prime question

**Lowell Goudge** · 07-30-2013, 04:27 AM

Originally posted by Trudger1272

I know a lot rides on personal taste but, if you already have a 50mm prime, which would you consider the wiser purchase as a next lens, 28mm or 35mm? I have really used prime lens yet and technically the 50 is still on the way. I've only been using zooms.

If you have been using zooms, look to see using exif plot or a similar free program to see what focal lengths you have been shooting. Tis may five you the best view of what primes to get.

For me, it is a tough call between 28 or 35 as a preferred focal length. Both are pretty common lengths and quite available especially in legacy lenses

Joe Nation · 07-30-2013, 11:17 AM

Another point worth noting is that the 35mm DA Limited is a macro lens, so if close-ups are your thing it's a good option.

mrNewt · 07-30-2013, 12:13 PM

I would personally go for the 28mm rather than 35mm... if you have a 50mm already.

redrockcoulee · 07-30-2013, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by Joe Nation

I have a 28mm SMC-A, a 40mm DA Limited, a 50mm Lensbaby (and previously a 50mm SMC-A) and a K 55mm. I tend to shoot street and landscape, and I guess the 40mm has spent the least time in my bag recently (partly due to autofocus and being ludicrously small). But I find the 28mm a very useful length too. The 50 and 55 rarely see much camera time, except for portraits. Its worth mentioning that I also shoot on film, where the 28 is a fair bit wider and the 55 gets a lot more use (not too far off the field of view of a 35mm on APS-C). I find myself yearning for a wider option, maybe a 15 or thereabouts (close to a 24mm on full-frame). The only zoom I use often is the 17-28mm fisheye, which I use almost exclusively at 17mm (27mm equivalent on full-frame).

So my advice to the OP would be around a 28mm or 30mm for near-normal focal length, and around a 15mm for wide. The 50 is great for portraits and short-tele stuff.

So much depends on the person. I have a 28,35 and 50 and tend to use the 35 the most followed by the 50 and then the 28. I now have a 70 as well as the 50 is just not long enough. I too have the 17-28 but at the wide end comparing it to my wife's 10-20 it is much closer to the 15 than it is to 17mm so more like a 23 on film.

OP If you are new to primes use the 50 when you get it and you will soon see if a prime is even right for you. It is not for everyone. I started with primes with a spotmatic, went to zooms when went with autofocus (SF1n) and am back mostly with primes. My wife who went the same route is more a zoom person. Enjoy the 50 and then decide or perhaps in the meantime either a 28 or 35 will fall into your lap at a price you cannot pass by and your decision will be made for you. My 28 is a M lens and the price was right FREE.

Trudger1272 · 07-31-2013, 12:52 AM

Yeah, going by the opinions and experience here, the 28mm 1st then the 15mm 2nd seems to be the wiser choice. And the fact that people speak of the 15mm as if the 14mm doesn't exist goes a long way as well. Just earlier today, I read a post in a thread comparing the 14 and 15 that also made good sense: The 14mm f2.8 would perform better at the wider end than the 15mm f4, while the 15 would be better at the narrower end. Meaning the 15 would have better DOF. Which to me would be an important aspect of a wide angle lens. So I think my mind is made up. I'll work with these two along with the 50mm before I decide on the 35mm.

I checked the tracking and should get my 50 1.4 on Monday the 5th. I hate to say it but so far my photos haven't been anything special, still I'll start posting some of what I shoot with the primes. Truthfully the "breath taking" photos I see in the forum makes it intimidating. But I know I'll get better with practice.

Thanks again everyone!

lytrytyr · 07-31-2013, 05:38 AM

I usually work with two bodies, a 50 or 58 on one, and a 24 on the other.
If those aren't wide or long enough, I then go to 15 or 85/90.
So I'd say that 28 is too close to 50.

Colbyt · 07-31-2013, 06:12 AM

Don't buy anything until you take some pictures and realize the limitations of what you have and what you want to do.

When I shot film I used 50, 28 most of the time with the 135 and the Sears 70-200 zoom making up the balance.

My first digital prime was a 40 ltd and I loved it. Then I realized it was a bit close for interior shots of people at the holidays and airplanes in hangers. I added the 21 ltd and it rapidly became my favorite go to lens. It resides on my camera more than any other.

