[heatherslightbox]

Nice shots, Heather.

Don't think you can use the DA35 w/ any TC though. Its minimum focal distance is already very close (14cm). At 1:1, the subject almost touches the front element. If you put a TC in between, the focus point probably would be inside the lens

Focus inside the lens--it could be the new thing.
Never mind that according to the specs for this lens, the minimum focusing distance is 0.456' (0.139m), according to Pentax--less than half an inch!

I guess what spoiled me in the way of ease of use in macro mode was the Fuji s602z I used to have. It had both macro and super macro capabilities and in the super macro mode, it also an in-your-face minimum focusing distance, which really didn't bother me, as long as I could get that close. That was one of my most favorite features about that camera and one that I've missed since I've gotten rid of it. The MFD on this lens reminds me of the s602z in super macro mode, so the lack of working room wouldn't bother me with the DA35.

If I do decide to pull the trigger on the DA35, I hope that ProDigital2000 lists some more of them on Fleabay at that ridiculously low price, so I can snatch one up and still hang on to the 43 (at least for a little while).


Heather

[q10]

Can anybody remark on the MF handling at longer distances? The small amount of arc devoted to all longer focal distances has me nervous about the lens being difficult to manually focus reliably with more distant targets, which would undermine it somewhat as an all-purpose lens.

[frank]

Can anybody remark on the MF handling at longer distances? The small amount of arc devoted to all longer focal distances has me nervous about the lens being difficult to manually focus reliably with more distant targets, which would undermine it somewhat as an all-purpose lens.

The DA35 lens has pretty short focus throw from 0.5m to infinity:



There isn't much room for you to play MF at a distant target. Good thing is, the AF is pretty fast when shooting something far

[Buddha Jones]

Apr 15, 2008 7:09 AM

On FedEx vehicle for delivery

CHARLOTTE, NC

AMEN!!

[thePiRaTE!!]

Meant to say Frank, nice shot with the 35 in response to my 31 pic. Given the thread, it was a good answer, lol. Its true, the 1:6.25 of the 31 is no match for the 1:1 of the 35 afterall.

What I've discovered in retrospect even by hoping that the 35 might dislodge the 31 from its high place in my mind is that adding close-focusing capabilities to any lens makes it a lot more interesting. I actually _want_ something to be better than the 31 which I use less and less, but can always rely on.

It seems that in more recent reports (thanks for the tip Hiep) that the Zeiss 25/2.8 is actually a solid flat performer outside of 5', but (sans floating element) progressively distorted within 5', up to a few inches for unique close-focusing. Something different, interesting. I've decided now to throw the 31 into the pit again against this new foe with the hope of relieving it of its boring crown.

Out of curiosity, when you receive your 35, it might be interesting to note any copy variance that may exist if you'll still have the one you're borrowing on hand.

[aegisphan]

Can anybody remark on the MF handling at longer distances? The small amount of arc devoted to all longer focal distances has me nervous about the lens being difficult to manually focus reliably with more distant targets, which would undermine it somewhat as an all-purpose lens.

I wouldn't worry too much about the throw for those distant targets. You can always focus to infinity and increase the aperture. Besides, being a WA lens w/ a normal FOV, it has more than adequate DOF.

[k100d]

What I've discovered in retrospect even by hoping that the 35 might dislodge the 31 from its high place in my mind is that adding close-focusing capabilities to any lens makes it a lot more interesting. I actually _want_ something to be better than the 31 which I use less and less, but can always rely on.

why don't you like the FA31 as much? i'm almost sold on buying it because i could use the extra speed and width. but you guys are making a very convincing case for the DA35, i think i'd only use the Macro feature to take food photos and the DA35 would work better with my DA21.

[thePiRaTE!!]

why don't you like the FA31 as much? i'm almost sold on buying it because i could use the extra speed and width. but you guys are making a very convincing case for the DA35, i think i'd only use the Macro feature to take food photos and the DA35 would work better with my DA21.

Its great; sharp, great color, nice focal range, good speed. I'm just a little bored with it. Since I started shooting the VL Lanthars, all with close-focus or macro, I use them all the time. They are the sharpest lenses I've used and all have an added depth of application due to said close-focusing, which I've really used a lot since getting them. And I guess thats what it boils down to - whats fun to use. But fun I can trust! I need to qualify that because the DA35 was fun. The VLs are my benchmark. If I don't see what I expect to see now with those in mind, I'm not satisfied. I suppose I wouldn't settle for any aspect, I'd ideally like to meet all those aspect for a lens I'd use in a given range, assuming I have the choice. And with the 25/2.8 - it seems I may have that choice after all in the same snack bracket as the 31. Going to investigate it anyways.

