FA 31 or DA 21 + FA 43

Nick Siebers · 12-12-2011, 08:23 PM

I had the 31 for a while, and found I prefer to the 43 in most ways. I use ithem mostly for people pictures and flower pictures, though. Not sure about landscapes. The 31 is pretty big for a normal prime. But it did take nice pictures.

mikeSF · 12-12-2011, 08:30 PM

ONE lens to rule them all...get the 31 or you will be second guessing yourself until you finally do.

twitch · 12-12-2011, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by Rez

Here's my question : what would you do if you had the choice between DA 21 + FA 43 or just FA 31 ? Prices are close on the marketplace...

I'd take the FA31 without any hesitation.

vrrattko · 12-13-2011, 04:40 AM

I had FA31 and chose FA43 + K20/4 combo instead as this gives me more flexibility. But FA31 is one fantastic lens, just I found that focal lenght bit limiting. It doesn't have character that FA43 seems to possess, but FA31 does everything well, It doesn't have big weakness really. Tough decision.
btw. If you're not worried about manual focus, Zeiss 28/2 zk might be option to consider - slightly wider than FA31 and nearly as expensive.

PentaxMom Felua · 12-13-2011, 05:13 AM

Hi, this is the route I took:
at first: da 21 + da35 & da40. Great, very versatile. And lots of swopping. So,
then: being angry with the bad reputation of the 16-50 da* ... I bought one. Less swopping. And I fell deeply for this lens. With all its flaws, it still delivers. But, needing sometimes something a bit smaller and faster, and after selling about 30 old lenses (passed away family members' hand-me-downs) I bought the fa31ltd. Combined with my feet it is the solution. I like it very much for indoor things.
That's it. I still have the da15, but getting more and more involved with 16-50 and 31, I consider selling it. My set up will then be 16-50/31/55/70/100dfa macro NON wr (I don't know why, I tried to replace it 3x for a WR, but none were as good as my trusty dfa non wr, except for bokeh) and my husband's bulky 60-250.
But to be fair, I still have a bunch of takumars. Which I also use a lot.

Rez · 12-13-2011, 05:59 AM

Hi, many intersting views here !

Originally posted by vrrattko

It doesn't have character that FA43 seems to possess

Could you develop why you think that the 43 has more character ? Is it related to bokeh ? sharpness ?
I made my decision on the 31 but i'm interested...

About the Zeiss, it seems very hard to find on the marketplace and I prefer keep on with AF

Originally posted by mikeSF

get the 31 or you will be second guessing yourself until you finally do

I understand that. At the time I bought the 35 macro, i had already spotted the 31, but the funding wasn't available...

vrrattko · 12-13-2011, 06:18 AM

Originally posted by Rez

Could you develop why you think that the 43 has more character ? Is it related to bokeh ? sharpness ?
I made my decision on the 31 but i'm interested...

Sure, by character I meant its special Image Quality. You almost guessed it, when you pointed out bokeh and sharpness. I think its character relates to both those qualities. FA43 has not so smooth bokeho as FA31, but it is somehow interesting, almost artistic. Combined with extreme centre sharpness you sometimes end up with photos that have this pop character, when object in focus appears to be in front of background, but background is still defined, not smooth and indifferent. It is sort of 3dimensionality, I'll try to find some photo, which may explain it better than words.
I think either decision is good, FA31 performs well in every aspect and stopped down can be very sharp.

Frogfish · 12-13-2011, 06:28 AM

Originally posted by vrrattko

If you're not worried about manual focus, Zeiss 28/2 zk might be option to consider - slightly wider than FA31 and nearly as expensive.

There is no need to spend so much for a superb Zeiss. The 28/2.8 is almost as good (superb corner to corner, extremely sharp, Zeiss rendering) but considerably cheaper (ca. US$400 + PK mount conversion of maybe US$50).

