[Pentaxor]

Well, I'm finally going to buy my first "nice" lens. I was all set on the DA15 since I do a lot of nature/landscape photography, but I've recently been reading up on the DA40.

So now I have to choose between the two.

I now am leaning towards the DA40 but would always wonder if I made a mistake in not getting the DA15. With the lenses I have now, I find myself using my kit lens at around 45-50 and also using an A 50 F2 lens a lot. I usually shoot wide open vistas, and know the DA15 might be perfect, but also wonder if the scale of the terrain, mountains, etc.. would be "shrunk" too much.

Are there any landscape photographers out there that can give me any pointers?

I know you'll probably say "just buy both", and I COULD, but that would pretty much limit all photography spending for the foreseeable future

it depends on what you intend to shoot, how wide and at what distance. usually when you shoot landscapes, small intricate details are unnecessary at small prints. unless you are going to shoot a really large resolution print like panoramic size for your living room or office. you can do panoramic stitching with your kitlens at 45-50 ad A50 but would require more work and might find it challenging under certain circumstances. the advantage of the DA15 is the luxury of having to shoot with much ease and for that purpose that you specifically want.

[PentaxMom Felua]

Hi, all things said are true, you alone decide.
This is what I think: it is harder to save up for the da15, as it is more expensive. To add a da40 afterwards is easier than the other way around.
Most of all: da15 shapes the land and the city and the partyhall and the museum and the people right in front of you, it is an inspiring lens that takes you anywhere. With it, you step into a new dimension, just do so, think differently, think da15.
I love landscapes, with any lens, upto 300mm. But 300mm is somewhat limiting, da15 never limits. Well, what else to say, you decide. But it is so comfortable a lens and .... No, I stop. Maybe it isn't your thing, I doubted it at first too, but well, now it is always with me. Except when I go Takumar. But that's a whole different story. Have fun with whatever it is you decide to have.

[Colorado CJ]

I went shooting in the mountains again today. I really concentrated on my fl with the kit zoom and found that the wider angles will probably work better for me . SO, I think I'll get the DA15 and add the DA40 later (or maybe the DA35Macro )

Thanks everyone for their help. It is hard for me to make decisions like this because I am used to buying $10.00 lenses from pawn shops. $500.00 is more than I spent on the whole camera, so I want to get the right lens the first time.

[paperbag846]

I think the DA 15 for you is a great choice... paired with your 50mm f2, there are lots of scenes you will be able to capture. Eventually the 40/35 will fit comfortably in between, but rest assured that it's best to start by spreading your focal lengths out and then filling in the gaps... so it is wise to plan (something I wish I had done properly).

[twitch]

Tossing up between a DA15 and a DA40 seems bizaar. It's not a matter of which of these is able to produce great images, they both can. It's a matter of which focal length you need, and there is a huge difference between 15 & 40. Don't choose a prime because you've heard or read one is good or highly regarded or whatever, choose a prmie based on what focal length you "need".

I learnt this in that I bought different primes before eventually getting the DA21 as I'd read the DA21 wasn't as good in IQ as all the other limiteds. However the DA21 for me was the perfect focal length, and it's focal length that matters the most. Now I find I don't use my DA70 much because even though I think it is the best IQ of all my primes, the focal length isn't that useful unless you like taking lots of head & shoulders portraits. I've found you can only have so many h&s portraits before the images get boring, what I enjoy more is taking pictures of friends/family in their environment doing stuff, and for that the DA21 is just perfect.

[tsammyc]

I would think about the new cheap DA35/2.4 instead of the DA40. IQ should be similar. I have the DA40, but mainly for its "pancake" effect with a KX as a small, light street SLR. If I didn't need a super small lens, the new DA35/2.4 looks like amazing bang for the buck.

[Brangdon]

I went shooting in the mountains again today. I really concentrated on my fl with the kit zoom and found that the wider angles will probably work better for me . SO, I think I'll get the DA15 and add the DA40 later (or maybe the DA35Macro )

There is quite a lot of choice in the 30-40mm range. I have a DA15 and am very pleased with it, and now I feel I need a "normal" lens. I fancy the DA35Macro, but I also wonder whether I would eventually want a longer lens for macro, in which case I might be better off getting, eg the new 35/2.4 to save money, or something slightly shorter like the Sigma 30/1.4, which could fit well between the DA15 and a telephoto. (I decided DA40 would be too long for me; I also have a M50/1.7 and am currently happy using the kit DAL 55-300, and 40mm is a bit close to either of those.)

The amount of choice in the 30-40mm range makes it a hard decision if you are trying to get it right first time. Where-as, for me at least, the DA15 was the obvious pick once I'd decided I could afford it.

[paperbag846]

I would think about the new cheap DA35/2.4 instead of the DA40. IQ should be similar. I have the DA40, but mainly for its "pancake" effect with a KX as a small, light street SLR. If I didn't need a super small lens, the new DA35/2.4 looks like amazing bang for the buck.

I would agree, except for one thing. The DA 40 has 9 aperture blades and it really helps when you stop the lens down. You don't get hexagons at f5.6 with the DA40. I find this to be an often-overlooked specification in the discussions here.

[pb_red]

Colorado CJ, first let me say that chances are you won't regret either lens. they are both great in their own right.

i had the da-40mm for a couple of years and it was my first pentax prime and like most people i have to admit that it's an amazing lens. i sold mine a week or so ago and it was a very sad day indeed (but i am getting married soon and could use the money).

i also have the 15mm and don't see myself letting it go anytime soon.

that said, i found the 40mm to be MUCH more versatile. the tiny size makes it great to walk around with and the focal length is appropriate for many subjects and situations.
the 15mm on the other hand is also a great lens, also small and light, but not nearly as versatile. it works in some situations and just plain doesn't work in others.

so if the wide angle is what you really want then you can't go wrong with the 15mm. however, if you want more versatility and flexibility then the 40mm is a great choice. it's also great for vast panorama shots.

good luck!