Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-16-2010, 08:05 AM   #1
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Best 40 for film (film only, please)

It started with a trip where I reconnected with my XA at 35mm, but I've decided that my favorite all-round street lens is 40mm on film. I've used the DA40, and it does well, especially at smaller apertures. I'd like to move to something with an aperture ring, though, so that it will work on my MX for a rangefinder-sized combo. I've looked at all the other threads on these lenses, but I can't find one that concentrates on film.

The choices are:

Stay with the DA40
sharp, but no manual focus damping, no aperture ring. Cheap because I own it.

FA 43
Has aperture ring, good for AF, but no manual focus damping and may be soft in corners on film, most expensive option.

M40 pancake
Nice size, maintains the period and design for MX, damped for manual focus, but performance is reputed to be less than stellar and used prices are silly. It is also the least useful on a DSLR because of manual exposure issues.

Voigtlander 40mm Ultron
Compact, sharp, Fast at F2, sharp in corners, nice manual focus, autoexposure works on DSLR but, manual focus, not cheap and discontinued.

So far, I'm leaning toward the VL, though the FA43 would be the most useful all around.

What do you film shooters think? Any options I've missed?

12-16-2010, 10:35 AM   #2
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
I think if you really want aperture ring, go for 43. I don't think it'll disappoint you. I still wonder why are the prices for M40 so crazy outside of UK. Here, copy in very good shape will go between 120-100GBP, ok 150max! I saw one just last week with minimal fungal infection for 29GBP! YES 29! I thought about buying it and cleaning it but I have 43 so why bother... Anyway, I did slap it on camera for few quick shots and I have to tell you the wide open sharpness and rendering were (for me) surprisingly good and a lot better I would expect! One let down of that lens though is the 5 bladed aperture... Can't see it making nice OOF. So my opinion? Sell 40 to fund 43 and you are done
12-16-2010, 10:40 AM   #3
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,339
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
It started with a trip where I reconnected with my XA at 35mm, but I've decided that my favorite all-round street lens is 40mm on film. I've used the DA40, and it does well, especially at smaller apertures. I'd like to move to something with an aperture ring, though, so that it will work on my MX for a rangefinder-sized combo. I've looked at all the other threads on these lenses, but I can't find one that concentrates on film.

The choices are:

Stay with the DA40
sharp, but no manual focus damping, no aperture ring. Cheap because I own it.

FA 43
Has aperture ring, good for AF, but no manual focus damping and may be soft in corners on film, most expensive option.

M40 pancake
Nice size, maintains the period and design for MX, damped for manual focus, but performance is reputed to be less than stellar and used prices are silly. It is also the least useful on a DSLR because of manual exposure issues.

Voigtlander 40mm Ultron
Compact, sharp, Fast at F2, sharp in corners, nice manual focus, autoexposure works on DSLR but, manual focus, not cheap and discontinued.

So far, I'm leaning toward the VL, though the FA43 would be the most useful all around.

What do you film shooters think? Any options I've missed?
Yep I’ve also been looking for something between the focal lengths 35mm to 50mm for my film cameras.

I’ve narrowed it down to the FA43, which seems to be the best choice for my K series film bodies. Even though I will never use the AF or aperture priority features on the lens. The 43mm FL on film seems to be about perfect as a normal lens can get and I also plan to use the FA 43 as walk around street lens. I just wish it was a bit faster; F1.9 is rather slow for a standard/normal lens that costs that much. It would have been nice if it was a F1.4, even though it would make the lens twice as big and more costly. My K50/1.2 is almost a stop and a half faster!

Phil.
12-16-2010, 10:54 AM   #4
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
Sell 40 to fund 43 and you are done
This might make the most sense. I've seen some images that lead me to believe that the 43 is at it's best on film, and why own two similar lenses when you can have one that will do it all? If you keep the 40 and buy pretty much anything else, it will cost you the same as selling the 40 and buying a used 43.

The only other option that makes sense to me would be to forgo autofocus all together, sell the DA 40 and buy the 40 Ultron. Someone would need to make a pretty convincing argument that the Ultron is superior to the 43 imho.

12-16-2010, 11:56 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 690
If you are still considering the Voigtlander Ultron, here's an in-depth review:

Voigtlander Ultron 40 mm f/2 SL II Aspherical review - Introduction - Lenstip.com
12-16-2010, 12:00 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 690
One option you might consider (somewhat uncommon on the used market these days though) is the Chinon 45mm f/2.8, a well-made little pancake - as long as you don't mind a lack of auto-aperture as well as manual focus.
12-16-2010, 12:04 PM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
I vote for the Ultron which I have been lusting after myself
12-16-2010, 12:09 PM   #8
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
This might make the most sense. I've seen some images that lead me to believe that the 43 is at it's best on film, and why own two similar lenses when you can have one that will do it all? If you keep the 40 and buy pretty much anything else, it will cost you the same as selling the 40 and buying a used 43.

The only other option that makes sense to me would be to forgo autofocus all together, sell the DA 40 and buy the 40 Ultron. Someone would need to make a pretty convincing argument that the Ultron is superior to the 43 imho.
The main thing the VL Ultron has on the FA 43 is that it is a real manual focus lens with what is reported to be a great feel during focus. Also Blende8 did some tests that seemed to show it was better in corners at large apertures, which makes me wonder how the FA43 is on film. I've seen relatively few film shots posted here.

