Why K-x + DA40mm and not K-x with FA 43mm?

driftingbunnies · 12-05-2010, 04:37 PM

I've always seen suggestions that point new K-x owners to purchase the DA40 just because it would be a lightweight package. I personally just sold mine in order to get a FA43. I think the ISO quality of the K-x is good but it's not breathtaking. Compared to my Sigma 24-70 (which weighs like a ton), the DA40 makes the system feel too light at times and I'm surprised by how much the camera moves. I'm not sure exactly how the FA43 will compare but it seems a bit premature to me to always recommend the DA40 as a first pick when suggesting primes.

Eagle_Friends · 12-05-2010, 04:41 PM

Price for one, actually, price is a really big issue. A used FA 43mm is going to cost more than the body itself!

Size for another. The K-x with the DA40mm can almost be write off as a big point and shoot.

The FA 43 is definitely better quality-wise, but the DA 40 is no slouch.

I feel for the K-x or the K-r, the DA 40 gives you more bang for your buck. Once you move up to a K7 or K5, then you should start getting those FA Limiteds.

paperbag846 · 12-05-2010, 04:50 PM

You can't go wrong with either pick.

The extra stop of the FA 43 is something to consider, but not a must in many circumstances. Same goes for the extra sharpness of the FA 43. It depends on the type of photography you want to do. The FA 43 is a great lens, but for many, the DA 40 would be great enough.

Other then the size advantage, the DA 40 is also very very fast to focus. This is another thing to consider.

**Clarkey** · 12-06-2010, 07:42 PM

Apart from the ability to generate more out of focus backgrounds with the 43mm, there is only the rendering that will be practically different. And I mean different, not worse or better. I prefer quickshift too, which the 40mm has.

In terms of weight and not being able to steady the camera, I agree in some respects, having used a MZ-5n which weighed less than a K-r or K-x. I often used either a 28-200mm, or a monopod (and often just shot with the grip of that) when shooting with a 50mm to steady the camera. I bought an ultrapod later on when I was using a *IST DS and 40mm, and that is a pretty good solution.

**Rondec** · 12-06-2010, 07:51 PM

There are a couple of things. First of all, on a smaller camera body it is nice to have a smaller lens. The kx is not only small, but also light and so balance is a little tougher with heavier lenses. Second is that the price of the lens is more than the body. Most people who are interested in an FA limited will be buying a K5. Finally, high iso is much better on the kx than preceding cameras, so shooting at f2.8 is much more feasible.

Nothing wrong with getting an FA 43, it's just that most kx owners are probably debating between a DA 40 and a DA 35 f2.4.

Pentaxor · 12-06-2010, 11:05 PM

I like the FA43 better.

greymda · 12-07-2010, 12:59 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

it's just that most kx owners are probably debating between a DA 40 and a DA 35 f2.4

my opinion, too

Jasvox · 12-07-2010, 01:32 AM

Get what makes you happy.

Jason

retroflex · 12-07-2010, 06:20 AM

I have a K-x + FA43. I got the lens used for a cheaper price than a new DA40 (which is hard to find used here). IQ-wise it's great, but AF speed can tick me off at times. I have thought about switching to a DA40 for this reason, but I'm not sure the difference is that huge.

paperbag846 · 12-07-2010, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by retroflex

I have a K-x + FA43. I got the lens used for a cheaper price than a new DA40 (which is hard to find used here). IQ-wise it's great, but AF speed can tick me off at times. I have thought about switching to a DA40 for this reason, but I'm not sure the difference is that huge.

I have not compared the 43 and 40, but the 40 is considerably faster than my 50, which has a longer focus ring.

wed7 · 12-07-2010, 07:50 AM

money is a rate limiting step.

Frogfish · 12-07-2010, 08:27 AM

I have a 43 Ltd and I have to say I'm not sure how much faster you want to focus ! It seems damn fast to me. Maybe I'm missing out on something !

It's incredibly sharp.

driftingbunnies · 12-07-2010, 08:45 AM

The DA40 was definitely fast especially since there really isn't that much you need to travel in order to focus. However, it seems as the majority of the people who owned/own both the FA43 and DA40, it seems as if the FA43 produces more interesting and pleasing pictures. Obviously some people will prefer the DA40 but the majority will say that the FA43 is very very good. I fell into the trap of buying the DA40 expecting it to be awesome and later finding out that I should have just saved the money for a FA43. I guess it depends on how you value your hobby/job as a photographer. If you feel that you will continue on in the next couple of years, I feel that investing in the FA43 is more beneficial than buying cheaper lenses to hold you off from buying it later.

paperbag846 · 12-07-2010, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by driftingbunnies

it seems as the majority of the people who owned/own both the FA43 and DA40, it seems as if the FA43 produces more interesting and pleasing pictures.

It's funny you say that, because I know people who have used both and describe the difference as "different", not better or worse.

The sharpness across the frame and extreme contrast of the DA 40 looks much more modern than the FA 43, which has more character. I know someone who sold his DA 40 to buy the FA 43. He said he could not afford both, but in an ideal world, he would own them both, because they are so different.

retroflex · 12-08-2010, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by Frogfish

I have a 43 Ltd and I have to say I'm not sure how much faster you want to focus ! It seems damn fast to me. Maybe I'm missing out on something !

As fast as possible

Most of my pictures lately have been of my 9 months old son, indoors at evening. And he just won't listen to me when I tell him to sit still.

The K-x focuses in a few small steps until it finds focus, which can take up to a second. Then he has already moved and shutter can't be pressed.

Outside in bright lightning it's fast though.