My current usage patterns would be 21, 40, 55-200 kit, 1.4A, 135A and the rest of the lenses doing about 5% of the total. That may change since there really aren't many WR primes and as I was quite impressed with the 18-55WR on the K-30 last night.

Class A · 08-01-2013, 08:01 PM

A 35mm lens on APS-C is only closer to the FOV a 50mm gives you on a full-frame camera than a 28mm lens by 1.8mm.

Also, consider that the "real" normal focal length on full-frame is ~43mm (hence the FA 43/1.9). Likewise the "real" normal focal length for APS-C is ~28mm.

I can highly recommend the Sigma 28/1.8 EX DG MACRO. They shouldn't call it "MACRO" because it cannot do 1:1 magnification, but nevertheless it has really nice close focusing abilities which makes it very versatile. It has very decent bokeh and gets extremely sharp after stopping down a bit.

Trudger1272 · 08-01-2013, 09:24 PM

Originally posted by Class A

I can highly recommend the Sigma 28/1.8 EX DG MACRO. They shouldn't call it "MACRO" because it cannot do 1:1 magnification, but nevertheless it has really nice close focusing abilities which makes it very versatile. It has very decent bokeh and gets extremely sharp after stopping down a bit.

That's funny, I just finished reading a few reviews on the Sigma 28mm F/1.8 and really like what I've read so far.

So I'm also planning to read up on third party ultra wide primes as well.

Bestzoom · 08-04-2013, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

If you have been using zooms, look to see using exif plot or a similar free program to see what focal lengths you have been shooting. Tis may five you the best view of what primes to get.

+1

You probably have a favourite FL while using your zoom. Check before you buy.

Trudger1272 · 08-06-2013, 04:49 PM

I just received my FA 50 1.4 this morning. I took some quick shots of leaves before a meeting and looking at the results I'm quite sure my next lens will be a FA. I can't wait to really put it to use. I'm trying to imagine the potential of this lens once I learn how to use it well.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Prime lens question	Scootskipper	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	6	09-30-2012 05:26 PM
prime lens question	mde1970	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	23	03-28-2012 09:10 AM
Noob question regarding filters for my prime lens	jinforthewin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	08-12-2011 12:48 AM
Question for Prime lens users	ChrisN	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	01-28-2009 11:56 AM
prime lens question	gokenin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	30	06-01-2008 08:14 AM

07-30-2013, 04:27 AM	#16
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by Trudger1272 I know a lot rides on personal taste but, if you already have a 50mm prime, which would you consider the wiser purchase as a next lens, 28mm or 35mm? I have really used prime lens yet and technically the 50 is still on the way. I've only been using zooms. If you have been using zooms, look to see using exif plot or a similar free program to see what focal lengths you have been shooting. Tis may five you the best view of what primes to get. For me, it is a tough call between 28 or 35 as a preferred focal length. Both are pretty common lengths and quite available especially in legacy lenses

07-30-2013, 11:17 AM	#17
Joe Nation Forum Member Join Date: May 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 61	Another point worth noting is that the 35mm DA Limited is a macro lens, so if close-ups are your thing it's a good option.

07-30-2013, 12:13 PM	#18
mrNewt Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: ON, RH Posts: 2,181	I would personally go for the 28mm rather than 35mm... if you have a 50mm already.

07-30-2013, 12:27 PM	#19
redrockcoulee Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Medicine Hat Posts: 2,306	Originally posted by Joe Nation I have a 28mm SMC-A, a 40mm DA Limited, a 50mm Lensbaby (and previously a 50mm SMC-A) and a K 55mm. I tend to shoot street and landscape, and I guess the 40mm has spent the least time in my bag recently (partly due to autofocus and being ludicrously small). But I find the 28mm a very useful length too. The 50 and 55 rarely see much camera time, except for portraits. Its worth mentioning that I also shoot on film, where the 28 is a fair bit wider and the 55 gets a lot more use (not too far off the field of view of a 35mm on APS-C). I find myself yearning for a wider option, maybe a 15 or thereabouts (close to a 24mm on full-frame). The only zoom I use often is the 17-28mm fisheye, which I use almost exclusively at 17mm (27mm equivalent on full-frame). So my advice to the OP would be around a 28mm or 30mm for near-normal focal length, and around a 15mm for wide. The 50 is great for portraits and short-tele stuff. So much depends on the person. I have a 28,35 and 50 and tend to use the 35 the most followed by the 50 and then the 28. I now have a 70 as well as the 50 is just not long enough. I too have the 17-28 but at the wide end comparing it to my wife's 10-20 it is much closer to the 15 than it is to 17mm so more like a 23 on film. OP If you are new to primes use the 50 when you get it and you will soon see if a prime is even right for you. It is not for everyone. I started with primes with a spotmatic, went to zooms when went with autofocus (SF1n) and am back mostly with primes. My wife who went the same route is more a zoom person. Enjoy the 50 and then decide or perhaps in the meantime either a 28 or 35 will fall into your lap at a price you cannot pass by and your decision will be made for you. My 28 is a M lens and the price was right FREE.