Who knows, I may still have the 31 ten years from now - or I might sell it next week, hehe.

The DA35 makes a good product shot lens. Close-focus at a corrected wider angle is a big asset in that dept.

[thePiRaTE!!]

Because this thread has pertained to a swath of praise for the DA35, I must add a reality check. I just received mail back from Frank that the copy I used for one day to test and sent to him has a defective filter thread. Judging by the pictures, its clearly a faulty part. It wows in toward the lens in four 'corners'. I would highly suggest that as you receive your copies, you have a quick look to be sure yours is free from this defect.

We are now in the process of determining how to get this problem solved. Has anyone had any experience in having new lenses - imported from other countries - replaced by Pentax? Worst case scenario, we must ship it back to Canada from Singapore where I will take it back to the store, then ship it back at a cost of approx $100 to us in shipping. Any experience in this is appreciated.

[a a i b]

For those of you who have already gotten the DA35 or are planning on ordering it in the near future, do any of you also have the 43? If so, do you plan on keeping both?

I got the DA35 and it's been on my camera non-stop. And though the 43 is my "least" favorite prime, I don't think I'll part with it. I haven't tried the DA40 or DA70, but I gotta say the 43 and 77 are just terrific portrait lenses.

As someone else noted, its the macro part of the DA35 that makes it fun. I'm not at all sure that the DA35 is better than the FA31 (not in my limited experience, anyway--shoot, no pun intended) but the DA35 sure is versatile.

[heatherslightbox]

This A-HA! moment came last night right after I had gone to bed and I got so excited about it, I couldn't go to sleep for at least a couple of hours.

It occured to me that I can have my cake and eat it too, that is to get the DA35 + the 100 macro--and I don't have to take out a second mortgage on the house to do it either. I've got enough money saved up that if I sell a couple more items and get what I want for them (a K1000 body and M28/2.8 lens), then I will have more than enough to buy the DA35. I've been taking a look at the plastic fantastic 100/3.5 badged under Pentax and various other names and I think that it would suit me for when I need more working space, like bugs. I shoot flowers more than I do bugs, so I don't need to spend a small fortune on a longer macro.

The good part about all of this is that I don't have to sell the 43 to make it happen. I'll hang on to the 43 long enough after I get the 35 to decide whether or not I want to keep both. If I decide to get rid of the 43 in the marketplace, I may see if I can trade for a 21 or 70--the 70 would cover the portrait length and the 21 would cover the wide end (which means I could possibly sell or trade my 17-70 for the 28-75--hehe).

So...if any of you are interested in a K1000 body or M28/2.8 lens...send me a PM. Hopefully, I'll be putting them on the marketplace tonight as soon as I can get some good pics of them.

Heather (whose LBA has gotten more expensive)

BTW, the lowest price I've seen today on the DA35 is $479.99+shipping at Calumet (Digital Cameras, Camcorders, Photography Equipment - CALUMET).

[Buddha Jones]

IT'S HERE!!! And its coming to work with me, I cant wait until this weekend to really use it.

[Pentaxke]

Can anybody remark on the MF handling at longer distances? The small amount of arc devoted to all longer focal distances has me nervous about the lens being difficult to manually focus reliably with more distant targets, which would undermine it somewhat as an all-purpose lens.

I would say that for an autofocus lens the MF handling is excellent even at longer distances... The focus is really smooth: like your handling an M of A lens. Really nice... The throw is, like Frank said, quite short, but I don't think you'll ever notice it in real live...

@ Buddha: congrats mate. Would love to hear your comments on it...

@ Heather: I don't know if you like MF lenses, but for longer macro's I use the A 100 f/4, which I'm quite pleased with. Maybe an alternative?

[Pentaxke]

For those interested: you can go still further. If you combine the DA 35 with the F1,7x adapter, I can get 1:4 magnifications. The lens is sitting almost on top of the subject then... There is no hint of IQ deterioration:



(yes, I know I have to clean my windows...)

[Pentaxke]

Have been the whole day sick in bed. Now I'm a little better, but there's no way to leave home and make some shots, so I have to improvize...

Toothpicks (actually not very sharp, but that is my trembling hand - still a bit shaky.)


And another one of my plant (don't know the name in English.)