12-05-2010, 04:37 PM	#1
driftingbunnies Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 48	Why K-x + DA40mm and not K-x with FA 43mm? I've always seen suggestions that point new K-x owners to purchase the DA40 just because it would be a lightweight package. I personally just sold mine in order to get a FA43. I think the ISO quality of the K-x is good but it's not breathtaking. Compared to my Sigma 24-70 (which weighs like a ton), the DA40 makes the system feel too light at times and I'm surprised by how much the camera moves. I'm not sure exactly how the FA43 will compare but it seems a bit premature to me to always recommend the DA40 as a first pick when suggesting primes.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Questions for DA40mm/2.8 LE	henryjing	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	03-05-2010 01:05 PM

12-05-2010, 04:41 PM	#2
Eagle_Friends Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 971	Price for one, actually, price is a really big issue. A used FA 43mm is going to cost more than the body itself! Size for another. The K-x with the DA40mm can almost be write off as a big point and shoot. The FA 43 is definitely better quality-wise, but the DA 40 is no slouch. I feel for the K-x or the K-r, the DA 40 gives you more bang for your buck. Once you move up to a K7 or K5, then you should start getting those FA Limiteds.

12-05-2010, 04:50 PM	#3
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	You can't go wrong with either pick. The extra stop of the FA 43 is something to consider, but not a must in many circumstances. Same goes for the extra sharpness of the FA 43. It depends on the type of photography you want to do. The FA 43 is a great lens, but for many, the DA 40 would be great enough. Other then the size advantage, the DA 40 is also very very fast to focus. This is another thing to consider.

12-06-2010, 07:42 PM	#4
Clarkey Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brampton, ON, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,456	Apart from the ability to generate more out of focus backgrounds with the 43mm, there is only the rendering that will be practically different. And I mean different, not worse or better. I prefer quickshift too, which the 40mm has. In terms of weight and not being able to steady the camera, I agree in some respects, having used a MZ-5n which weighed less than a K-r or K-x. I often used either a 28-200mm, or a monopod (and often just shot with the grip of that) when shooting with a 50mm to steady the camera. I bought an ultrapod later on when I was using a *IST DS and 40mm, and that is a pretty good solution.

12-06-2010, 07:51 PM	#5
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	There are a couple of things. First of all, on a smaller camera body it is nice to have a smaller lens. The kx is not only small, but also light and so balance is a little tougher with heavier lenses. Second is that the price of the lens is more than the body. Most people who are interested in an FA limited will be buying a K5. Finally, high iso is much better on the kx than preceding cameras, so shooting at f2.8 is much more feasible. Nothing wrong with getting an FA 43, it's just that most kx owners are probably debating between a DA 40 and a DA 35 f2.4.

12-06-2010, 11:05 PM	#6
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	I like the FA43 better.

12-07-2010, 12:59 AM	#7
greymda Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Moldova, EU Posts: 150	Originally posted by Rondec it's just that most kx owners are probably debating between a DA 40 and a DA 35 f2.4 my opinion, too

12-07-2010, 01:32 AM	#8
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	Get what makes you happy. Jason

12-07-2010, 06:20 AM	#9
retroflex Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mölnlycke Photos: Albums Posts: 98	I have a K-x + FA43. I got the lens used for a cheaper price than a new DA40 (which is hard to find used here). IQ-wise it's great, but AF speed can tick me off at times. I have thought about switching to a DA40 for this reason, but I'm not sure the difference is that huge.

12-07-2010, 07:18 AM	#10
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by retroflex I have a K-x + FA43. I got the lens used for a cheaper price than a new DA40 (which is hard to find used here). IQ-wise it's great, but AF speed can tick me off at times. I have thought about switching to a DA40 for this reason, but I'm not sure the difference is that huge. I have not compared the 43 and 40, but the 40 is considerably faster than my 50, which has a longer focus ring.

12-07-2010, 07:50 AM	#11
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421	money is a rate limiting step.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-07-2010, 08:27 AM	#12
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	I have a 43 Ltd and I have to say I'm not sure how much faster you want to focus ! It seems damn fast to me. Maybe I'm missing out on something ! It's incredibly sharp.

12-07-2010, 08:45 AM	#13
driftingbunnies Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 48 Original Poster	The DA40 was definitely fast especially since there really isn't that much you need to travel in order to focus. However, it seems as the majority of the people who owned/own both the FA43 and DA40, it seems as if the FA43 produces more interesting and pleasing pictures. Obviously some people will prefer the DA40 but the majority will say that the FA43 is very very good. I fell into the trap of buying the DA40 expecting it to be awesome and later finding out that I should have just saved the money for a FA43. I guess it depends on how you value your hobby/job as a photographer. If you feel that you will continue on in the next couple of years, I feel that investing in the FA43 is more beneficial than buying cheaper lenses to hold you off from buying it later.

12-07-2010, 08:51 AM	#14
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by driftingbunnies it seems as the majority of the people who owned/own both the FA43 and DA40, it seems as if the FA43 produces more interesting and pleasing pictures. It's funny you say that, because I know people who have used both and describe the difference as "different", not better or worse. The sharpness across the frame and extreme contrast of the DA 40 looks much more modern than the FA 43, which has more character. I know someone who sold his DA 40 to buy the FA 43. He said he could not afford both, but in an ideal world, he would own them both, because they are so different.

12-08-2010, 12:36 AM	#15
retroflex Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mölnlycke Photos: Albums Posts: 98	Originally posted by Frogfish I have a 43 Ltd and I have to say I'm not sure how much faster you want to focus ! It seems damn fast to me. Maybe I'm missing out on something ! As fast as possible Most of my pictures lately have been of my 9 months old son, indoors at evening. And he just won't listen to me when I tell him to sit still. The K-x focuses in a few small steps until it finds focus, which can take up to a second. Then he has already moved and shutter can't be pressed. Outside in bright lightning it's fast though.