35mm lens..... DAL, FA, DA Macro???

Siekierus_pl · 12-21-2011, 12:44 PM

In my first words I'd like to say "hello" to all Pentaxians from this forum.
I'm not a new member, I read this forum on daily basis. But this is my first post.
Let's get to the point.
I'm looking for a 35mm lens to compliment my set.
I've looked at:
DA 35mm f:2,4 AL
DA 35mm f:2,8 Macro LTD
FA 35mm f:2 AL
I need a bright lens to shoot without the flash. It should be sharp and produce a decent bokeh.
I don't need macro as I have DFA 100mm 2,8.
Of course the question of price is quite important.
At present, I can buy new DA 35mm f:2,4 AL for half a price of used FA 35mm f:2 AL. What is more, I could also buy almost new DA 16-45 (mint condition) and still pay less than for those two than for FA 35mm f:2 AL.
DA 35mm f:2,8 Macro (new) is the most expensive option at the moment and I'd have to save some more to get it.

To sum up, is the optical quality of DA 35mm f:2,8 Macro LTD or FA 35mm f:2 AL that much better than DA 35mm f:2,4 AL? What is more, that DA 16-45 could be an interesting addition to my set. What do you think?

Docrwm · 12-21-2011, 12:53 PM

Lots of praise for the 35/2.0 in the review section but there are a number comments that say something to the effect of "The DA 35mm f/2.4 is much cheaper and shares most of its characteristics." Might be a good idea to read the reviews of the 35/2.0. I like my 35/2.4 but haven't had the opportunity to use the 35/2.0.

Captmatt · 12-21-2011, 01:01 PM

Hi,
I Just went through a similar thought process and ended up buying a 16-45mm. Price wasn't as big an issue as carrying the least equipment for the best bang. As far as the 35mm lenses, I've heard that at equivalent apertures they are all very similar, though of course you get better build quality at the higher end, and probably better probability of maintaining the original quality for a longer time. If you need speed the 35mm f2 is probably the best bet, then you will have a lens that will be worth even more when Pentax brings out their full frame camera in Feb 201?.

rob1234 · 12-21-2011, 01:11 PM

DA35/2.4 has the same 6 element/5 group optical formulae, same 6 bladed aperture, same min focussing distance etc as the FA35.

No brainer for me, and 1/2 a stop slower is negligible IMHO - save your cash!

**Pepe Guitarra** · 12-21-2011, 02:11 PM

Have you considered the following 35mm lenses that are some of my favorites (BTW, you may not need macro, but the macro lens is special and will render you special sharpness when used in non-macro. One of the lenses below is just like that without being called macro (the Zeiss)):

1) CARL ZEISS JENA FLEKTOGON 35/2.8 ZEBRA LENS*M42

2) SUPER-TAKUMAR 35MM F2 * M42

If you buy the plasticl wonder (DA 35mm f2.4) make sure it does not come with compatibility problems. I purchased one from B&H more than a month ago, that I had to send to Pentax Technical Customer Support about two weeks ago (I haven't heard from them yet). It works fine with the K5, but did not work well with any of my two Kx. Just be aware.

metalmania · 12-21-2011, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Pepe Guitarra

Have you considered the following 35mm lenses that are some of my favorites (BTW, you may not need macro, but the macro lens is special and will render you special sharpness when used in non-macro. One of the lenses below is just like that without being called macro (the Zeiss)):

1) CARL ZEISS JENA FLEKTOGON 35/2.8 ZEBRA LENS*M42

2) SUPER-TAKUMAR 35MM F2 * M42

If you buy the plasticl wonder (DA 35mm f2.4) make sure it does not come with compatibility problems. I purchased one from B&H more than a month ago, that I had to send to Pentax Technical Customer Support about two weeks ago (I haven't heard from them yet). It works fine with the K5, but did not work well with any of my two Kx. Just be aware.

The 35/2.4 stays on my K-X at all times. Never have a problem.

elho_cid · 12-21-2011, 03:31 PM

I'm a FA35 owner and I like that lens. But I had a chance to tr` the DA35/2.8 macro and I would not hesitate to exchange my FA for the DA. Unless you plan to use a film camera, the DA is much better choice.