I have the 43 and although I don't use it much I'd never sell it - it's that good. However like the OP I prefer around 30 for a walkaround and that is where the Sigma 30/1.4 comes in. So my '30 ish' kit is the Zeiss 28/2.8 (landscapes) and the Sigma 30 for everything else.

Frogfish · 12-13-2011, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by PentaxMom Felua

That's it. I still have the da15, but getting more and more involved with 16-50 and 31, I consider selling it. My set up will then be 16-50/31/55/70/100dfa macro

That is another lens I could never sell (15 Ltd) it is just AMAZING and the 16-50 (nor any other zoom) could never replicate the superb contrast and gorgeous starbursts it gives off just by looking at it. A truly wonderful little piece of heaven.

mikeSF · 12-13-2011, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by vrrattko

Sure, by character I meant its special Image Quality. You almost guessed it, when you pointed out bokeh and sharpness. I think its character relates to both those qualities. FA43 has not so smooth bokeho as FA31, but it is somehow interesting, almost artistic. Combined with extreme centre sharpness you sometimes end up with photos that have this pop character, when object in focus appears to be in front of background, but background is still defined, not smooth and indifferent. It is sort of 3dimensionality, I'll try to find some photo, which may explain it better than words.
I think either decision is good, FA31 performs well in every aspect and stopped down can be very sharp.

to add to this, it seems to me that the longer you go in FL, the more 3D potential there is from a good fast lens. Don't get me started on the FA77, that is my favorite when the situation can handle it.

vrrattko · 12-13-2011, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by Frogfish

There is no need to spend so much for a superb Zeiss. The 28/2.8 is almost as good (superb corner to corner, extremely sharp, Zeiss rendering) but considerably cheaper (ca. US$400 + PK mount conversion of maybe US$50).

I have the 43 and although I don't use it much I'd never sell it - it's that good. However like the OP I prefer around 30 for a walkaround and that is where the Sigma 30/1.4 comes in. So my '30 ish' kit is the Zeiss 28/2.8 (landscapes) and the Sigma 30 for everything else.

Oh yes, Contax Zeiss 28/2.8 is very highly regarded lens, and used to be also cheap. I had two other Contaxes converted to PK, both performed great (on par with FA limiteds) but I sold them as they were not so convenient to use. But for the landscapes I guess convenience doesn't matter.

robgo2 · 12-13-2011, 02:16 PM

The FA31 is a great general purpose lens, but the FA43 is a better lens, IMO. I own and use both. It is up to the individual to decide which focal length will be more useful or suitable. The DA21 has its fans, but it is not in the same league as the FA Limiteds. However, it is a nice complement to the either of the other two. So is the DA15.

Rob

vrrattko · 12-13-2011, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by robgo2

The FA31 is a great general purpose lens, but the FA43 is a better lens, IMO. I own and use both. It is up to the individual to decide which focal length will be more useful or suitable. The DA21 has its fans, but it is not in the same league as the FA Limiteds. However, it is a nice complement to the either of the other two. So is the DA15.

Rob

For me it is difficult to say which is better, maybe I favour FA43 a bit more, but IMHO they are quite different lenses. I see FA43 as one that is ultrasharp in centre and gives sort of impressionistic bokeh, while FA31 is more even across the frame and very smooth rendering. I once bought FA31 because somebody reasoned with me that it can always replace FA43 with just a little crop - that is not true. Both lenses render images differently.

Rez · 12-13-2011, 03:16 PM

I guess I should stop reading all this stuff ... You will eventually convince me to get all the FA Ltd trio !
It makes me think... My girlfriend has two kidneys, is this really so indispensable ?

Before getting extreme, I've contacted a seller... We'll see

DogLover · 12-13-2011, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by Rez

I guess I should stop reading all this stuff ... You will eventually convince me to get all the FA Ltd trio !
It makes me think... My girlfriend has two kidneys, is this really so indispensable ?

Before getting extreme, I've contacted a seller... We'll see

Make no mistake, once you have tasted the FA Ltd. nectar, you will want to try all 3.