07-31-2013, 12:52 AM	#20
Trudger1272 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Los Angeles Photos: Albums Posts: 288 Original Poster	Yeah, going by the opinions and experience here, the 28mm 1st then the 15mm 2nd seems to be the wiser choice. And the fact that people speak of the 15mm as if the 14mm doesn't exist goes a long way as well. Just earlier today, I read a post in a thread comparing the 14 and 15 that also made good sense: The 14mm f2.8 would perform better at the wider end than the 15mm f4, while the 15 would be better at the narrower end. Meaning the 15 would have better DOF. Which to me would be an important aspect of a wide angle lens. So I think my mind is made up. I'll work with these two along with the 50mm before I decide on the 35mm. I checked the tracking and should get my 50 1.4 on Monday the 5th. I hate to say it but so far my photos haven't been anything special, still I'll start posting some of what I shoot with the primes. Truthfully the "breath taking" photos I see in the forum makes it intimidating. But I know I'll get better with practice. Thanks again everyone!

07-31-2013, 05:38 AM	#21
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	I usually work with two bodies, a 50 or 58 on one, and a 24 on the other. If those aren't wide or long enough, I then go to 15 or 85/90. So I'd say that 28 is too close to 50.

07-31-2013, 06:12 AM	#22
Colbyt Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Central Kentucky Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,417	Don't buy anything until you take some pictures and realize the limitations of what you have and what you want to do. When I shot film I used 50, 28 most of the time with the 135 and the Sears 70-200 zoom making up the balance. My first digital prime was a 40 ltd and I loved it. Then I realized it was a bit close for interior shots of people at the holidays and airplanes in hangers. I added the 21 ltd and it rapidly became my favorite go to lens. It resides on my camera more than any other. My current usage patterns would be 21, 40, 55-200 kit, 1.4A, 135A and the rest of the lenses doing about 5% of the total. That may change since there really aren't many WR primes and as I was quite impressed with the 18-55WR on the K-30 last night.

08-01-2013, 08:01 PM	#23
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	A 35mm lens on APS-C is only closer to the FOV a 50mm gives you on a full-frame camera than a 28mm lens by 1.8mm. Also, consider that the "real" normal focal length on full-frame is ~43mm (hence the FA 43/1.9). Likewise the "real" normal focal length for APS-C is ~28mm. I can highly recommend the Sigma 28/1.8 EX DG MACRO. They shouldn't call it "MACRO" because it cannot do 1:1 magnification, but nevertheless it has really nice close focusing abilities which makes it very versatile. It has very decent bokeh and gets extremely sharp after stopping down a bit.

08-01-2013, 09:24 PM	#24
Trudger1272 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Los Angeles Photos: Albums Posts: 288 Original Poster	Originally posted by Class A I can highly recommend the Sigma 28/1.8 EX DG MACRO. They shouldn't call it "MACRO" because it cannot do 1:1 magnification, but nevertheless it has really nice close focusing abilities which makes it very versatile. It has very decent bokeh and gets extremely sharp after stopping down a bit. That's funny, I just finished reading a few reviews on the Sigma 28mm F/1.8 and really like what I've read so far. So I'm also planning to read up on third party ultra wide primes as well.

08-04-2013, 06:01 AM	#25
Bestzoom Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 232	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge If you have been using zooms, look to see using exif plot or a similar free program to see what focal lengths you have been shooting. Tis may five you the best view of what primes to get. +1 You probably have a favourite FL while using your zoom. Check before you buy.