Docrwm · 12-21-2011, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by elho_cid

I'm a FA35 owner and I like that lens. But I had a chance to tr` the DA35/2.8 macro and I would not hesitate to exchange my FA for the DA. Unless you plan to use a film camera, the DA is much better choice.

Appreciate your sharing your experience with both lenses. Two questions for you: have you tried the 35/2.4 and why do you say that you'd not hesitate to swap the FA for the DA?

DaveHolmes · 12-21-2011, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Captmatt

If you need speed the 35mm f2 is probably the best bet, then you will have a lens that will be worth even more when Pentax brings out their full frame camera in Feb 201?.

Assuming FF is coming in Feb (which I doubt) and assuming when FF comes (which it will, but not by Feb) it'll come in K-mount...

Hang on... 201?

:-)

creampuff · 12-21-2011, 07:46 PM

Having tried all three of the 35mm AF lenses, I would rank them:

DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited
DA 35mm f/2.4
FA 35mm f/2

Although the slowest of the three in terms of maximum aperture, the DA 35mm Macro's close focusing allows more photo opportunities for closeups. Plus the nine aperture blades give nice bokeh. Focus is fast and build quality is the best of the three. Loss of one or half a f-stop is not a big deal when you can get closer to fill the frame.

The DA 35mm f/2.4 is sharp and cheap but the trade off is the plastic build quality. It also comes in different colors so that may appeal to some. It can pretty much do everything the FA 35mm f/2 can do but cheaper. But no hood and like the FA35mm f/2 has no quick shift. FA 35mm f/2 has blocky bokeh imo and color rendition is quite different from the typically warm punchy colors of FA lenses, some even say it is Canon-like. By way of comparison, all three AF lenses beat the manual A 35mm f/2 easily. All the lenses are sharp for general scenic, snapshot kind of images, so either opt for close focusing, price or max aperture as the point of difference.

Siekierus_pl · 12-21-2011, 11:35 PM

Thank you all for your suggestions. I think I'll take DAL and after some time get 70mm LTD.

yusuf · 12-22-2011, 03:09 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

FA 35mm f/2 has blocky bokeh imo and color rendition is quite different from the typically warm punchy colors of FA lenses, some even say it is Canon-like.

FA31 vs FA35, please note that the focus point is different in both the pics but as far as color rendition goes, they are very very close.

FA31 f1.8 320 ISO 100 (cropped slightly to match FA35 pic)

FA35 f2 250 ISO 100

Don From The Radio · 12-22-2011, 03:21 AM

I hate to be the guy who nitpicks every time, but the 35 2.4 isn't a DA-L lens. It's a full DA, even with the plastic mount. And it's a wonderful piece of glass. One of my favorite lenses ever. The 70 Limited being the other.

elho_cid · 12-22-2011, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by Docrwm

Appreciate your sharing your experience with both lenses. Two questions for you: have you tried the 35/2.4 and why do you say that you'd not hesitate to swap the FA for the DA?

Yes, I tried that DAL f2,4 too, but only for few shots. I found the result quite similar to FA35 as expected.

My point is that with K-5's high ISO (may get even better with future Pentaxes) one would probably only use the f2 aperture to get blurred background. However bokeh of the FA35 is not particulary nice. It has 6-blade aperture where the blades are not rounded and the bokeh may feel busy at times.
On the other hand DA35 macro has 9-blade aperture and even if the result is not so much blurred as with FA35, the nature of the blur looks better. And of course it is all-metal, and focuses a lot closer. Many object that 35mm macro is not usable as you have to be too close and scare the insect, but macro is not all about insect and you can look at my PPG to see that butterfly shot with DA35 is not impossible.

yusuf · 12-22-2011, 07:49 AM

Originally posted by elho_cid

On the other hand DA35 macro has 9-blade aperture and even if the result is not so much blurred as with FA35, the nature of the blur looks better.

