Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-06-2011, 04:56 PM   #16
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Theres alot more difference than just one stop paperbag.
V5planet, if your not really all that happy with the 35 and it doesnt excite you, then yeah sell it and try something else. There is no point keeping a lens that doesnt do much for you.

03-06-2011, 05:48 PM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
QuoteOriginally posted by alan_smithee_photos Quote
I love my 35 (it's one of two AFs I own - 15 and 35, same as you) and I wouldn't sell it. I do want something in the 40 range but the thing I think I'd struggle with in the 43 (or the 31 for that matter) is lack of quick-shift focus. I'm a largely MF guy and I really like having the ability to do a fine adjustment override easily. (Maybe this would be less of an issue if I had the better AF capabilities of a K-5.) That's probably why the 40 I'm looking at right now is the Voigtlander Ultron 40mm 2.0.

My $0.02.
The manual focus was the reason I ended up with the Ultron over the FA43, though it was a tough decision.
03-06-2011, 08:16 PM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
NeverSatisfied's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by MSM Quote
I agree with jeff. They are two very different lenses. Your lens kit looks like mine. I will say that I own both. If I had to choose one it probably be the 43. I don't know why exactly but that is what my gut tells me. One thing to consider is the mfd. If your habits is to get close on a subject , you may be disappointed with the 43. Believe me the 35 mm spoils you. I am not talking any where near macro. I am just talking about getting close to a subject to pick up say a detail. With the 43, I find myself backing up. Of course it may just be me, but that is what I find after going from the 35 to the 43. That being said, I love them both for what they are. Good luck with your decision.
I've been pondering whether to add the 35 Ltd to my inventory, and already have the FA 43- so V5 I guess I'm coming at your scenario from the opposite side. However, I have no intention of getting rid of the 43! It's one of my favorites and the default lens on my K20D. In so many ways the 35 Ltd sounds great, but I can't say it's really driving me insane with LBA...

In my efforts to stave off the desire for the 35, I just started playing around with the Raynox 150 on the FA 43. Hhhmm. Looks promising. (MFD is about 6 inches with that set-up.) I personally like the focal length of the 43; typically one considers the 70 or 77 for portraits, but the 43 is so sharp that it's easy to crop and still come away with some really nice shots. Now the D-FA 100 WR is something to consider if you want another dedicated macro, but since you've already had some experience with the 35's macro capabilities, you might get the best of both worlds with the 43 plus a few more dollars for the Raynox. Speed, bokeh, and the occasional macro when you need it. Just a thought.

FWIW the 15 Ltd and FA 43 do make a fun little kit to carry around and fairly versatile. Anyway, thanks for even posing the question, I think you've helped me save a bunch of money, for now!

Last edited by NeverSatisfied; 03-06-2011 at 08:33 PM.
03-08-2011, 10:38 AM   #19
Pentaxian
v5planet's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,913
Original Poster
Thanks for your input everyone. I realize they're pretty different lenses, so I guess it's a matter of what I'm willing to sacrifice for what. Truth be told my biggest hesitation is letting go of the 35Ltd's close focus capabilities. To me its strengths lie in the distance range between macro and what you might typically use for a portrait (say a few feet). After that it's only 'okay' in my mind. The 43 seems to perform better past that point, and the added speed would be a huge boon.

In any event, I think I'll sit on this until I've already filled out my other focal lengths of interest.

03-08-2011, 11:08 AM   #20
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by v5planet Quote
Thanks for your input everyone. I realize they're pretty different lenses, so I guess it's a matter of what I'm willing to sacrifice for what. Truth be told my biggest hesitation is letting go of the 35Ltd's close focus capabilities. To me its strengths lie in the distance range between macro and what you might typically use for a portrait (say a few feet). After that it's only 'okay' in my mind. The 43 seems to perform better past that point, and the added speed would be a huge boon.

In any event, I think I'll sit on this until I've already filled out my other focal lengths of interest.
The focal length is a little longer, so depending on how close you want to get, you might not notice too much of a difference.
03-13-2011, 10:47 PM   #21
Senior Member
Mr_Canuck's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 293
Sell the 43, keep the macro, and get a 70/2.4 or a 50/1.4 for your portraits.
03-13-2011, 11:25 PM   #22
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
Keep the 43mm Ltd, get a longer focal length macro like the Tamron 90mm Macro or DFA 100MM macro WR. If you need wide angle or wider than the 43, you can always grab a 12-24mm or another wider than 35mm lens later. IMO the longer range on a macro means better working distance from your subject. So depending on how often you shoot macro or landscapes is what way I would lean.. Or you could just get a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Macro and cover it all decently.
03-14-2011, 12:52 AM   #23
axl
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
I never had 35ltd but then I was never interested in that one. I used to have 40ltd which I ended up swapping for 43 and never regreted it (I just regret selling F50 that had to pay the difference).
As others have pointed, it boils down to what you intend to use the lens for. 43 is bit tight but that's fine by me. For out doors I feel at home with this lens, for indoors 31 is better.43 is stunning people lens, just look at Simon's (TOUGEFC) pictures if you need any convincing. If you are planning to swap your lenses between macro/close up shots and the rest, then 43 would make a lot of sense. But if you like macro and sell 35 before getting longer macro lens then you may run into trouble with 43 pretty soon as the MFD is about 45-50cm. Luckily the choice is yours

