[John Elger]

I own both the 40 XS and 40 Limited. Image quality is exactly the same. What isn't the same is what it sounds like focusing. The XS sounds like a torture machine when it is focusing. It is very loud, and I would think it would give you away for street photography. Also, the 40 Limited has quick shift, which I could see being useful.

I fancied the XS for the compact size for city photography but you're saying that it's too loud and it will scare of ppl.?

[audiobomber]

I own both the 40 XS and 40 Limited. Image quality is exactly the same.

Not the same, CA is different and fringing is excessive on the XS 40mm, IME. CA measures 6µm vs. 11µm according to DXOMark:
Pentax HD DA 40mm F2.8 Limited versus competition - DxOMark

[miltona580]

I fancied the XS for the compact size for city photography but you're saying that it's too loud and it will scare of ppl.?

The 40 XS is my loudest autofocusing lens by far. The 40 Limited is considerably quieter. I don't think it will scare people, but the idea with street photography is to be unobtrusive. Unless the environment is loud or you are very far away, people will notice that lens autofocusing.

---------- Post added 05-28-14 at 06:25 AM ----------

Not the same, CA is different and fringing is excessive on the XS 40mm, IME. CA measures 6µm vs. 11µm according to DXOMark:
Pentax HD DA 40mm F2.8 Limited versus competition - DxOMark

The problem with DXOMark is their testing is very affected by sample variation. They only test one lens, so if there are differences between individual lenses, a really bad copy or a really good copy will throw off their results quite a bit. We know from various patent filings that the 40XS and 40 Limited share the exact optical formula. The same pieces of glass are in each lens and in the same place. They also likely use the same coatings (the SMC 40 Limited and the 40 XS), though that is harder to confirm. The only optical difference I know of is the presence of a lens hood on the 40 Limited, which does add contrast definitely, but you could add a lens hood to the 40 XS and get the same effect. Also, my experience with this lens is that it is already extremely flare resistant - a hood doesn't make much difference. I stand by what I said - they are identical and should perform the same. If they don't either you got a really good lens and you should be happy, or you got a bad copy and should return it or service it.

[Sandy Hancock]

The DA40 is an excellent lens, but for me it was nothing special. The FA43 on the other hand is unique: faster, 8 bladed iris, quirky bokeh and nicer handling at the expense of quick shift. Not as easy, but more rewarding.

The DA21 is a beauty. Mine is centrally sharp wide open, and sharp everywhere from f/5.6. I really like the angle of view as a general walk-around body cap replacement.

Don't discount the DA35 limited macro. You get the quick shift you miss out on with the DA35/2.4 or FA35/2.0, plus genuine macro ability and only a stop or less speed. Super sharp too, and pretty nice bokeh if the subject is nice and close.

[miltona580]

The DA40 is an excellent lens, but for me it was nothing special. The FA43 on the other hand is unique: faster, 8 bladed iris, quirky bokeh and nicer handling at the expense of quick shift. Not as easy, but more rewarding.

The DA21 is a beauty. Mine is centrally sharp wide open, and sharp everywhere from f/5.6. I really like the angle of view as a general walk-around body cap replacement.

Don't discount the DA35 limited macro. You get the quick shift you miss out on with the DA35/2.4 or FA35/2.0, plus genuine macro ability and only a stop or less speed. Super sharp too, and pretty nice bokeh if the subject is nice and close.

I agree about the FA 43. What I really like about it is its contrast. The shots with it seem to have more character.

[audiobomber]

The same pieces of glass are in each lens and in the same place.

That is where I disagree. It is my belief that a cheaper lens element is used in the XS 40 vs. DA 40 to get the cost down, and the same is done with the DA 35 f2.4 vs. FA 35.

[bsamcash]

The DA40 is an excellent lens, but for me it was nothing special. The FA43 on the other hand is unique: faster, 8 bladed iris, quirky bokeh and nicer handling at the expense of quick shift. Not as easy, but more rewarding.

+1

The DA40 isn't a bad lens, I just expected too much from it. It is really only better than the DA35 2.4 in build. The FA43 attached to my MX the other hand has completely ended my lust for a Leica M3.

[miltona580]

That is where I disagree. It is my belief that a cheaper lens element is used in the XS 40 vs. DA 40 to get the cost down, and the same is done with the DA 35 f2.4 vs. FA 35.

The specs on the two lenses are exactly the same - same min focusing distance, same magnification, same number of elements and groups. They are the same optical formula. The only possible difference would be coatings.