12-12-2011, 08:23 PM	#16
Nick Siebers Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,165	I had the 31 for a while, and found I prefer to the 43 in most ways. I use ithem mostly for people pictures and flower pictures, though. Not sure about landscapes. The 31 is pretty big for a normal prime. But it did take nice pictures.

12-12-2011, 08:30 PM	#17
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	ONE lens to rule them all...get the 31 or you will be second guessing yourself until you finally do.

12-12-2011, 08:55 PM	#18
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Originally posted by Rez Here's my question : what would you do if you had the choice between DA 21 + FA 43 or just FA 31 ? Prices are close on the marketplace... I'd take the FA31 without any hesitation.

12-13-2011, 04:40 AM	#19
vrrattko Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 753	I had FA31 and chose FA43 + K20/4 combo instead as this gives me more flexibility. But FA31 is one fantastic lens, just I found that focal lenght bit limiting. It doesn't have character that FA43 seems to possess, but FA31 does everything well, It doesn't have big weakness really. Tough decision. btw. If you're not worried about manual focus, Zeiss 28/2 zk might be option to consider - slightly wider than FA31 and nearly as expensive.

12-13-2011, 05:13 AM	#20
PentaxMom Felua Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Veluwe Posts: 339	Hi, this is the route I took: at first: da 21 + da35 & da40. Great, very versatile. And lots of swopping. So, then: being angry with the bad reputation of the 16-50 da* ... I bought one. Less swopping. And I fell deeply for this lens. With all its flaws, it still delivers. But, needing sometimes something a bit smaller and faster, and after selling about 30 old lenses (passed away family members' hand-me-downs) I bought the fa31ltd. Combined with my feet it is the solution. I like it very much for indoor things. That's it. I still have the da15, but getting more and more involved with 16-50 and 31, I consider selling it. My set up will then be 16-50/31/55/70/100dfa macro NON wr (I don't know why, I tried to replace it 3x for a WR, but none were as good as my trusty dfa non wr, except for bokeh) and my husband's bulky 60-250. But to be fair, I still have a bunch of takumars. Which I also use a lot.

12-13-2011, 05:59 AM	#21
Rez New Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 16 Original Poster	Hi, many intersting views here ! Originally posted by vrrattko It doesn't have character that FA43 seems to possess Could you develop why you think that the 43 has more character ? Is it related to bokeh ? sharpness ? I made my decision on the 31 but i'm interested... About the Zeiss, it seems very hard to find on the marketplace and I prefer keep on with AF Originally posted by mikeSF get the 31 or you will be second guessing yourself until you finally do I understand that. At the time I bought the 35 macro, i had already spotted the 31, but the funding wasn't available...

12-13-2011, 06:18 AM	#22
vrrattko Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 753	Originally posted by Rez Could you develop why you think that the 43 has more character ? Is it related to bokeh ? sharpness ? I made my decision on the 31 but i'm interested... Sure, by character I meant its special Image Quality. You almost guessed it, when you pointed out bokeh and sharpness. I think its character relates to both those qualities. FA43 has not so smooth bokeho as FA31, but it is somehow interesting, almost artistic. Combined with extreme centre sharpness you sometimes end up with photos that have this pop character, when object in focus appears to be in front of background, but background is still defined, not smooth and indifferent. It is sort of 3dimensionality, I'll try to find some photo, which may explain it better than words. I think either decision is good, FA31 performs well in every aspect and stopped down can be very sharp.

12-13-2011, 06:28 AM	#23
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by vrrattko If you're not worried about manual focus, Zeiss 28/2 zk might be option to consider - slightly wider than FA31 and nearly as expensive. There is no need to spend so much for a superb Zeiss. The 28/2.8 is almost as good (superb corner to corner, extremely sharp, Zeiss rendering) but considerably cheaper (ca. US$400 + PK mount conversion of maybe US$50). I have the 43 and although I don't use it much I'd never sell it - it's that good. However like the OP I prefer around 30 for a walkaround and that is where the Sigma 30/1.4 comes in. So my '30 ish' kit is the Zeiss 28/2.8 (landscapes) and the Sigma 30 for everything else.

