[causey]

is those 5mm doing so much difference in specs of focal length to have them both (da 40mm and da 35mm) ?

I think it really depends on your usage. My favorite FL is 35mm... The DA 40mm would go well with my A 28mm though.

[paperbag846]

I had the 40mm, and I plan to get it again. It's a wonderful lens, tiny and relatively inexpensive. I know its bokeh is better than that of the DA L 35mm. However, I find the 40mm to be a bit too long in many everyday/street contexts. It's too nice a lens not to have (and I'm not interested in macro, so I don't need to spend $500+ to get the DA ltd.). I suppose the DA L 35mm will be around $170 in less than a year, which is cheap enough to get it for the situations in which the 40mm becomes restrictive (although I use a Tak 35mm, and I find it very nice). The DA L is 'optional for me--it depends on how cheap it can get.

OK, since you know you want the DA 40 (good choice, I tried not to be too pushy), I would suggest something complementary. I really see the 35 being too close to the 40.

Give your kit lens a go at 28mm. It's a really nice focal length on digital (a loose normal), and is much more forgiving in tight quarters than 35mm.

The 28mm gives me a really natural look. It's very close to the FOV of the FA 43 on film, which is what the FA 43 was designed for. The A 28mm 2.8 has rather desaturated colours, but it is very sharp if you nail focus.

I'm just saying that it makes sense to space your primes out so you have a series of specific tools. I can make the 40mm work indoors, but when I can't, I know 35mm wouldn't work either but 28mm might get me there.

The 28mm is the "other bargain"... there are other lenses that are wider, but much more expensive. The 28mm is an outright steal if you are ok with manual focus... the FA 28mm is less tempting, but still a more useful focal length paired with a 40 than the 35.

EDIT: You already have the 28! The 40 is a no-brainer (in my little brain!).

[causey]

EDIT: You already have the 28! The 40 is a no-brainer (in my little brain!).

Yes, I'll try out the 28mm + 40mm kit to see whether it's worth having the 35mm as well.

[ramseybuckeye]

I just ordered the DA 35/2.4. Thanks or all the helpful replies. I don't think I would go wrong with either. Looking forward to it arriving on Friday.

[abacus07]

At this time I would go with the DA 40 but size (length) would be my primary reason. At the same time I find myself liking the 28-35mm distance better for street/scene shooting and going to the 50 to isolate a scene. I'm not sure if I would like to be any tighter than 35 as my primary lens. But this isn't a choice that I'll be making anytime soon.

[paperbag846]

At this time I would go with the DA 40 but size (length) would be my primary reason. At the same time I find myself liking the 28-35mm distance better for street/scene shooting and going to the 50 to isolate a scene. I'm not sure if I would like to be any tighter than 35 as my primary lens. But this isn't a choice that I'll be making anytime soon.

Interesting. I find that 50 is a nice way to isolate a scene, but longer lengths really give me that "focused look". I actually prefer the 40 over my 50's for "environmental portraiture", and then use my 50's often for low DOF stuff / when I need as much reach as possible. This is all on digital though.

For a wide normal look, I much prefer the flexibility of the 28 over 35. Personal preference I suppose.

[abacus07]

I think we're saying the same thing but I'm not sure. For more of a architectural based street shooting I would like to be on the wider side of 35mm if anywhere. For people street shooting 50 is good but I would prefer an even longer lens. I guess I should set the kit lens to 40mm and walk around a little to see how I like it.

[paperbag846]

I think we're saying the same thing but I'm not sure. For more of a architectural based street shooting I would like to be on the wider side of 35mm if anywhere. For people street shooting 50 is good but I would prefer an even longer lens. I guess I should set the kit lens to 40mm and walk around a little to see how I like it.

I think so too . Sorry, I'm tired.

[0144]

i have 35 DA-L and 40Lim at the moment.
i would choose DA40 without any doubt. much less color aberrations, superb flare control, size, built, quick-shift and what's very interesting - camera is less noisy(and I'm not talking about AF) with DA40 compared to DA-L 35, i guess plastic bayonet doesn't lower noise as well as a metal one.

[causey]

As a cheap 35mm alternative, consider the Takumar 35mm 3.5. It's a gem. Superb, realistic colors, and very sharp, even wide open. For street shots, in good daylight, I usually keep it at f8 (f5.6 being problematic with the m42 tight DOF), which is decreases the amount of manual work. (My Cosmicar--i.e., Pentax A--28mm f2.8 is nice, but perhaps not as sharp as the Tak 35mm, and its colors have a kind of warm, brownish tint that makes pics look a bit mushy. I haven't found a formula to get rid of this unpleasant characteristic in PP.)

The last two posts convinced me to skip on the DA L 35mm and get the DA 40mm soon. My Tak 35mm makes the addition of another 35mm superfluous, and for AF there's no better choice than the 40mm. I was naive to sell it the first time, thinking a good zoom like the 16-45mm would satisfy my needs. But a kind of growing perfectionism is what fuels LBA, mine at least...

[photapioca]

Hello

I still haven't decided which lens to buy next. I currently have the 50 1.4, but it is too long for other shots like group photos.
I would like to know would it be better for me to get the 35mm, or just sell the prime and get the Tamron 17-50mm.

[Pentaxor]

Hello

I still haven't decided which lens to buy next. I currently have the 50 1.4, but it is too long for other shots like group photos.
I would like to know would it be better for me to get the 35mm, or just sell the prime and get the Tamron 17-50mm.

you can sell both the 18-55 and 50mm or opt to keep the 50mm for portraits.

[macTak]

As a cheap 35mm alternative, consider the Takumar 35mm 3.5. It's a gem. Superb, realistic colors, and very sharp, even wide open.

Having the Super-Takumar version, let me just say it really is a tiny lens. Offhand, I think its the smallest of the regular (ignoring the fisheyes) primes of the Takumar era, and is nearly a pancake lens itself.

[simonkit]

I previously owned the 40mm pancake and now own the DA 35mm F2.4. Whilst the 40mm definitely produces nice images personally I couldn't really get on with it, I found the focal length a little difficult and the lens a bit too "fiddly" in use. I do prefer the DA 35mm F2.4 although I do think the images it produces, whilst very good, don't quite have the same "look" as the 40mm. Both are very good lenses though and I can't see anyone been unhappy with either.

Simon

[benjikan]

The 40 Ltd is in my BRUTALLY sharp category!