[Tanzer]

Only 218 photos with the DA15? You are still in the infatuation phase. The FOV and perspective are so different between these two lenses. Just give it more time, and you may find yourself moving back towards the DA40 for a good portion of your photos.

[Docrwm]

Just maybe? It's not just a matter of making them uncomfortable, it's also going to look very different. Just do this - take two portraits, one with the 15 and one with the 40, while keeping the size of the head in the frame roughly constant. I'm pretty sure you'll appreciate the 40 much more again after this exercise.

And an 85 even more for that sort of photo. Again, lenses are tools and each has its place and roll. It's funny how often people what a lens that is Most Excellent at one thing to be all things. I even see people commenting on threads about Zooms that the person really needs to get an XXmm Limited instead.

LBA: Buy what you like, keep what you use, don't pay too much.

[Ikarus]

And an 85 even more for that sort of photo.

In my experience, that very much depends on the individual face. Some are best served with a 35mm, others with a 85mm on APS-C, but I have yet to meet somebody who can be made to look good with a 15mm without standing back and heavy cropping.

[Docrwm]

In my experience, that very much depends on the individual face. Some are best served with a 35mm, others with a 85mm on APS-C, but I have yet to meet somebody who can be made to look good with a 15mm without standing back and heavy cropping.

Agree about the 15, but I don't see a medium telephoto like an 85 doing a worse job on portraits than a 35. I'd have to see the same person with both and clearly see the 35 did a better job, because its just physics with the compression issues and others that come with longer lenses.

[SpecialK]

It's Sigma and I heard many scary stories about their quality management. Also I don't know what to think of the size, weight and really big filter diameter...

Sigma has a very long warranty.

It is not that big or heavy as some make it out to be, though it is no DA Limited.

[psychdoc]

Bottom line: I'm looking for something new (again), to replace my 40mm Ltd. Actually I'm not sure if I have the heart to sell it, because I do love it and perhaps someday I'll regret giving it away but...anyway, I need a lens which is a bit wider, mainly for indoor, available light and street photography. My budget is between 400 and 600€ (roughly 500 to 800 USD)...please don't recommend the FA 31mm

I dont have a recommendation for which lens would fit the bill but I can tell you about one of the options you are looking at.

The DA 35mm limited is a nice lens but may not work for street photography. It has a long focus range, which means if it misses the focus on the first try, it will go through the whole range, squeaking and groaning all the while. However this is mainly an issue if you focus on something very close and then quickly switch to something at a distance or vica versa. See the link below for a pretty detailed review of this lens:
Pentax SMCP-DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited User Review « robertsdonovan.com

Best of luck

[jimr-pdx]

The DA40 convinced me that I'd never get much use of a 35mm, but you aren't me so it might be a reasonable number for you. I'd test one rather than pay for it though, find a club or a forum member nearby and give one a spin. Next step would be an FA31 or the Sigma 30, I know nothing about either. I really like my Rikenon 28mm all-manual lens, although recently I failed to look away in time and found a still-better option in an SMC-A 24mm! The world is full of bargain 28s of all brands, to me that would be an excellent option before denting the bank balance for something bigger and 'better'.

[Just1MoreDave]

Oh boy, where to begin...


The 15/4 isn't too slow because I mainly use it for landscapes, often with a tripod and when I used in indoors or at dawn or situations like that and I noticed it's time for something faster, I took the 40. But even then, the 40 could have been faster. I'll have a look at the two lenses you mentioned. They're rare aren't they? Didn't find them anywhere.

The FA 28mm f2.8 might be found new somewhere but was discontinued six or seven years ago. (The F version is older than that.) It left an unfortunate hole in the Pentax lineup, unless you just pay up for the FA31/1.8.

[carcha]

Only 218 photos with the DA15? You are still in the infatuation phase. The FOV and perspective are so different between these two lenses. Just give it more time, and you may find yourself moving back towards the DA40 for a good portion of your photos.

Only 218 photos because these are the ones I kept, I threw away just as much. And I'd been only five days in Scotland and Amsterdam..so, that's why. I don't doubt that one day, I'll use the 40 more again. Just like music...I don't listen to everything all the time. Maybe I don't want to listen to Band XY right now but that doesn't mean I won't listen to them ever again, If you know what I mean.

