[builttospill]

The 43 is my favorite lens. It's incredible to use on both film and digital bodies. It's also very sharp (naysayers disagree here), even wide open. Congratulations on such a nice acquisition.

f/1.9

It's funny to read threads from user's who grew up on digital and AF zoom lenses.

Agreed .

[BigMike]

By learning curve, I mean carefully placing the shot utilizing the 43mm focal length. In other words don't try to make it do something it wasn't meant for. And because its a fixed length it requires you to frame it by moving around. So I do alot more preparation and a bit thinking before just firing off a bunch of shutter clicks.

Gotcha, I guess I was reading too much into your original statement. I enjoy shooting at that FL, so it's all good.

[Driline]

Gotcha, I guess I was reading too much into your original statement. I enjoy shooting at that FL, so it's all good.

The more I shoot with the FA 43 the less I like my 18-135mm zoom lens. Maybe I'm just a prime guy . Hmmmm.....if I dump the 18-135mm what lens would complement the FA 43? Maybe the DA 35 Macro? I'm not willing to spend the $1,000 on the FA 31 just yet.

[rparmar]

It's the best lens Pentax ever made.

But some have issues with the 135 equivalent FOV of 64mm. That is what takes getting used to for many.

Mounted on Micro-Four-Thirds, FA 43 has an effective 86mm which puts it right in portrait range... yes!

[Driline]

I guess when you have the "best" FA lens out there, nothing compares. The difference is glaring between it and the 18-135. But I need a lens I can shoot closeups with and yet get that wide angle when I need it. Hmmmmm.....Maybe I just need a better alternative zoom than the 18-135mm that is sharper throughout. That or I just start buying primes one at a time starting with the 21mm since i would not have a wide in my lineup.

[Ash]

All three amigos are the best lenses Pentax have made IMO, but the 43 is small, light and so handy for just about all general photography. The 77 is great for when you are shooting from more of a distance, and the 31 is awesome for non-wide landscapes and some portraiture on APS-C. Enjoy your 43. It is brilliant in every way.

[builttospill]

The more I shoot with the FA 43 the less I like my 18-135mm zoom lens. Maybe I'm just a prime guy . Hmmmm.....if I dump the 18-135mm what lens would complement the FA 43? Maybe the DA 35 Macro? I'm not willing to spend the $1,000 on the FA 31 just yet.

I'd go a bit wider than 35. Maybe the 21 or even better the FA* 24. With the 24, 43 and 77 you'd be covered across a nice range.

[Driline]

I'm leaning towards the 21. The FA 24 looks so retro 80's

[Ash]

You won't go wrong with the 21. Again, small but full of detail and colour.

[Driline]

You won't go wrong with the 21. Again, small but full of detail and colour.

Hypothetically speaking, would you trade off a DA 18-135 zoom for a DA 21 to achieve better IQ? I know the bar has been set high with the FA 43. I assume the DA 21 kicks the pants off the zoom lens at that focal length.

[calculator01]

I have the 21 on my list of lenses to have, but I would never trade my 18-135 for any lens (of equal value). My favourite (best?) portraits have been taken with the 18-135 at 18-24mm. So arguably, the 21 is in that range, and could reproduce the pictures, but my fav shots have been off-the-cuff shots while out shooting other subjects at other focal lengths.

[Ash]

Hypothetically speaking, would you trade off a DA 18-135 zoom for a DA 21 to achieve better IQ? I know the bar has been set high with the FA 43. I assume the DA 21 kicks the pants off the zoom lens at that focal length.

I would as long as you wouldn't miss the 18mm end, nor the 50-135mm range of the lens. Later on, though, if you wanted the 50-135 range, I'd suggest trying out the stellar DA* 50-135 lens. A true gem of a zoom lens. 21mm is often too narrow a FoV for wide landscapes, so consider the DA 15 Ltd for those.

[rparmar]

But I need a lens I can shoot closeups with and yet get that wide angle when I need it. Hmmmmm.....Maybe I just need a better alternative zoom than the 18-135mm that is sharper throughout. That or I just start buying primes one at a time starting with the 21mm since i would not have a wide in my lineup.

Problem is that the 21mm is not particularly wide nor particularly good. Nothing wrong with it, but nothing special either. (Plus, personally, I don't like the focal length. It always feels like it's aching to be a 24mm.)

The answer is the DA12-24mm. Nothing more versatile and the IQ is just fine. Will be distinctly better than the 18-135 and gets you significantly wider while still covering the very useful 24mm focal length. I recommend this lens despite not being a zoom user. But in the wide end zoom is eminently more practical than covering a prime for every useful field of view. (Besides, they don't exist.)

[Driline]

Problem is that the 21mm is not particularly wide nor particularly good. Nothing wrong with it, but nothing special either. (Plus, personally, I don't like the focal length. It always feels like it's aching to be a 24mm.)

The answer is the DA12-24mm. Nothing more versatile and the IQ is just fine. Will be distinctly better than the 18-135 and gets you significantly wider while still covering the very useful 24mm focal length. I recommend this lens despite not being a zoom user. But in the wide end zoom is eminently more practical than covering a prime for every useful field of view. (Besides, they don't exist.)

Good to know. If the DA 12-24 is a better lens IQ wise than the 21 then its definatley a contender.

[Ash]

I'm not sure about the 12-24 being better in IQ than the 21. All the Ltds are just excellent in IQ, and the 12-24 versatile whilst still being great in IQ, but the 12-24 is bulky and heavier (although lighter than most other UWA lenses of its class).