At F2, blades are completely open and hence blade count or shape is completely irrelevant. So it will not be correct to say that FA35 bokeh @f2 will be any worse than DA35 @f2.8

12-21-2011, 12:44 PM	#1
Siekierus_pl Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 29	35mm lens..... DAL, FA, DA Macro??? In my first words I'd like to say "hello" to all Pentaxians from this forum. I'm not a new member, I read this forum on daily basis. But this is my first post. Let's get to the point. I'm looking for a 35mm lens to compliment my set. I've looked at: DA 35mm f:2,4 AL DA 35mm f:2,8 Macro LTD FA 35mm f:2 AL I need a bright lens to shoot without the flash. It should be sharp and produce a decent bokeh. I don't need macro as I have DFA 100mm 2,8. Of course the question of price is quite important. At present, I can buy new DA 35mm f:2,4 AL for half a price of used FA 35mm f:2 AL. What is more, I could also buy almost new DA 16-45 (mint condition) and still pay less than for those two than for FA 35mm f:2 AL. DA 35mm f:2,8 Macro (new) is the most expensive option at the moment and I'd have to save some more to get it. To sum up, is the optical quality of DA 35mm f:2,8 Macro LTD or FA 35mm f:2 AL that much better than DA 35mm f:2,4 AL? What is more, that DA 16-45 could be an interesting addition to my set. What do you think?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Need suggestions for Hoods for DAL 18-55 Kit Lens and DAL 55-300mm Lens	photoleet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	09-20-2011 03:15 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DAL 35mm 2.4 lens (Worldwide)	efkelly	Sold Items	5	07-06-2011 07:24 PM
New 35mm f2.4 DAL Lens	nanhi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	48	04-07-2011 10:11 PM
K5, Kr, DAL 35mm, anything else?	KxBlaze	Pentax News and Rumors	8	09-16-2010 03:03 PM
DAL 55-300mm as close-up / macro lens	Igilligan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	03-02-2010 11:02 PM

12-21-2011, 12:53 PM	#2
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Lots of praise for the 35/2.0 in the review section but there are a number comments that say something to the effect of "The DA 35mm f/2.4 is much cheaper and shares most of its characteristics." Might be a good idea to read the reviews of the 35/2.0. I like my 35/2.4 but haven't had the opportunity to use the 35/2.0.

12-21-2011, 01:01 PM	#3
Captmatt Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Homer, Alaska Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 101	Hi, I Just went through a similar thought process and ended up buying a 16-45mm. Price wasn't as big an issue as carrying the least equipment for the best bang. As far as the 35mm lenses, I've heard that at equivalent apertures they are all very similar, though of course you get better build quality at the higher end, and probably better probability of maintaining the original quality for a longer time. If you need speed the 35mm f2 is probably the best bet, then you will have a lens that will be worth even more when Pentax brings out their full frame camera in Feb 201?.

12-21-2011, 01:11 PM	#4
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	DA35/2.4 has the same 6 element/5 group optical formulae, same 6 bladed aperture, same min focussing distance etc as the FA35. No brainer for me, and 1/2 a stop slower is negligible IMHO - save your cash!

12-21-2011, 02:11 PM	#5
Pepe Guitarra Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,223	Have you considered the following 35mm lenses that are some of my favorites (BTW, you may not need macro, but the macro lens is special and will render you special sharpness when used in non-macro. One of the lenses below is just like that without being called macro (the Zeiss)): 1) CARL ZEISS JENA FLEKTOGON 35/2.8 ZEBRA LENSM42 2) SUPER-TAKUMAR 35MM F2 M42 If you buy the plasticl wonder (DA 35mm f2.4) make sure it does not come with compatibility problems. I purchased one from B&H more than a month ago, that I had to send to Pentax Technical Customer Support about two weeks ago (I haven't heard from them yet). It works fine with the K5, but did not work well with any of my two Kx. Just be aware.

12-21-2011, 02:41 PM	#6
metalmania Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 253	Originally posted by Pepe Guitarra Have you considered the following 35mm lenses that are some of my favorites (BTW, you may not need macro, but the macro lens is special and will render you special sharpness when used in non-macro. One of the lenses below is just like that without being called macro (the Zeiss)): 1) CARL ZEISS JENA FLEKTOGON 35/2.8 ZEBRA LENSM42 2) SUPER-TAKUMAR 35MM F2 M42 If you buy the plasticl wonder (DA 35mm f2.4) make sure it does not come with compatibility problems. I purchased one from B&H more than a month ago, that I had to send to Pentax Technical Customer Support about two weeks ago (I haven't heard from them yet). It works fine with the K5, but did not work well with any of my two Kx. Just be aware. The 35/2.4 stays on my K-X at all times. Never have a problem.

