[SigB]

Dear all,
i've read you since I bough my K5 with the 50mm f/1.4 about an year ago. I'm very happy about that lens, but I thought it was time to move forward and look for something which can get a bit wider angles.
I thought it was a good thing to have a llok here, and indeed now I have more doubts . So basically, I'd like to know which one can be a good choice between the
- pentax 35 mm f/2.8 limited macro
- sigma 30mm f/1.4
- Samyang 35mm f1.4

I'm already oriented towards the 35 mm macro (even from what I read in your forum), but i'm afraid it could be way to slow when not in macro view (landscapes, street photo, portraits,...). You know: if you ever got a dog or a cat, say, you could know they don't actually wait for you to focus on their nose to move or go away.

I'd like a lens to be close to a wide angle, but i could regret not having a good macro...
If you have suggestions and or advice (even to other lenses), please write down.
Thank you very much

[Docrwm]

None of the above.

Pentax DA35/2.4 - its autofocus, wide enough, and is a gem of a lens. If you specifically want Manual Focus and an f of 1.4 then the Samyang is well regarded.

[SigB]

well, I can understand the 35/2.4 can be interesting for several reasons (such as the price, which is not obvious). But, then I'd lose the possibility to have the further goal of the macro, which I liked. I mean, I'd love to couple macro, speed and low chromatic aberration to a wide-ish angle lens (up to 400€/520$)...

[SigB]

ah, nevertheless it'll may be absurd, what if the 35/2.4 and the 35/macro travels together? I mean, using the second for the macro only?

[VictorDA]

Hi SigB, welcome to the forums.
Usually for macro, people prefer longer focal length -- around 100mm. I like 50mm, used to have the 35mm Limited but sold it...
Anyway I wouldn't buy both 35mms. If you get the Limited you don't really need the 1/2 extra stop at the exact same focal length. It might be more logical (but more expensive) to go with both the Limited and the Sigma 30.
Also bear in mind that 30-35mm is not really wide on digital. Sure it's wider than the 50, but if you really want wide you need to go below 24mm.
Have fun,
Victor

[SpecialK]

ah, nevertheless it'll may be absurd, what if the 35/2.4 and the 35/macro travels together? I mean, using the second for the macro only?

I'd get the Tamron 90 macro instead of the 35 macro. It can double for portraits/telephoto, and gives a bit more working distance to the subject.

[lytrytyr]

I use the DA 35 Ltd as an all-round standard lens, as well as for macro.
Fantastic rendering, and it will focus especially fast
when you use the Quick-Shift to get it in the ball park.

On APS-C, it's the equivalent of the old 50 macros on FF.

[SigB]

Thank you very much!
So, my purpose isn't to go that much wide: I can be already satisfied with something wider than the 50 I already have. That's why I thought about the 35mm better would be the 31mm but I'm not that rich...

The Tamron 90 macro is interesting, and still I'd get the 35/2,4 with it since I'm missing some wider-than-50mm-angle right now.

Ah, lytrytyr, could you explain quickly the quick shift for the 35 macro? Since I've read a lot about the low speed when not in macro mode..

[lytrytyr]

Ah, lytrytyr, could you explain quickly the quick shift for the 35 macro? Since I've read a lot about the low speed when not in macro mode..

The AF algorithm in the camera works faster
if it starts with the lens close to being in focus.

So if you want a photo of your pet at around 1.5 m,
you can focus the lens manually to around 1 - 2 m
(without having to switch the camera to MF),
and then press the shutter halfway (or the AF button)
to let the camera complete the focusing job.

I have my cameras set up just to use the center AF point,
so I know where it's trying to focus.

Also, be sure to point at something contrasty to get a focus.
(I once pointed the DA 35 Ltd at a blank whiteboard,
and the lens whirred back and forth until I realised my mistake.)

[Mareket]

I recently had a similar dilemma and went for the DA 35 (I already have the 35/2.4 but I wanted the metal build, rendering and macro, gonna sell it soon). It's amazing. Not fantastic for macro, as you really have to get up in the grill of whatever you're shooting, but the feeling of being able to get as close as you want with such a lovely lens is awesome for a general walk around jobbie.

Though I hear good things about the 30/1.4 that Sigma makes, and I was tempted by such a beast.

[SigB]

lytrytyr, but does that work on the 35 macro only? I mean, if I try to manually focus with my 50mm (right before the AF to exact focus), and leave the camera on AF.S, then the lens af engine can get damaged, since it's in AF, can't it?

yes, Mareket, up to 13 cm if I remember well, and that's great! On the other side, sometimes macros have to be taken from further away, as SpecialK said, since u can affect the shoot (imagine getting too close to an insect or whatever movable); unless u take the pic from far away and then crop it during the post processing...

I'm still confused: 35 macro pentax or tamron 90 macro +pentax 35/2.4?

[lytrytyr]

lytrytyr, but does that work on the 35 macro only?

It works with any lens that has "Quick-Shift,"
so DA Ltd, DA*, and D FA (in K mount at least).

I mean, if I try to manually focus with my 50mm (right before the AF to exact focus), and leave the camera on AF.S, then the lens af engine can get damaged, since it's in AF, can't it?

That is correct.
You would probably hear or feel some gears having their teeth strained,
possibly to breaking point.

I'm still confused: 35 macro pentax or tamron 90 macro +pentax 35/2.4?

That's one of those personal decisions that you have to make.

The DA 35 Ltd gives you a very light macro option,
easy to carry around with you.
The Tamron 90 + 35/2.4 combination would probably not cost much more than the DA Ltd,
and would give you a bigger range.
On the other hand, the 35 Limited seems to have more "character" than the 35/2.4,
which may or may not be important for you.

[SigB]

thank you. I've understood. Sorry for my ignorance , but since I started directly with a 50/1,4 I didn't know about the quick shift which is actually indeed really interesting and can finally have an important weight on the choice.
Thank you also for the latest comment about the 35 macro character (that I even saw in some other threads and in some pics that u just confirmed).
You all are really kind! Thanks a lot!

[Docrwm]

It works with any lens that has "Quick-Shift,"
so DA Ltd, DA*, and D FA (in K mount at least).
That is correct.
You would probably hear or feel some gears having their teeth strained,
possibly to breaking point.
That's one of those personal decisions that you have to make.

The DA 35 Ltd gives you a very light macro option,
easy to carry around with you.
The Tamron 90 + 35/2.4 combination would probably not cost much more than the DA Ltd,
and would give you a bigger range.
On the other hand, the 35 Limited seems to have more "character" than the 35/2.4,
which may or may not be important for you.

I'm still trying to figure out what "character" the 35 limited adds for non Macro shots over the 35/2.4? I own several limiteds and the build quality is top notch, no argument, but my 40Limited (which is the closest I own to the 35/2.4) is not performing much better than my 35/2.4 in the situations I have used it in.

[lytrytyr]

I'm still trying to figure out what "character" the 35 limited adds for non Macro shots over the 35/2.4?

I described it as "ominous" once in another thread.

While I don't have the 35/2.4, it seems to be like my Tamron 17-50/2.8,
very sharp in a slightly soulless, digital fashion.