Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-09-2013, 12:54 PM   #1
Site Supporter
Kameko's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: White Rock
Photos: Albums
Posts: 416
Next prime should be?

I've currently got the 15mm Ltd, the F50 1.7 and a telephoto kicking around in my camera bag. As I'm learning more about what style of photography I enjoy, I find myself wanting a wider, faster prime than my trusty 50. I'm getting more into low light settings, whether it be concerts or abandoned places. I was thinking the 43mm Ltd. would be a good choice, but after trying it out, I'm not so sure it'd make much of a difference in focal length. I'm a bit fenced as to which way I should go, what lenses I should consider. Thoughts?


Last edited by Kameko; 08-09-2013 at 01:17 PM.
08-09-2013, 01:29 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
You are right, 43 is too close to what you have. If you're wanting something dramatically different, go with 35 or wider. The DA35/2.4 is on sale now.

Last edited by kenafein; 08-09-2013 at 02:12 PM.
08-09-2013, 01:33 PM   #3
Veteran Member
oxidized's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: USA - Delaware
Photos: Albums
Posts: 434
yes. the 43 wouldnt be that different. every lens has a unique way of rendering but since you already have the 50 1.7 it will be a bit redundant. you could look into something in between 15 and 50. For instance the sigma 35 1.4 is very popular nowadays. It is also very fast, perfect for low light settings. If you are more on a budget you could also try the samyang/rokinon version of the lens - much cheaper but manual focus only. Of course there is always the 31mm 1.8 which I have and absolutely love. Though it's "bang for the buck" is somewhat questionable with the sigma being available now. There is also a pentax FA 35 F2, which is quite popular, sharp and about half the price of the 31mm. The nice thing about this 30ish focal length is that it looks very natural through your viewfinder since the 1.5 crop ratio makes it behave like a 50ish mm lens on your camera.

So it all boils down to
1) how much money are you willing to spend
2) are you willing to live with manual focus (in low light settings auto focus may not even be that useful)

After you answer those, you will be pretty close to the answer
08-09-2013, 02:20 PM   #4
Pentaxian
seventysixersfan's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,704
QuoteOriginally posted by Grete_J Quote
I find myself wanting a wider, faster prime than my trusty 50.
Well, that's tricky. Your F50 is f/1.7. For a wider, faster prime in K-mount, AND autofocus, you only have a few options. (Obviously, you have more options if you're willing to use a manual focus lens.)

Sigma 35 f/1.4 Art
Sigma 30 f/1.4 - original version (only available used)
Sigma 28 f/1.8
Sigma 24 f/1.8
Sigma 20 f/1.8

Pentax FA* 24 f/2
Pentax FA 31 f/1.8
Pentax FA 35 f/2
Pentax DA 35 f/2.4 (not that fast)
Pentax FA 43 f/1.9 (which, as you point out, isn't much wider than your F 50)


am I missing any AF prime lens that is at least f/2 or faster, and wider than 50mm?

I think this is why the new Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 zoom holds so much appeal -- it covers the range where there are not that many fast primes currently available for K-mount.

You might be well served to try to buy a used Sigma 30 f/1.4 lens.

08-10-2013, 01:19 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Kameko's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: White Rock
Photos: Albums
Posts: 416
Original Poster
Thanks for the advice, I've only briefly owned a Sigma lens and wasn't thrilled with the quality or weight. While the FA* 24 f/2 is appealing (there's one available on my local cl), I still fear it may be too close to my 15mm.

Price isn't too much of an issue. I'd rather not go and spend $400+ on a lens that I'd be unhappy with. I would much rather save for an extra month and get what I want. I'm curious about the FA 35 f/2, but in all reality I'll probably wait and get the 31.
08-10-2013, 02:28 PM   #6
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by Kameko Quote
Thanks for the advice, I've only briefly owned a Sigma lens and wasn't thrilled with the quality or weight. While the FA* 24 f/2 is appealing (there's one available on my local cl), I still fear it may be too close to my 15mm.