12-21-2011, 03:31 PM	#7
elho_cid Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	I'm a FA35 owner and I like that lens. But I had a chance to tr` the DA35/2.8 macro and I would not hesitate to exchange my FA for the DA. Unless you plan to use a film camera, the DA is much better choice.

12-21-2011, 04:05 PM	#8
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by elho_cid I'm a FA35 owner and I like that lens. But I had a chance to tr` the DA35/2.8 macro and I would not hesitate to exchange my FA for the DA. Unless you plan to use a film camera, the DA is much better choice. Appreciate your sharing your experience with both lenses. Two questions for you: have you tried the 35/2.4 and why do you say that you'd not hesitate to swap the FA for the DA?

12-21-2011, 04:08 PM	#9
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	Originally posted by Captmatt If you need speed the 35mm f2 is probably the best bet, then you will have a lens that will be worth even more when Pentax brings out their full frame camera in Feb 201?. Assuming FF is coming in Feb (which I doubt) and assuming when FF comes (which it will, but not by Feb) it'll come in K-mount... Hang on... 201? :-)

12-21-2011, 07:46 PM	#10
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Having tried all three of the 35mm AF lenses, I would rank them: DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited DA 35mm f/2.4 FA 35mm f/2 Although the slowest of the three in terms of maximum aperture, the DA 35mm Macro's close focusing allows more photo opportunities for closeups. Plus the nine aperture blades give nice bokeh. Focus is fast and build quality is the best of the three. Loss of one or half a f-stop is not a big deal when you can get closer to fill the frame. The DA 35mm f/2.4 is sharp and cheap but the trade off is the plastic build quality. It also comes in different colors so that may appeal to some. It can pretty much do everything the FA 35mm f/2 can do but cheaper. But no hood and like the FA35mm f/2 has no quick shift. FA 35mm f/2 has blocky bokeh imo and color rendition is quite different from the typically warm punchy colors of FA lenses, some even say it is Canon-like. By way of comparison, all three AF lenses beat the manual A 35mm f/2 easily. All the lenses are sharp for general scenic, snapshot kind of images, so either opt for close focusing, price or max aperture as the point of difference.

12-21-2011, 11:35 PM	#11
Siekierus_pl Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 29 Original Poster	Thank you all for your suggestions. I think I'll take DAL and after some time get 70mm LTD.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-22-2011, 03:09 AM	#12
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Originally posted by creampuff FA 35mm f/2 has blocky bokeh imo and color rendition is quite different from the typically warm punchy colors of FA lenses, some even say it is Canon-like. FA31 vs FA35, please note that the focus point is different in both the pics but as far as color rendition goes, they are very very close. FA31 f1.8 320 ISO 100 (cropped slightly to match FA35 pic) FA35 f2 250 ISO 100

12-22-2011, 03:21 AM	#13
Don From The Radio Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Delaware Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 344	I hate to be the guy who nitpicks every time, but the 35 2.4 isn't a DA-L lens. It's a full DA, even with the plastic mount. And it's a wonderful piece of glass. One of my favorite lenses ever. The 70 Limited being the other.

12-22-2011, 06:55 AM	#14
elho_cid Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by Docrwm Appreciate your sharing your experience with both lenses. Two questions for you: have you tried the 35/2.4 and why do you say that you'd not hesitate to swap the FA for the DA? Yes, I tried that DAL f2,4 too, but only for few shots. I found the result quite similar to FA35 as expected. My point is that with K-5's high ISO (may get even better with future Pentaxes) one would probably only use the f2 aperture to get blurred background. However bokeh of the FA35 is not particulary nice. It has 6-blade aperture where the blades are not rounded and the bokeh may feel busy at times. On the other hand DA35 macro has 9-blade aperture and even if the result is not so much blurred as with FA35, the nature of the blur looks better. And of course it is all-metal, and focuses a lot closer. Many object that 35mm macro is not usable as you have to be too close and scare the insect, but macro is not all about insect and you can look at my PPG to see that butterfly shot with DA35 is not impossible.

12-22-2011, 07:49 AM	#15
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Originally posted by elho_cid On the other hand DA35 macro has 9-blade aperture and even if the result is not so much blurred as with FA35, the nature of the blur looks better. At F2, blades are completely open and hence blade count or shape is completely irrelevant. So it will not be correct to say that FA35 bokeh @f2 will be any worse than DA35 @f2.8