Just picked up a DA40 ...

TOUGEFC · 11-16-2011, 04:54 AM

Originally posted by eigelb

nope, 2 F stops difference

No he is right, its still four times more light (2 stops)

example of 4 times faster shutter speed (2 stops)-

Start with say 1/250 go up one stop (twice faster) = 1/500, go up another stop = 1/1000 (twice faster again)

1/250 vs 1/1000 = 4 times faster (2 stops)

Last edited by TOUGEFC; 11-16-2011 at 05:00 AM.

pentup · 11-16-2011, 05:32 AM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

No he is right, its still four times more light (2 stops)

lol. I wonder how many people make mistakes like this. If two stops meant only twice the light, then one stop would mean no change at all... :ugh:

eigelb · 11-16-2011, 12:05 PM

naa i know it was more a psychological post for me ..when you hear 4 times more, this lba thing wakes up, "2stops sounds ok", i have also the 3 limiteds, they are great. they do not have the extra speed, but they are small light and sharp.
I have also a 50mm f1.7 but since i got the 40mm i doesn't use it so often

alphanerd · 11-16-2011, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by pentup

lol. I wonder how many people make mistakes like this. If two stops meant only twice the light, then one stop would mean no change at all... :ugh:

Well, there is a (small) difference between T-stops (i.e. transmission) versus F-stops.

Last edited by alphanerd; 11-16-2011 at 12:25 PM.

paperbag846 · 11-16-2011, 12:21 PM

This is my most-bought and sold focal length range.

I first bought the K55 1.8. Then I got a A 50 1.7 with a film camera. I became obsessed with 50s. Then I wanted to try a limited and bought the DA 40. I noticed immediately that 40 just had this pop and shine to it that the 50s did not have. I think it mostly has to do with contrast retention.

I also get a little frustrated with focusing the manual 50s, so I bought an FA 50. Then I sold the A 50 1.7. Then I sold the FA 50 1.4, preferring the DA 40. Then I started to miss the "less perfect" look the 50 1.4 gave. Sure, the 40 has pop, but the 50 has character (resembling an older, more organic look). The DA 40 paints the sky bluer than you will ever see it with your own eyes (for example).

Eventually, the DA 40, and K 55 went. I just have the FA 50 right now. I don't love the focal length of the 50, but it works. I would prefer it a little longer (55), or closer to 40, but for the price, you can't beat the 50 1.4. Just don't be one of those people who obsesses over sharpness. This lens is better than that! Its about character!

That said, I got a lot of great photos with the DA 40 just because it makes for fool-proof photography. Not a single bad aperture, and ultra-fast autofocus. You also basically never need to worry about bumping the lens, either. In the end, I picked the FA 50 not because it was better, but because I liked it better from the options in my price range. Happy shooting!

pentup · 11-16-2011, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

You also basically never need to worry about bumping the lens, either.

I know. I find I have to worry more about scraping my knuckles on stuff, rather than bumping the lens.
I don't mind the extra vibrant skies; other lenses seem to drain color from the sky. Something I really appreciate with the DA 40 is that it almost magically seems to cut through murky, smoky air; maybe I'm imagining things, but it really seems to have a "pollution filtering" quality to it. Nice city lens.

timo · 11-17-2011, 07:45 AM

Originally posted by kent

I bought DA40 and sold it after a week or so. It was great lens, produced sharp images, but 40mm FOV did not suit my shooting style. Neither for portraits, nor for landscapes. It's okay for street photography, but i prefer classic 50mm.

But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning. DA35 is more classic.

I have an FA50/1.7; used to have a 1.4; have various M50s. But they are mild telephoto lenses really. Useful in certain circumstances, but really my M28/3.5 is a more useful walkaround lens, and closer to the 'classic' 50. The DA40's a great little lens, but I find even that just a tad too long for general purposes.

Tim

audiobomber · 11-17-2011, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by timo

But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning.

The actual focal length of the FA 50mm 1.4 is 52mm. With a 1.5X crop, it is 78mm. Not classic but pretty close to the Pentax 77mm on film.

DA 40 photos look very punchy due to high contrast, but the FA 50mm is more realistic. Which look I prefer depends on what I'm after. I can get along with f/2.8 maximum aperture with the K-x, but I want f/2 with the K20D. 40mm focal length is a bit of no-man's land, not really a normal, too short for classic portraits. I like it though, as an all-round focal length.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 11-17-2011, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by timo

But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning.