12-16-2010, 12:26 PM   #9
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by nater Quote
If you are still considering the Voigtlander Ultron, here's an in-depth review:

Voigtlander Ultron 40 mm f/2 SL II Aspherical review - Introduction - Lenstip.com
I sometimes have to chuckle about different reviewers' standards. I read them to say that the Ultron is not "useful" wide open at F2 in the corners on a full frame. However, the photos they post wide open are far beyond "useful" in my mind. I wonder what Lenstips would have said about the FA43?
12-16-2010, 01:07 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: New England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 690
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I sometimes have to chuckle about different reviewers' standards. I read them to say that the Ultron is not "useful" wide open at F2 in the corners on a full frame. However, the photos they post wide open are far beyond "useful" in my mind. I wonder what Lenstips would have said about the FA43?
I get the impression from their reviews that they talk about lens weaknesses more in terms of comparison to a hypothetical ideal, which is why they sound so harsh. They often quality their criticisms though, such as in the FA 77 review, where they say, "Noticeable coma and the softness at edges when wide open are minor flaws and you shouldn’t bother yourself with them," because just before it they said that in comparison to equivalent lenses from Canon and Nikon it has "significantly better performance near the maximum relative aperture."

I think my one issue with their reviews is that when they review AF lenses, they rate autofocus accuracy, but wouldn't that be significantly affected by (if not primarily determined by) the AF sensors in the lens body, not the lens itself? (They say the DA 70 "didn’t have so serious autofocus issues" as the FA 77 in their testing, which I don't quite understand...)
12-16-2010, 01:17 PM   #11
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by nater Quote
I get the impression from their reviews that they talk about lens weaknesses more in terms of comparison to a hypothetical ideal, which is why they sound so harsh.
This is exactly what they do, which is why I prefer looking at sample photos.

Often measures sharpness difference between two lenses can look huge on a chart, but if you give me 2 100% crops I find myself squinting to see any difference.

However with that sort of data, one could say that lens A is "significantly softer" than lens B.
12-16-2010, 01:24 PM   #12
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Original Poster
It is also somewhat annoying that no two reviewers seem to post MTF data in the same way. I agree that I'd rather see sample photos.
12-16-2010, 01:44 PM   #13
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
How hell bent are you on having a 40? Personally I don't find the non damped focus ring of the FA43 that difficult to deal with but YMMV. The reason I ask is would you be willing to consider one of the A35 options? I only find 1 for sale at the 3 main reseller sites (Adorama, A35 f2,8) but it might be worth seeking out. I had the M40 for a short while and wasn't all that impressed with it. That was on a K10d however and I may not have given it a fair chance. I bought the lot it came with for the K50 f1:1.2 (kind of regret selling that one).

12-16-2010, 03:19 PM   #14
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JeffJS Quote
How hell bent are you on having a 40? Personally I don't find the non damped focus ring of the FA43 that difficult to deal with but YMMV. The reason I ask is would you be willing to consider one of the A35 options? I only find 1 for sale at the 3 main reseller sites (Adorama, A35 f2,8) but it might be worth seeking out. I had the M40 for a short while and wasn't all that impressed with it. That was on a K10d however and I may not have given it a fair chance. I bought the lot it came with for the K50 f1:1.2 (kind of regret selling that one).

I'm not sure that I'd call my preference "hell-bent," but since running a few rolls through the DA40 on the film body I prefer the FOV and the size of the 40 (though no option is as small as the DA40). I own an FA35 already, so I'm not sure if I need another film 35 more than I need another 40.

I had an M40, or more precisely, lived with someone who had one in the early '80s. It did not change my world, either. If it cost <$100 like it did then, it would be a stronger candidate.

Do you use the FA43 often on film? Have you posted any of the shots from this lens on film?
12-16-2010, 05:34 PM   #15
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I'm not sure that I'd call my preference "hell-bent," but since running a few rolls through the DA40 on the film body I prefer the FOV and the size of the 40 (though no option is as small as the DA40). I own an FA35 already, so I'm not sure if I need another film 35 more than I need another 40.

I had an M40, or more precisely, lived with someone who had one in the early '80s. It did not change my world, either. If it cost <$100 like it did then, it would be a stronger candidate.

Do you use the FA43 often on film? Have you posted any of the shots from this lens on film?
I thought your goal was the damped focus ring and an aperture ring, the only reason I suggested an A35 option. The M40 is definitely overpriced IMO. B&H has one for $199. Haven't followed any on ebay to see the true going rate. It isn't a door stop of a lens but it just isn't one I would look to re-acquire.

I've never put the 43 on a film camera. Interestingly (or not), I bought an MZ-S last spring with the intention of shooting full frame (slides) with my FA limiteds. To date, I think I've only tried the 77 and it took me 2 months to send the film in for processing just to see what they looked like. I'm still going through them.

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, aperture, corners, da40, dslr, film, focus, k-mount, mx, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Film and 35mm Film Cameras Still Made? InStitches49 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 110 12-09-2010 07:01 AM
Any horror film buffs know this film? K-9 General Talk 12 09-24-2010 05:43 PM
Returning to Film: Would I be put-off by using consumer film pcarfan Pentax Film SLR Discussion 39 07-06-2010 06:49 AM
Newbie SLR film and film develop qestion winglik Pentax Film SLR Discussion 11 06-15-2009 03:13 AM
favourite film camera and other film cameras? k100d Pentax Film SLR Discussion 54 03-25-2009 09:13 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:51 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