not look that sharp. Furthermore I am actually very happy with the 28mm, and would maybe replace it one day with the 24 2.0 when I can afford it. The 28mm lens is quite nice except in situations where I'm starved for light.

On to the 35mm... if I could buy any it would be the DA 35 macro, but I can't . The FA 35 2.0 looks good, but hard to find and rather pricey when compared to the DA 35 2.4... which looks very good in some recent comparisons.

Now the DA 40 (which I have considered before) has reared it's head again. However extreme compactness has never been top priority to me, but if it will give me significantly nicer pictures than the 35 2.4, I would consider it. I would sell the 50mm 1.7 too, and stick with the 55 1.8. Would the difference in low-light between the 35 2.4 and the 40 2.8 be worth mentioning?

I like the lineup that you mentioned NaCl, but I don't have anywhere near enough money to play with to get myself that lineup. Thats why all the lenses I currently own cost me under 200 . However I just sold off some guitar gear I don't use that much anymore, and plan on spending 300 - 500 on something that will really blow my current lenses away (and, after all, be AF).

Thanks so much everyone.

EDIT: The bokeh looks pretty good on the DA 40... better than my 50 1.7. However, I would bet that the bokeh would be greatly helped by moving to something like the DA 70?

So in essence: Would the DA 40 be sharper/nicer/better bokeh than the cheaper DA 35? Would I miss that stop in low light?

E.g., I never really use my 50 1.7 below 2.4 for people anyways, because nothing is in focus. So I'm really torn. Unfortunately the bokeh of the 50 1.7 starts to look really jagged and busy past 2.8, so an improvement with the DA 40 might be the right compromise... unless I can get similar rendering out of the 35 fantastic plastic!

Last edited by paperbag846; 10-26-2010 at 02:47 PM.
10-26-2010, 02:44 PM   #12
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I was under the impression that the DA 40 was not really a bokeh master, but desirable for it's compact size.

Would the upgrade from the 35mm to the 40 be a big jump in IQ?
for it's speed the DA40 has actually very pleasant bokeh. Very smooth and pleasant.... combined with great sharpness very nice IMO
(talking from first hand experience here)
10-26-2010, 03:47 PM   #13
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
So in essence: Would the DA 40 be sharper/nicer/better bokeh than the cheaper DA 35? Would I miss that stop in low light?
I think you'd need a microscope to spot the difference in either sharpness or bokeh between those 2 lenses. Tiny differences between lenses get way over stated on forums like this. Worry about the right FL, if 35 is "right" then you wont go wrong with the DA35 (either models).
10-26-2010, 05:08 PM   #14
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
Partly it's a matter of cost, eh? My only AF prime is the FA50/1.4 -- all my rest (MANY) are manual, and they're what I can afford.

What I have and like on the wide side are the Zenitar 16/2.8 (the least cheap); Tokina-made M42 21/3.8 and 24/2.8 and PK 35/2.8; Tamron PK 28/2.5; If I can get my Vivitar-Komine 24/2 fixed or replaced, it might stand in for the 21 and 28. A 35/2 or faster would be nice too, a stand-in for a FF Nifty Fifty.

The differences between 21-24-28 are minor but noticeable, and can be significant depending on what you're doing. The 21mm is great on sunny streets, stopped-down to f/11 and hyperfocused to 2m for DOF of 1m to infinity, but I don't use it much indoors. The 24mm is good in well-lit indoors and for nice sharp landscapes. The 28mm has the true 'normal' FL and is good for general walkabout and tighter landscapes. In comparison, a 35-37mm has the short-tele FOV of a FF Nifty Fifty, and the Zenitar grabs small spaces nicely.

I could talk about longer lenses but I'd bore you and I must go cook dinner now. Ciao.
10-26-2010, 07:59 PM   #15
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
I think you'd need a microscope to spot the difference in either sharpness or bokeh between those 2 lenses. Tiny differences between lenses get way over stated on forums like this. Worry about the right FL, if 35 is "right" then you wont go wrong with the DA35 (either models).
This was my "worry". I got the impression that the DA 40 was more about the super-compact size and weight, and the all metal construction. For me, not super important at this point (although one day I'd like to invest in some sexier glass ).

That said, I can't help but think that the 9 blades vs. 6 blades would really make a difference for OOF renderings when you stop down to say F4. I don't yet have a lens that will render a blurry background in the f4 - 5.6 area, which I really like.

If neither will pull that off though, I'll buy the 35 for less and save up for the DA 70 .
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
28mm, da, k-mount, kit, pentax lens, slr lens, thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-7 Kit recommendations SkagitFly Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 10-04-2010 04:36 AM
Recommendations for replacing the 18-55mm DA-L Kit Lens... Internetpilot Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 66 06-12-2010 11:49 PM
Looking to replace my K-x kit lenses - recommendations please iankh Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 04-26-2010 09:26 AM
Need recommendations on my kit (75/25 portrait/landscape) krypticide Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 11-15-2008 04:36 PM
Prime Recommendations Between 24 and 50 ? daacon Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 30 04-07-2008 01:07 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:33 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top