12-13-2011, 06:32 AM	#24
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by PentaxMom Felua That's it. I still have the da15, but getting more and more involved with 16-50 and 31, I consider selling it. My set up will then be 16-50/31/55/70/100dfa macro That is another lens I could never sell (15 Ltd) it is just AMAZING and the 16-50 (nor any other zoom) could never replicate the superb contrast and gorgeous starbursts it gives off just by looking at it. A truly wonderful little piece of heaven.

12-13-2011, 08:53 AM	#25
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	Originally posted by vrrattko Sure, by character I meant its special Image Quality. You almost guessed it, when you pointed out bokeh and sharpness. I think its character relates to both those qualities. FA43 has not so smooth bokeho as FA31, but it is somehow interesting, almost artistic. Combined with extreme centre sharpness you sometimes end up with photos that have this pop character, when object in focus appears to be in front of background, but background is still defined, not smooth and indifferent. It is sort of 3dimensionality, I'll try to find some photo, which may explain it better than words. I think either decision is good, FA31 performs well in every aspect and stopped down can be very sharp. to add to this, it seems to me that the longer you go in FL, the more 3D potential there is from a good fast lens. Don't get me started on the FA77, that is my favorite when the situation can handle it.

12-13-2011, 02:16 PM	#26
vrrattko Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 753	Originally posted by Frogfish There is no need to spend so much for a superb Zeiss. The 28/2.8 is almost as good (superb corner to corner, extremely sharp, Zeiss rendering) but considerably cheaper (ca. US$400 + PK mount conversion of maybe US$50). I have the 43 and although I don't use it much I'd never sell it - it's that good. However like the OP I prefer around 30 for a walkaround and that is where the Sigma 30/1.4 comes in. So my '30 ish' kit is the Zeiss 28/2.8 (landscapes) and the Sigma 30 for everything else. Oh yes, Contax Zeiss 28/2.8 is very highly regarded lens, and used to be also cheap. I had two other Contaxes converted to PK, both performed great (on par with FA limiteds) but I sold them as they were not so convenient to use. But for the landscapes I guess convenience doesn't matter.

12-13-2011, 02:16 PM	#27
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	The FA31 is a great general purpose lens, but the FA43 is a better lens, IMO. I own and use both. It is up to the individual to decide which focal length will be more useful or suitable. The DA21 has its fans, but it is not in the same league as the FA Limiteds. However, it is a nice complement to the either of the other two. So is the DA15. Rob

12-13-2011, 02:21 PM	#28
vrrattko Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 753	Originally posted by robgo2 The FA31 is a great general purpose lens, but the FA43 is a better lens, IMO. I own and use both. It is up to the individual to decide which focal length will be more useful or suitable. The DA21 has its fans, but it is not in the same league as the FA Limiteds. However, it is a nice complement to the either of the other two. So is the DA15. Rob For me it is difficult to say which is better, maybe I favour FA43 a bit more, but IMHO they are quite different lenses. I see FA43 as one that is ultrasharp in centre and gives sort of impressionistic bokeh, while FA31 is more even across the frame and very smooth rendering. I once bought FA31 because somebody reasoned with me that it can always replace FA43 with just a little crop - that is not true. Both lenses render images differently.

12-13-2011, 03:16 PM	#29
Rez New Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 16 Original Poster	I guess I should stop reading all this stuff ... You will eventually convince me to get all the FA Ltd trio ! It makes me think... My girlfriend has two kidneys, is this really so indispensable ? Before getting extreme, I've contacted a seller... We'll see

12-13-2011, 03:33 PM	#30
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by Rez I guess I should stop reading all this stuff ... You will eventually convince me to get all the FA Ltd trio ! It makes me think... My girlfriend has two kidneys, is this really so indispensable ? Before getting extreme, I've contacted a seller... We'll see Make no mistake, once you have tasted the FA Ltd. nectar, you will want to try all 3.