03-14-2011, 12:55 AM   #24
axl
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
PS: 43 + 77 is one of the best couples I've encountered in 40odd lenses past 4 years with Pentax. These two work extremely well together so again, if you are planning to get 77 then yes, 43 would make a lot of sense!
03-14-2011, 01:22 AM   #25
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Thanks for the kind words Peter!
The 43 + 77 combo is incredible, whenever i go out i always bring them both and always comeback with great shots from both. They compliment each other really well.

I dont have a 31 (yet) but im sure from what ive seen the same can be said about that too. And given its wider lenght it would be excellent for indoors.
03-14-2011, 08:38 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
NeverSatisfied's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 666
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr_Canuck Quote
Sell the 43, keep the macro, and get a 70/2.4 or a 50/1.4 for your portraits.
"Keep the 43mm Ltd, get a longer focal length macro like the Tamron 90mm Macro or DFA 100MM macro WR. If you need wide angle or wider than the 43, you can always grab a 12-24mm or another wider than 35mm lens later. IMO the longer range on a macro means better working distance from your subject. So depending on how often you shoot macro or landscapes is what way I would lean.. Or you could just get a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Macro and cover it all decently. "

Hey you guys, um, "read before you post", eh? The OP does not own a 43 and was contemplating its purchase.

Last edited by NeverSatisfied; 03-14-2011 at 08:45 AM.
03-14-2011, 08:23 PM   #27
Veteran Member
irishwhite's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: philadelphia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 349
I've got the three lenses you've mentioned and by far, so far, the 43 is my least used lens. I have to do some snapshot portrait work at work for ID badges and that's really the only time I pull out the 43, or if I am shooting film. Otherwise my 100mm Macro is on the camera at all times and when I'm working closer to the subject I throw on the 35mm lens. Only downside to me is the lack of aperture ring which is a big down side as I prefer shooting older pentax slr's when shooting film.

It should be noted that I bought all three lenses in January, so I haven't really had a lot of time to test them and get most comfortable with them. Plus I'm still missing my FA 50 1.4 which was sold off to help buy these bad boys :-(
03-14-2011, 11:27 PM   #28
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
QuoteOriginally posted by v5planet Quote
I am planning out my future kit a bit. In the AF lens department I currently own a 15/4 and 35/2.8macro. In the near future I am planning to add a 77/1.8. I find myself looking at the 35 and wondering if I should
DA35/2.8 is one of the weakest lens for me. I sold DA35/2.8 after 2 months of using.
It's not bad macro lens...But FA43 LTD is MUCH better as every-day lens. Even new DA35/2.4 AL is better.

Last edited by ogl; 03-14-2011 at 11:36 PM.
03-14-2011, 11:39 PM   #29
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
Yeah, my bad.. I was also following a thread of someone who had both lenses and was deciding to keep both or sell one... just got them mixed up.

So on this particular question.. considering I only own the 43mm Ltd and love it, I would drop the 35m as you can pick up another down the road cheaply if you really miss it. There are lots of 35mm lenses available, old manuals and new AF macro's. Lots out there, but only one 43mm Ltd

Last edited by Chex; 03-14-2011 at 11:49 PM.
03-15-2011, 12:19 PM   #30
Senior Member
Mr_Canuck's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 293
QuoteOriginally posted by NeverSatisfied Quote
Hey you guys, um, "read before you post", eh? The OP does not own a 43 and was contemplating its purchase.
Point noted! Sorry. Let me rephrase that: keep the 35, and get a 70.
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!
future, k-mount, kit, lens, macro, pentax lens, range, reviews, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
50mm 1.2...to sell or not to sell? That is the question. RT1 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 38 06-03-2013 04:13 PM
Vivitar extension tubes: To sell or not to sell? LowVoltage Photographic Technique 8 01-04-2011 12:26 PM
People Eye on Finance.. Lainey Photo Critique 6 02-04-2010 02:22 PM
Film camera bodies - CLA then sell, or sell as is? SOldBear Pentax Film SLR Discussion 15 10-27-2009 04:18 PM
Global Crisis in Finance & Climate. Mallee Boy General Talk 36 12-22-2008 02:35 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:31 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