Price isn't too much of an issue. I'd rather not go and spend $400+ on a lens that I'd be unhappy with. I would much rather save for an extra month and get what I want. I'm curious about the FA 35 f/2, but in all reality I'll probably wait and get the 31.
Given what you have, saving up and getting the Pentax 31mm sounds right.

I just looked at statistics in Aperture, >50% of my shots are with the 31mm.....you just won't regret waiting for that.
08-10-2013, 06:55 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 667
I personally found the 43 just Right. I know a lot of people don't find it very different from a 50, but just that little bit of extra room made a huge difference for me. If you want something a little wider, I suggest looking at the 31 or the 35 macro.
08-11-2013, 06:13 AM   #8
Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 7,897
QuoteOriginally posted by Kameko Quote
Thanks for the advice, I've only briefly owned a Sigma lens and wasn't thrilled with the quality or weight. While the FA* 24 f/2 is appealing (there's one available on my local cl), I still fear it may be too close to my 15mm.

Price isn't too much of an issue. I'd rather not go and spend $400+ on a lens that I'd be unhappy with. I would much rather save for an extra month and get what I want. I'm curious about the FA 35 f/2, but in all reality I'll probably wait and get the 31.
The difference between 24 mm and 15 mm is very close to the difference between 50 mm and 31 mm. So anywhere in that range will be close to "in the middle" (27.4 being the exact midpoint, if I'm not completely off).

08-12-2013, 01:35 PM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Lietuva, Vilnius
Posts: 627
QuoteOriginally posted by Kameko Quote
Thanks for the advice, I've only briefly owned a Sigma lens and wasn't thrilled with the quality or weight. While the FA* 24 f/2 is appealing (there's one available on my local cl), I still fear it may be too close to my 15mm.

Price isn't too much of an issue. I'd rather not go and spend $400+ on a lens that I'd be unhappy with. I would much rather save for an extra month and get what I want. I'm curious about the FA 35 f/2, but in all reality I'll probably wait and get the 31.
I have owned 31mm and I can't say anything bad about it. Was my favorite lens.
But now since the Sigma have 18-35 f/1.8 and 35 f/1.4 I find it extremely hard to find reasons to pay extra 400/500$ for 31mm. It is just not worth it anymore.
I'd get the 18-35 if I were you (in fact, if my stolen 31 doesn't show up in a couple months, I will get 18-35)
08-14-2013, 09:05 AM   #10
Forum Member
jqsk's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 81
Yet another 31 owner reporting in with nothing but satisfaction. It's a pricey lens but I have never been disappointed by it. My desire to buy new gear actually dried up considerably when I obtained it. I'd be fine if it were the only lens I had.
08-16-2013, 06:52 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Kameko's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: White Rock
Photos: Albums
Posts: 416
Original Poster
anddd I'm now the proud (broke) owner of this. Was pretty hard to resist after finding it used in my local camera shop for $900, especially when the sales guy knocks an extra $100 off of that. I'm hoping this lens lives up to its reputation. Thanks to everyone for the advice.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
08-16-2013, 06:59 PM   #12
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,385
The right choice. Congratulations and welcome to the Pixie Dust club!
08-16-2013, 09:28 PM   #13
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,538
Would someone please define "Pixie Dust"?
08-16-2013, 10:37 PM   #14
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,446
It can`t be defined. It comes from pixies.
08-17-2013, 01:01 AM   #15
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,385
QuoteOriginally posted by bossa Quote
Would someone please define "Pixie Dust"?
Why would anyone want to do a silly thing like that? Every time that question is asked a pixie dies.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, ltd, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LBA again - my next prime lens? stormtech Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 08-02-2012 07:05 AM
Not sure what my next lens should be nsolarz Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 10-17-2011 08:55 PM
What should I get next? MadMan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 10-17-2011 11:01 AM
My next lens purchase should be? Chex Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 54 04-11-2011 11:56 PM
Should my next lens be the F 135/2.8 or DA200/2.8 pcarfan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 05-06-2009 02:45 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:25 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top