Best fast prime lens for under $500?

Mlcinema · 02-06-2013, 05:15 PM

Hello All,

I looking for the best fast prime lens for under $500. Any opinions? (to put on a K-30)

Thank you.

SpecialK · 02-06-2013, 05:27 PM

Perhaps the Rokinon (or similar) 14 or 35. They are manual focus, but provide excellent results.

If I was a manual focuser and had it all to do over again, I would seriously consider the 14/35/85 trio as a start.

The Sigma 30 is on a blowout sale as well.

**c.a.m** · 02-06-2013, 05:36 PM

Oh, there are countless possibilities!

Depends on how you define "best." Could you narrow your needs? e.g., Focal length? AF or MF? Aperture? Is cost important, or simply $500 max? New or used?

Off hand, as a start I would suggest:

- Pentax-F 50mm f/1.7. Typically $150-200 used, but less than $100 if you are lucky. Sharp, accurate AF, fast.
- SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4. Manual focus. Sublime.

Craig

Aegon · 02-06-2013, 05:36 PM

The F/FA 50mm ƒ/1.7 or ƒ/1.4 are extremely good lenses for about $200-250. Fast and cheap, the two qualities you list.

**seventysixersfan** · 02-06-2013, 05:45 PM

If you want to spend up to $500 for a "best" fast prime, you might find a used FA 43mm f/1.9 limited for sale for under that, especially if it is assembled in Vietnam.

The FA 35mm f/2 is also awesome.

Mlcinema · 02-06-2013, 06:16 PM

I always seem to leave stuff out of my posts. Must have the option for auto focus.

Thank you.

Louicio · 02-06-2013, 06:40 PM

I would have to say, the need to define a focal length is far more important that AF. But you should look through the lens review section of the forum, browse through the F/FA primes, the new DA primes and Sigma legacy and current primes sections. That is most of the range of AF primes that is available, find something you like.

Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

audiobomber · 02-06-2013, 07:21 PM

What are you intending to shoot with the lens?

DSims · 02-06-2013, 08:27 PM - **1 Like**

The FA43 would be the answer - it outperforms all the Pentax AF 50s (which is why I sold them all when I got the FA43).

If you want faster and sharper, the answer is the DA*55, but it's over $500. If you want a lens you're really likely to love (despite the higher price) it's the FA77 - one of few lenses that performs really well wide open (FA43 doesn't; FA31 does, DA*55 comes close performing really well at f/1.6 or f/1.8, making it tied for the fastest "effective" Pentax AF lens along with the more expensive FA*85/1.4).

Mlcinema · 02-07-2013, 05:36 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

What are you intending to shoot with the lens?

Landscapes and portraits.

tclausen · 02-07-2013, 06:05 AM

Originally posted by Mlcinema

Landscapes and portraits.

A short tele is ideal for portraits, whereas a moderate wide-angle is ideal for landscapes.

Hmm, that sounds like your needing two, not one, lenses.

(Around here, that's generally considered a good thing...)

jbuck92 · 02-07-2013, 08:28 AM

The FA43 could possibly do both landscapes and portraits, depending on the situation. That would probably be your best bet if you can only afford 1 ~$500 lens at the moment.

john5100 · 02-07-2013, 08:34 AM

another one that's cheap is the da35mm f2.4. very nice lens too.

bullitt_60 · 02-07-2013, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by john5100

another one that's cheap is the da35mm f2.4. very nice lens too.

Yeah, that combined with the FA 50 1.4 and it would be around $550 or so. Best of both worlds.

joe.penn · 02-07-2013, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by Mlcinema

Landscapes and portraits.

35mm focal reigns supreme in this case (from my experience). It gives you a semi-wide fov for lanscapes (good ground, subject and sky fov) while also giving you a good fov for portrait work lower chest and up. IMHO if you have never shot a prime focal to cover your intended shooting [of landscapes and portraits], I would recommend you take a zoom that you have on hand and shoot many subjects at the recommended focal lengths (35, 43, 50) and compare to see which focal is best suited for you to help narrow down your decision.

02-06-2013, 05:15 PM	#1
Mlcinema Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 109	Best fast prime lens for under $500? Hello All, I looking for the best fast prime lens for under $500. Any opinions? (to put on a K-30) Thank you.

