[builttospill]

I have both lenses. I find I use the 50 1.7 pretty much exclusively on film cameras, while the 43 is used for both digital and film, but mostly digital.

The 43 is the finest lens I've ever used. You won't be disappointed and if it is something you want get it. I'd echo what robgo2 said above.

[wowtip]

You don't have the opportunity to tr the FA43 out at a camera store and see if you like it?

I have not used the FA43 myself, but from what I have read, it is a lens most liked for the special rendering and colors. For me I find myself more and more using a cheap old MF Helios 44-2 over my kind of expensive FA50f1.4, just because of the rendering.

Edit:

How fast is the FA43 to focus compared to the FA43? Maybe I should sell the FA50 for the FA43, but then it might be a bit close to th DA35Ltd?

[paperbag846]

Anyone out there want to defend the 43 before I put the idea of buying it on the shelf for a while?

I would find one in real life and play with it. Make your decision based on experience. If you buy the 35 DA L used, you can sell it for what you buy it for, if you decide the 43 is the way to go down the line.

[JeffJS]

You don't have the opportunity to tr the FA43 out at a camera store and see if you like it?

I have not used the FA43 myself, but from what I have read, it is a lens most liked for the special rendering and colors. For me I find myself more and more using a cheap old MF Helios 44-2 over my kind of expensive FA50f1.4, just because of the rendering.

Edit:

How fast is the FA43 to focus compared to the FA43? Maybe I should sell the FA50 for the FA43, but then it might be a bit close to th DA35Ltd?

They are exactly the same.

[HEEGZ]

The 35/2.4 seems like a good bang for the buck, but I really do value build quality and I especially like shooting with the M50 if not for that reason alone. It just feels like a littel gem mounted on the end, not too big, but solid as a rock. On the rock-solid K-7 it just feels like a match. I don't doubt the image quality that the 35/2.4 would produce, I just hope it would feel nice on the camera too.

Even though it is made of plastic, the 35mm f2.4 feels just as solid on my K-7 as my M50mm f1.7 with the only thing that feels cheap about it being the focus ring. I always shoot autofocus with this lens so it's a non-issue for me, but the lens feels very sturdy on the camera. It is just large enough that I can comfortably support the lens without touching my fingers to the focusing ring, and also it is extremely light which suits me just fine. The only other advice I can offer is to question if you know which focal length you really want? There is also the FA 50mm f1.4 which is also fairly cheap and very fast.

[mgvh]

I've been using a M 50mm f1.7 on a K-x and have experimented w/ both catch in focus and my own focusing. >>> I've ended up using catch in focus since it seems better than my eyeballing and using the green hexagon focus indicator, but I'll take more than 1 pic to improve my odds on a sharp pic. This has been especially true for macro and close-ups.

[pinholecam]

I have all the M 50's and A 50's, as well as the 43ltd.
The 43ltd is a bit soft at f1.9 (still sharper than the 50's), but pulls away immediately at 1/3stop closed down and becomes very sharp. I like it over the 50mms for the AF (which is a significant step up on the K5), sharpness and being a "wider 50mm", which makes it slightly more versatile on APS-C. There is also some sort of 'sweet spot' FL+sharpness+rendering that results in more 3D pop from its images.

[m42man]

After experimenting with catch-in-focus for a day or so, I think it gets me about halfway there. It seems to be pretty accurate in decent lighting. However, in low light it seems to struggle to find the focus point, and then I can't even try to take a picture. One other big problem is that I like to compose a lot of my shots so that the subject of interest isn't always in the center. I like to follow the rule of thirds frequenlty. Catch in focus only works on the center focus point, unless you manually change which point it uses, but who has time to do that for each shot? So like I said, it is a nice feature to know how to use, and I will probably use more than regulary manual shooting, but it doesn't replace AF with multiple AF points for me...

If you seem to be getting sufficiently accurate focusing using C-i-F, maybe you'll be OK using the green hexagon focus indicator to guide you. This would enable you to focus then recompose.

I normally wouldn't recommend this (as you've already heard!), but if you can satisfy yourself that it works well for this particular lens, then go for it!

[wowtip]

They are exactly the same.

Never post when tired. How fast does FA43 focus compared to FA50/1.4, that should have been.

[JeffJS]

Never post when tired. How fast does FA43 focus compared to FA50/1.4, that should have been.

I knew that, just couldn't resist. The only camera I have any real experience with both of them on is the K10d. In 'good' light, there isn't a lot of difference. In Room light (dim, incandescent), the FA50 would Try to focus but would routinely miss. The FA43 was quite good on that camera. I sold the FA50 to finance the 43 so I never really did a 1 to 1 compare of the two but it's a decision that I do not regret.

[Vote4Pedro]

I would find one in real life and play with it. Make your decision based on experience. If you buy the 35 DA L used, you can sell it for what you buy it for, if you decide the 43 is the way to go down the line.

You don't have the opportunity to tr the FA43 out at a camera store and see if you like it?

My Pentax purchases have to be made on faith, because there isn't a Pentax retailer in all of Florida. I don't personally know anyone with a Pentax anything to borrow equipment from either. What I read on the forum and other websites pretty much influences all of my purchasing decisions.

I appreciate the advice thus far, and for now I'm thinking of holding off on the 43, although I see the dollar depreciate by the day and know it's only a matter of time before another price hike.

[paperbag846]

I appreciate the advice thus far, and for now I'm thinking of holding off on the 43, although I see the dollar depreciate by the day and know it's only a matter of time before another price hike.

Buy used. You can sell it again at no loss if you don't like it.

[builttospill]

My Pentax purchases have to be made on faith, because there isn't a Pentax retailer in all of Florida. I don't personally know anyone with a Pentax anything to borrow equipment from either.

You could always rent a lens before making a decision to buy. That way before spending $5-600 or more, you'll get what you want. CameraLensRentals.com - Canon, Nikon and Pentax Lens Rentals.

[Nick Siebers]

M 50/1.7 is a great little lens. FA 43 is a little wider, a lot more convenient, and a little better. Either can take a great shot. I use the 43 as my everyday lens for pictures of my kids and wife, and I think they come out great. The 50 is a little long for "sitting around the table" shots. The DA40 is also quite good, that was my first step up from the M 50/1.7. I prefer both the 43 and the 40 to the 31, which I had a few great shots with but many I wasn't as happy with. (Ducks for cover)

[DaveHolmes]

I don't have the greatest eyesight which makes focusing difficult

I'd be looking at the 'FA 50mm f1.4'... At £200 less and still sharp as a really sharp knife... That an extra £200 to blow on other toys (for you or the new baby...)