Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-06-2010, 09:43 PM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Juneau, AK
Posts: 72
40mm - weird focal length

Is it just me or does anyone else find 40mm to be a strange length on a crop camera? I just can't get used it to it...

11-06-2010, 09:51 PM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,824
I'm not a big fan, either. It's too long to be a normal lens, yet too short for a short tele. But it is tiny and sharp, though!

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-06-2010, 09:56 PM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Juneau, AK
Posts: 72
Original Poster
Worst is that I think there is no alternative... kinda.. the 35mm macro - not a fan of, paying 400 bucks for the FA35 - insane.
11-06-2010, 11:38 PM   #4
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
I think some sort of DA 28 2.0 would be a nice ASP-C version of the FA 43. Would make a nice limited.

11-07-2010, 12:27 AM   #5
Veteran Member
jolepp's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Finland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,196
QuoteOriginally posted by herzzreh Quote
Worst is that I think there is no alternative... kinda.. the 35mm macro - not a fan of, paying 400 bucks for the FA35 - insane.
How about the new DA 35mm 2.4, though? (<$200)
11-07-2010, 12:58 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
QuoteOriginally posted by herzzreh Quote
Worst is that I think there is no alternative... kinda.. the 35mm macro - not a fan of, paying 400 bucks for the FA35 - insane.
Takumar 35/3.5 shouldn't set you back more than about $30~50.





Pentax K20D
S-M-C Takumar 35/3.5

11-07-2010, 01:50 AM   #7
JHD
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,407
I prefer 40mm to 50mm. IMO not much point in having the 35mm if you have 40mm and vice versa.
11-07-2010, 02:08 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
This is so weird. And i think its making a lot of people have seconds thoughts on what to buy.

Myself, i would have bought the 35 Ltd if it wasnt a macro! But then it wouldnt be any point in making the 40 Ltd. The new 35 2,4 is not an Ltd so i wont buy it either.

So my feelings are that Pentax did it wrong from the start with the DA Ltd line.

IMHO it should have been like this: Ltd Pancakes: 25, 50, 70 (very simple!!! the 25 being a compromise between WA, street, normal)
Then the special need Ltd's: 15 WA and 35 Macro

11-07-2010, 02:49 AM   #9
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
I think 40 (and 43 for that matter) is terrific on APSC. It's tight normal, not too far from what you would have seen with 55/58 on film. I love the FOV this lens(es) offer. Very useful for streets, and very practical for single person shots indoors etc...

@the Swede: 25/50/70?!?
I would understand 25 (although would prefer 23 or 24) as replacement for 35mm on FF, 70 is out as it is, but 50? Why on earth? I still don't get why so many people want 50mm on APSC. I know I have one myself, but that's all about f1.2 and I use it pretty much the same way film folks would use 77ltd. Short tele, short portrait lens. In no means as standard lens. Besides, as pancake 50 would probably end up being f2.8 (max 2.4) and for 50 it's nothing tempting IMHO. 40 isn't terrificly fast but then again it's 40, it's small and it has wider FOV than 50. It can get away with it.

my 2p
11-07-2010, 03:02 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
I think 40 (and 43 for that matter) is terrific on APSC. It's tight normal, not too far from what you would have seen with 55/58 on film. I love the FOV this lens(es) offer. Very useful for streets, and very practical for single person shots indoors etc...

@the Swede: 25/50/70?!?
I would understand 25 (although would prefer 23 or 24) as replacement for 35mm on FF, 70 is out as it is, but 50? Why on earth? I still don't get why so many people want 50mm on APSC. I know I have one myself, but that's all about f1.2 and I use it pretty much the same way film folks would use 77ltd. Short tele, short portrait lens. In no means as standard lens. Besides, as pancake 50 would probably end up being f2.8 (max 2.4) and for 50 it's nothing tempting IMHO. 40 isn't terrificly fast but then again it's 40, it's small and it has wider FOV than 50. It can get away with it.

my 2p
hmmm... i think you changed my mind I made a bold statement about the 50. 40 may just be very cool (i had to fetch my 16-45 and realised that i mostly use it at 16 or 40-45mm
I also have an 50 1,2 wich is only used in nature at f1,2 for closeups.

23 or 24? We have an 21 Ltd dont we? This is getting me all wired up
11-07-2010, 04:44 AM   #11
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
This is actually not that uncommon.

It is 60mm FF equiv. That is almost the same as some of the 58mm film era normal primes, like helios 44m or zeiss biotar.

Since few mm's at the far end doesn't matter that much, you would be having the same experience as most soviet photographers with their thousands of Zenit's and 58mm kit's.

I think it's wide enough for overall view, but still lets you to exclude unwanted features and focus on details.
11-07-2010, 05:40 AM   #12
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,018
There is nothing weird or not weird about it. Focal length preference is very individual. I am with Peter on 50mm lenses on crop cameras, but 35-40mm lenses seem to work very well as longish normal lenses, while 70mm becomes a great portrait/ short telephoto.

This is what always strikes me as funny when someone posts the question "what lens should I get, the DA 15mm or the DA 70mm?" The real question in that case is one of focal length. Which one works for you and would use more. There is no arguing over taste.
11-07-2010, 06:29 AM   #13
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Juneau, AK
Posts: 72
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jolepp Quote
How about the new DA 35mm 2.4, though? (<$200)
Well... maybe I'm off but it's not in the same class as say DA40 or Voigtlander 40...
11-07-2010, 07:34 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: europe
Posts: 148
same for me. I got the 40mm but I cant get used to the focal lenght.
Not natural feeling at all and I always use my 21mm.

I'm thinking in selling it to get a 35mm (either the macro one but expensive, either the new non-limited one).
Although 40 and 35 seems very close in term of focal lenght, I have the feeling I would be more confortable. Did anybody experienced both?
11-07-2010, 07:43 AM   #15
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,777
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
I think 40 (and 43 for that matter) is terrific on APSC. It's tight normal, not too far from what you would have seen with 55/58 on film. I love the FOV this lens(es) offer. Very useful for streets, and very practical for single person shots indoors etc...2p
I couldn't have said it better, so I didn't!

I'll add to Axl's list architectural detail and landscape. The DA70 is king for this, but I'm surprised in looking over my travel shots how many times I've used the DA40 for landscape and detail. Paired with the DA21, it is a super street shooter.

It would be interesting to know how the love/hate division among users breaks down based upon how and when we began photography. I started in the screw-mount days, with a 55mm as my first lens.
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!
40mm, k-mount, length, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
focal length landscaped1 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 48 05-05-2010 03:04 PM
What is Focal Length Ole Photography Articles 2 05-15-2009 12:20 PM
Focal Length ? deludel Photographic Technique 14 01-30-2008 06:58 PM
Focal Length Jimsi777 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 11-09-2007 06:46 PM
40mm (1.5) = great focal length mattdm Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 04-29-2007 01:23 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:07 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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