Which makes it much more interesting to use on APS sensors. I chat with a lot of people that use FF and for them, 50mm is a "meh" focal length. On APS it becomes a fast and compact lens providing 75mm FOV. And you can use one as a walkaround lens very well. What focal length you prefer for general purposes is a matter of personal preference.

regor · 11-17-2011, 01:51 PM

Good deal on an outstanding landscape lens IMO:

abacus07 · 11-20-2011, 08:34 AM

I've had the DA40 for a few weeks and I use it as my walk around lens since it's the only AF prime that I have. But I think I like my A50/1.7 better. Maybe my answer will change next time you ask though.

MegaPower · 11-22-2011, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by timo

But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning. DA35 is more classic.

I have an FA50/1.7; used to have a 1.4; have various M50s. But they are mild telephoto lenses really. Useful in certain circumstances, but really my M28/3.5 is a more useful walkaround lens, and closer to the 'classic' 50. The DA40's a great little lens, but I find even that just a tad too long for general purposes.

Tim

I have A28/2.8.
but the FA35/2 will provide a closer 'classic' fifty look.

Jonathan Mac · 11-22-2011, 02:38 AM

Originally posted by abacus07

I've had the DA40 for a few weeks and I use it as my walk around lens since it's the only AF prime that I have. But I think I like my A50/1.7 better. Maybe my answer will change next time you ask though.

The A50 f/1.7 is superb, it produces the most saturated, vibrant colours of any lens I've used.

The draw of the 40mm ltd hasn't abated much since I go the 35mm ltd...

pentup · 11-22-2011, 05:20 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Mac

The draw of the 40mm ltd hasn't abated much since I go the 35mm ltd...

That's funny; I have the DA 40 and all I can think about is the 35mm ltd. :ugh:

Jonathan Mac · 11-22-2011, 07:32 AM

Originally posted by pentup

That's funny; I have the DA 40 and all I can think about is the 35mm ltd. :ugh:

Ha ha!!

I do love the DA35 though, so I won't suggest a swap

11-17-2011, 08:24 AM	#23
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by timo But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning. The actual focal length of the FA 50mm 1.4 is 52mm. With a 1.5X crop, it is 78mm. Not classic but pretty close to the Pentax 77mm on film. DA 40 photos look very punchy due to high contrast, but the FA 50mm is more realistic. Which look I prefer depends on what I'm after. I can get along with f/2.8 maximum aperture with the K-x, but I want f/2 with the K20D. 40mm focal length is a bit of no-man's land, not really a normal, too short for classic portraits. I like it though, as an all-round focal length. Last edited by audiobomber; 11-17-2011 at 12:34 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
lx i just picked up	m3vwg	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	3	10-17-2011 08:52 PM
Picked up a ME Super! A few questions	Turbo_Spool900	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	37	01-21-2011 09:20 AM
To Da40..or not to Da40...tiss the question!	Shutter-bug	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	10-26-2010 08:46 AM
Picked up $300	Bramela	Photographic Technique	18	10-17-2010 07:08 PM
Picked up 3 mf lenses recently	Skullsroad	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	09-23-2010 05:50 PM

11-16-2011, 04:54 AM	#16
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Originally posted by eigelb nope, 2 F stops difference No he is right, its still four times more light (2 stops) example of 4 times faster shutter speed (2 stops)- Start with say 1/250 go up one stop (twice faster) = 1/500, go up another stop = 1/1000 (twice faster again) 1/250 vs 1/1000 = 4 times faster (2 stops) Last edited by TOUGEFC; 11-16-2011 at 05:00 AM.

11-16-2011, 05:32 AM	#17
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	Originally posted by TOUGEFC No he is right, its still four times more light (2 stops) lol. I wonder how many people make mistakes like this. If two stops meant only twice the light, then one stop would mean no change at all... :ugh:

11-16-2011, 12:05 PM	#18
eigelb Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Italy Posts: 174	naa i know it was more a psychological post for me ..when you hear 4 times more, this lba thing wakes up, "2stops sounds ok", i have also the 3 limiteds, they are great. they do not have the extra speed, but they are small light and sharp. I have also a 50mm f1.7 but since i got the 40mm i doesn't use it so often

11-16-2011, 12:19 PM	#19
alphanerd Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 119	Originally posted by pentup lol. I wonder how many people make mistakes like this. If two stops meant only twice the light, then one stop would mean no change at all... :ugh: Well, there is a (small) difference between T-stops (i.e. transmission) versus F-stops. Last edited by alphanerd; 11-16-2011 at 12:25 PM.