And an 85 even more for that sort of photo. Again, lenses are tools and each has its place and roll. It's funny how often people what a lens that is Most Excellent at one thing to be all things. I even see people commenting on threads about Zooms that the person really needs to get an XXmm Limited instead.

LBA: Buy what you like, keep what you use, don't pay too much.

What did I start...I was just kidding :) Of course I don't use my 15 for portrait photography, at least not seriously. I do like to experiment with it and if you get a shot of the baby on your lap putting the camera strap in it's mouth, then it's worth it because I wouldn't have got that with a longer lens. Portraits are not my thing...so I really don't want anything longer than 40.

unless you just pay up for the FA31/1.8

I'd like that but it's really waaay beyond my budget. I could buy it, but that does the car I'm actually saving for, not anything good. Even used it's still about twice my budget :-/

I guess I'm a step, like a really small one, closer to know what I actually want. Something between 20 and 30mm, something to fill the gap between my 15 and the 40 but not something that would make the 40 redundant. At the moment I don't really have a lens for dimly lit rooms (think pubs) or one that allows me to take photos in the dawn without the need of cranking up the iso. Are the 28/2.8 really fast enough for that? Well...I somehow feel attracted to the Sigma 30/1.4 :-/ the tiny DOF is appealing to me and the 30 should be enough of a difference to the 40 to not make it "useless". Maybe I find a used one which is already focus corrected

Thanks again for all the responses :) I feel I'm getting somewhere

[Ikarus]

I'd have to see the same person with both and clearly see the 35 did a better job, because its just physics with the compression issues and others that come with longer lenses.

It's not a question of better or worse, but what look you're going for. There are faces that have a sort of compressed look and others a somewhat elongated and stretched look to them all on their own, so it becomes a matter of whether you want to exaggerate these features or mitigate them.

[retroflex]

There's a Sigma 24/2.8 with AF that gets good reviews and might be a good focal length for you..?

Sigma 24mm F2.8 AF Super Wide II Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

Can only be found used though and it might be hard to find it.

[GeneV]

My FA35/2 is on a path to eclipse My DA40 as my most used lens overall. Whether you actually shoot at F2 or not, the benefits of focusing at F2 are noticeable, especially indoors in tungsten light. Carrying the DA40 is a freebie, though. It takes up so little space. It also makes DSLRs and the K01 pocketable or waistpackable. Focus time suffers with just about any macro lens.

My travel pack of primes has historically been the DA 15/21/40/70. (I have a longer zoom available, too) The whole kit is extremely sharp and compact, especially on a K-x. When I look at my travel shots, the frequency of use order is 40/21/15/70. I have taken the Kiron 28/2 or the M 28/2.8 along, but the AF beckons.

[carcha]

There's a Sigma 24/2.8 with AF that gets good reviews and might be a good focal length for you..?

Yea, 24 sounds good. Unfortunately I didn't find it anywhere and don't remember seeing it in the marketplace....I'll see. It's still time...my next trip (Scotland again :) ) is in 3 months and until then I should have it (but want it right now of course ;) ). What about the current Sigma 24/1.8? Not that good? I was pretty surprised as I discovered it on amazon yesterday...haven't read a word about it, nor seen anybody recommend it. Same with the 28/1.8.

My travel pack of primes has historically been the DA 15/21/40/70. (I have a longer zoom available, too)

That was my plan just as well. I was content when I bought the 15 and already owned the 40 and thought "Someday I'll get myself a 21 and perhaps...the 70" but know I'd like to have something a little bit wider than normal (not much) with a nice bokeh, thin DOF...at least the last two points, I suppose, I won't get with the 21

[timo]

I share your sense that the DA40 is just a tad tight. You need a 28. I have an M28/3.5, which is an excellent travel lens, and easy to focus. I used to have an FA28, which I regret selling. I prefer the 28 to the 35 FOV on APSC.

15-28-50-70 + M100 or M150 is my current fave primes line-up.

[carcha]

I'm reading up on a 28 just at that moment On the Sigma 28/1.8 to be concrete...doesn't sound too bad. To be honest, I already own a 28: the Pentax-A 28/2.8. I bought it shortly after I got the K-5 but never really used it because of the manual focus, I guess. I've got to use it on the next occasion to see whether I like the focal length or not.