[greymda]

thanks for replies!

very useful posts and quite a lot to think about.

[RioRico]

As mentioned, on APS-C a Fast Fifty is more of a portrait lens, and a 35 is roughly equivalent to a 52mm short tele on FF (but with thicker DOF). If you can actually only afford to own one lens, you're in a pickle. I have and use numerous manual primes (mostly cheap) in the 50-and-below class: 21-24-28-35-37-45-50-55-58mm and they all deliver different pictures. Here's a rough overview from my experience:

* 50-55-58/1.4-1.7-2 -- portraits, low light, keeping a slight distance, isolating a subject from the background
* 35-37-40-45/2-3.5 -- short tele similar to 52-55-58mm in FF, for a tighter crop with a slightly thicker DOF
* 28/2.5-3.5 -- true 'normal' (or wide-normal) FL for APS-C, the least bias for 'scapes and snapshots etc
*21-24/2-4 -- wider views with thicker DOF, for medium-size interiors and streets and full-context portraits

The primes I'm likely to carry:

* 16/2.8 mild fisheye -- for small spaces and to emphasize angles
* 21/3.8 or 24/2.8 -- for slightly larger spaces, including streets
* 28/2.5 or 35/3.5 -- for 'scapes and 'normal' view situations
* 50/1.7 or 55/1.4 -- for isolating subjects, and dim situations
* 85/2 or 100/2.8 -- for more reach, and more subject isolation

We have interchangeable-lens cameras precisely so we can change lenses, use different glass in different situations. Many very good manual lenses in the 24-58 range are still available at incredibly low cost. Faster glass below 50mm isn't quite so cheap, but nothing like retail rates. If cash is critical, check out the old manual primes.

[woof]

If you are truly not happy with the focal length, and keeping both was an option, why not go a third route. Sell them both and get a Sigma 28 f/1.8 or Sigma 30 f/1.4? I think it would be a big loss on your part to give up the speed. Just my opinion.

That's actually the right "out of the box" solution.

I like 28mm as a "normal" very, very much - much more so than 35mm, especially in a crowd at events. The Sigma is a great choice.

woof

[dragonfly]

I vote to sell the fa50mm 1.4 lens. I personally own the f50 1.7 and an A50 1.4. The autofocus is nice to have, but I usually take the manual focus lens because the AF is so unpredictable.

[Blue]

Your poll is set up like you have neither lens which makes it something of a problem to vote accurately. However, I would keep the FA 50 and add the DA 35/2.4 later.

[Reportage]

it all boils down to just how much working space you have. For me, works just fine but the problem about the F/1.4 is that at F/4~F/8 for a family portrait...it is too sharp.

[mattb123]

Sell the 50. Really cheap. To me!

[greymda]

.

[bilybianca]

If the lens isn't faulty, it's never logical to sell an FA50mm 1.4. I have the FA 35mm and two fast 50's, they all get their use for different purposes. The FA 50 1.4 will probably not get cheaper in the foreseeable future. Money already spent are quickly forgotten, money to be saved for future use hurt your economy!

Kjell

[Pentaxor]

keep the 50mm for now. if you see that it doesn't get used as much, then sell it.

[greymda]

hey guys,
do you think it's possible to get the WHITE coloured DA35/2.4 option anytime soon?

all i see online is the usual black one...

[RioRico]

hey guys,
do you think it's possible to get the WHITE coloured DA35/2.4 option anytime soon?

all i see online is the usual black one...

oneword:

spraypaint

[greymda]

kinda radical method, imho)

[greymda]

well... some of my friends tell me to go for a Sigma 28mm 1.8 EX DG... costs more but it's "wider"...

[yeatzee]

The DA 35mm F/2.4 is cheap enough to buy the 35mm, play with it, and sell the one you like the least