02-06-2013, 05:27 PM	#2
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Perhaps the Rokinon (or similar) 14 or 35. They are manual focus, but provide excellent results. If I was a manual focuser and had it all to do over again, I would seriously consider the 14/35/85 trio as a start. The Sigma 30 is on a blowout sale as well. Last edited by SpecialK; 02-06-2013 at 05:43 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fast, fast focusing 30-35mm prime? For dance photography	Pheo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	11-02-2012 07:57 AM
Fast prime lens (35/40/50mm) for Pentax K-30	sena	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	10-10-2012 10:12 PM
best 18-50-ish standard zoom under $500 used	CPTenorII	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	09-10-2012 05:09 PM
Recomendations for an economical fast legacy prime lens for video	Wayne77	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	02-21-2012 07:59 AM

02-06-2013, 05:36 PM	#3
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Oh, there are countless possibilities! Depends on how you define "best." Could you narrow your needs? e.g., Focal length? AF or MF? Aperture? Is cost important, or simply $500 max? New or used? Off hand, as a start I would suggest: - Pentax-F 50mm f/1.7. Typically $150-200 used, but less than $100 if you are lucky. Sharp, accurate AF, fast. - SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4. Manual focus. Sublime. Craig

02-06-2013, 05:36 PM	#4
Aegon Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 1,416	The F/FA 50mm ƒ/1.7 or ƒ/1.4 are extremely good lenses for about $200-250. Fast and cheap, the two qualities you list.

02-06-2013, 05:45 PM	#5
seventysixersfan Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 2,054	If you want to spend up to $500 for a "best" fast prime, you might find a used FA 43mm f/1.9 limited for sale for under that, especially if it is assembled in Vietnam. The FA 35mm f/2 is also awesome.

02-06-2013, 06:16 PM	#6
Mlcinema Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 109 Original Poster	I always seem to leave stuff out of my posts. Must have the option for auto focus. Thank you.

02-06-2013, 06:40 PM	#7
Louicio Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Melbourne Posts: 432	I would have to say, the need to define a focal length is far more important that AF. But you should look through the lens review section of the forum, browse through the F/FA primes, the new DA primes and Sigma legacy and current primes sections. That is most of the range of AF primes that is available, find something you like. Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

02-06-2013, 07:21 PM	#8
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	What are you intending to shoot with the lens?

02-06-2013, 08:27 PM - 1 Like	#9
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	The FA43 would be the answer - it outperforms all the Pentax AF 50s (which is why I sold them all when I got the FA43). If you want faster and sharper, the answer is the DA55, but it's over $500. If you want a lens you're really likely to love (despite the higher price) it's the FA77 - one of few lenses that performs really well wide open (FA43 doesn't; FA31 does, DA55 comes close performing really well at f/1.6 or f/1.8, making it tied for the fastest "effective" Pentax AF lens along with the more expensive FA*85/1.4).

02-07-2013, 05:36 AM	#10
Mlcinema Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 109 Original Poster	Originally posted by audiobomber What are you intending to shoot with the lens? Landscapes and portraits.

02-07-2013, 06:05 AM	#11
tclausen Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,397	Originally posted by Mlcinema Landscapes and portraits. A short tele is ideal for portraits, whereas a moderate wide-angle is ideal for landscapes. Hmm, that sounds like your needing two, not one, lenses. (Around here, that's generally considered a good thing...)

02-07-2013, 08:28 AM	#12
jbuck92 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 381	The FA43 could possibly do both landscapes and portraits, depending on the situation. That would probably be your best bet if you can only afford 1 ~$500 lens at the moment.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-07-2013, 08:34 AM	#13
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	another one that's cheap is the da35mm f2.4. very nice lens too.

02-07-2013, 09:47 AM	#14
bullitt_60 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 320	Originally posted by john5100 another one that's cheap is the da35mm f2.4. very nice lens too. Yeah, that combined with the FA 50 1.4 and it would be around $550 or so. Best of both worlds.

02-07-2013, 10:10 AM	#15
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902	Originally posted by Mlcinema Landscapes and portraits. 35mm focal reigns supreme in this case (from my experience). It gives you a semi-wide fov for lanscapes (good ground, subject and sky fov) while also giving you a good fov for portrait work lower chest and up. IMHO if you have never shot a prime focal to cover your intended shooting [of landscapes and portraits], I would recommend you take a zoom that you have on hand and shoot many subjects at the recommended focal lengths (35, 43, 50) and compare to see which focal is best suited for you to help narrow down your decision.