11-16-2011, 12:21 PM	#20
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	This is my most-bought and sold focal length range. I first bought the K55 1.8. Then I got a A 50 1.7 with a film camera. I became obsessed with 50s. Then I wanted to try a limited and bought the DA 40. I noticed immediately that 40 just had this pop and shine to it that the 50s did not have. I think it mostly has to do with contrast retention. I also get a little frustrated with focusing the manual 50s, so I bought an FA 50. Then I sold the A 50 1.7. Then I sold the FA 50 1.4, preferring the DA 40. Then I started to miss the "less perfect" look the 50 1.4 gave. Sure, the 40 has pop, but the 50 has character (resembling an older, more organic look). The DA 40 paints the sky bluer than you will ever see it with your own eyes (for example). Eventually, the DA 40, and K 55 went. I just have the FA 50 right now. I don't love the focal length of the 50, but it works. I would prefer it a little longer (55), or closer to 40, but for the price, you can't beat the 50 1.4. Just don't be one of those people who obsesses over sharpness. This lens is better than that! Its about character! That said, I got a lot of great photos with the DA 40 just because it makes for fool-proof photography. Not a single bad aperture, and ultra-fast autofocus. You also basically never need to worry about bumping the lens, either. In the end, I picked the FA 50 not because it was better, but because I liked it better from the options in my price range. Happy shooting!

11-16-2011, 06:04 PM	#21
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	Originally posted by paperbag846 You also basically never need to worry about bumping the lens, either. I know. I find I have to worry more about scraping my knuckles on stuff, rather than bumping the lens. I don't mind the extra vibrant skies; other lenses seem to drain color from the sky. Something I really appreciate with the DA 40 is that it almost magically seems to cut through murky, smoky air; maybe I'm imagining things, but it really seems to have a "pollution filtering" quality to it. Nice city lens.

11-17-2011, 07:45 AM	#22
timo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: former Arsenal football stadium Photos: Gallery Posts: 431	Originally posted by kent I bought DA40 and sold it after a week or so. It was great lens, produced sharp images, but 40mm FOV did not suit my shooting style. Neither for portraits, nor for landscapes. It's okay for street photography, but i prefer classic 50mm. But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning. DA35 is more classic. I have an FA50/1.7; used to have a 1.4; have various M50s. But they are mild telephoto lenses really. Useful in certain circumstances, but really my M28/3.5 is a more useful walkaround lens, and closer to the 'classic' 50. The DA40's a great little lens, but I find even that just a tad too long for general purposes. Tim

11-17-2011, 12:17 PM	#24
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by timo But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning. Which makes it much more interesting to use on APS sensors. I chat with a lot of people that use FF and for them, 50mm is a "meh" focal length. On APS it becomes a fast and compact lens providing 75mm FOV. And you can use one as a walkaround lens very well. What focal length you prefer for general purposes is a matter of personal preference.

11-17-2011, 01:51 PM	#25
regor Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Victoria, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 356	Good deal on an outstanding landscape lens IMO:

11-20-2011, 08:34 AM	#26
abacus07 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Taiwan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,075	I've had the DA40 for a few weeks and I use it as my walk around lens since it's the only AF prime that I have. But I think I like my A50/1.7 better. Maybe my answer will change next time you ask though.

11-22-2011, 12:26 AM	#27
MegaPower Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Hong Kong / Irvine, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 636	Originally posted by timo But on K5/K-x etc. sensor it's not classic FOV. It's like a 75mm lens in old reckoning. DA35 is more classic. I have an FA50/1.7; used to have a 1.4; have various M50s. But they are mild telephoto lenses really. Useful in certain circumstances, but really my M28/3.5 is a more useful walkaround lens, and closer to the 'classic' 50. The DA40's a great little lens, but I find even that just a tad too long for general purposes. Tim I have A28/2.8. but the FA35/2 will provide a closer 'classic' fifty look.

11-22-2011, 02:38 AM	#28
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,897	Originally posted by abacus07 I've had the DA40 for a few weeks and I use it as my walk around lens since it's the only AF prime that I have. But I think I like my A50/1.7 better. Maybe my answer will change next time you ask though. The A50 f/1.7 is superb, it produces the most saturated, vibrant colours of any lens I've used. The draw of the 40mm ltd hasn't abated much since I go the 35mm ltd...

11-22-2011, 05:20 AM	#29
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	Originally posted by Jonathan Mac The draw of the 40mm ltd hasn't abated much since I go the 35mm ltd... That's funny; I have the DA 40 and all I can think about is the 35mm ltd. :ugh:

11-22-2011, 07:32 AM	#30
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,897	Originally posted by pentup That's funny; I have the DA 40 and all I can think about is the 35mm ltd. :ugh: Ha ha!! I do love the DA35 though, so I won't suggest a swap