What you pay for in the Limited is the quick shift mechanism, metal body, the metal lens hood, and the metal lens cap. The XS is all plastic, has no quick shift, has no lens hood, and a rubber lens cap. Also the rear cap is the cheaper push on kind that comes with the DA-L lenses instead of the nicer twist lock kind that comes with almost all Pentax lenses.

[John Elger]

+1

The DA40 isn't a bad lens, I just expected too much from it. It is really only better than the DA35 2.4 in build. The FA43 attached to my MX the other hand has completely ended my lust for a Leica M3.

I belive that the FA43mm/F1.9 is excelent lens and I hope I'll put my hands on it one day, but it's twice the price of 40mm ltd. HD which is already even more than twice the price of DA 35mm f/2.4.

No way even for Leica M3? How is the MX anyway? I would like to purchase one of those sometime. And how is it different from for exmp. ME?

[ChristianRock]

That is where I disagree. It is my belief that a cheaper lens element is used in the XS 40 vs. DA 40 to get the cost down, and the same is done with the DA 35 f2.4 vs. FA 35.

I think they're basically the same, but neither you nor I will ever know this for sure

At least, I can't tell the pictures apart... but I just might not be educated enough...

[lytrytyr]

I own both the 40 XS and 40 Limited. Image quality is exactly the same. What isn't the same is what it sounds like focusing. The XS sounds like a torture machine when it is focusing.

The DA 40 XS focuses so quickly
that I haven't found the noise to be an issue.

It is very loud, and I would think it would give you away for street photography.

Well, this depends on your technique for street photography.

If I'm using my DA 40 XS for street,
I first set up the hyperfocal distance
by automatically focusing on the ground several meters ahead,
and then switch the camera body to MF.

With this technique, the DA 40 XS
actually has a big advantage,
in that you're unlikely to catch the tiny focus ring
to knock it off your focus point.

[John Elger]

And yet, we were just chating about Pentax lenses but what about other manufacturers? For the money that FA43mm f/1.9 costs, you can buy for example sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art.

So how about others, for what I've found you can buy Pentax/Sigma/Tamron/Samyang for Pentax k-mount DSLRs and that's it.

[bsamcash]

No way even for Leica M3? How is the MX anyway? I would like to purchase one of those sometime. And how is it different from for exmp. ME?

The MX is a beautiful piece of machinery. I lusted after the compact simplicity for one for years (as I did for the M3). And when I finally held it in my hands, it was better than I expected. The build quality is as good as it gets. I have both a Spotmatic and a KX, and the compactness of this feel tighter. I haven't had the ME, but I had the ME Super, and I thought it felt worse than my Super Program, and the MX makes the Super Program feel cheap. But that's just me.

But in any case, the MX with the FA43 is as good as I can imagine a mechanical set being.

[noelpolar]

I have a new hd da40 I'd sell......if anyone is interested...... Got a 31 shortly after and haven't used the 40.

[DSims]

That is where I disagree. It is my belief that a cheaper lens element is used in the XS 40 vs. DA 40 to get the cost down, and the same is done with the DA 35 f2.4 vs. FA 35.

The specs on the two lenses are exactly the same - same min focusing distance, same magnification, same number of elements and groups. They are the same optical formula. The only possible difference would be coatings.

What you pay for in the Limited is the quick shift mechanism, metal body, the metal lens hood, and the metal lens cap. The XS is all plastic, has no quick shift, has no lens hood, and a rubber lens cap. Also the rear cap is the cheaper push on kind that comes with the DA-L lenses instead of the nicer twist lock kind that comes with almost all Pentax lenses.

There's certainly nothing that precludes them from using different (cheaper) glass. They don't want to re-design the optical formula - that wouldn't make sense. But they can manufacture the glass differently if they want. And they wouldn't have to justify it to us when they're offering the lenses for so much less money than the originals.

I'm happier with the DA35/2.4 (which I got for my daughter) than the two FA35/2 lenses I had. It's certainly better bang for the buck, so I can overlook its faults more easily (which were mostly removed automatically anyway, by eliminating the widest 1/2 stop of the original design). So it's fine with me if they changed the glass. But it's also easy enough to believe they would do that. As for the DA40, I was never actually fond enough of the original to care whether the XS is a degraded version or not.

---------- Post added 05-29-14 at 12:31 AM ----------

And yet, we were just chating about Pentax lenses but what about other manufacturers? For the money that FA43mm f/1.9 costs, you can buy for example sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art.

I sure hope you're not spending that much on an FA43! Especially used (but even new if you shop in the most obvious place)!