[disya2]

Hi guys,

Would you, please, help me to make a buying decision?

I have two FA limiteds 31mm and 77mm and I think they are absolutely fantastic lenses. However, recently I'm getting the feeling that I want a WR zoom lens in wide-angle to normal range. I know that a fixed focal lens is much better in terms of image quality and it encourages you to think more about composition and place. But still I want to reduce the number of lenses I have to pack with me on multi-day outdoor trips. I tried 18-135 but it's not quite up to the DA* or limited lenses so it's a no-go for me. I also had 16-50 and while I really liked it on the longer end, the wide-end was simply terrible.

Does anyone have some experience to use both FA 31 and DA limited zoom at the same time? How would you compare them? Do you feel that at f4-f5.6 the DA lens can compare to FA 31? It actually is rare that I use FA 31mm wide open. The most pictures are in F2.8-5.6 range and I think that DA's 2.8-4 would be good enough for me in this aspect.

The whole thing started when I understood that 60-250 I had was so good that I hardly had the urge to mount 77mm. That's why it's almost decided that I'll sell the 77mm to fund either a K-3 or DA teleconverter. If the same holds true for DA zoom limited then I'll sell both FA limiteds and use the money to fund purchase of K-3 and DA 20-40.

Your thoughts on the topic are welcome.

[Na Horuk]

Do you mean the DA 20-40mm limited? It seems some people love it and others complain about it.

You can see the forum in-depth review here (compares it to some other lenses):
HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm Limited - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums
You can check the user lens reviews here:
HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm F2.8-4 Limited DC WR Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

From what I read about it, it seems like this lens has a priority of having nice bokeh, tones and character to the photos, rather than just brutal sharpness with a flat field of focus. So it depends on your priorities. But it seems a lot of people report they are using this lens instead of their primes since it is good enough and more convenient
Regarding the relatively slow aperture.. yeah, its not perfect, a lot of people were hoping for a constant f2.8, but with modern cameras high ISO performance f4 is not such a big problem anymore

[Sandy Hancock]

Funny how we form our opinions. I never warmed to my DA*60-250, but wild horses could not drag me away from my FA77.

I love my DA*16-50, but did not like my (probably bad copy) HD DA 20-40 limited. Although it was very good beyond 35mm even wide open, the corners were *terrible* at the wider focal lengths until at least f/5.6. It certainly could not hold a candle to my FA31 at that focal length, and it is two stops slower. I was also surprised at how big it was. The DC focus, WR and build quality were great, but not enough to make it a keeper.

I guess an important difference is I use my lenses a lot at wide apertures. If you like to stop yours down it will be much less of an issue.

[percy]

I had an FA31 and the DA40 Limiteds. Both great lenses but I ended up finding that I wasn't using either of them enough, and having decided that I need to consolidate my lens collection I bit the bullet and with some regret sold them both, to be replaced with the DA 20-40 Limited.

The 20-40 is much more convenient, and covers the wider end of the range meaning I don't need to get the 21. I find I'm using it more than either the 31 or 40 that I sold, and the image quality is plenty good enough for me. Like all the limiteds it's a joy to use, and certainly better than the 18-135, but unsurprisingly not as nice as the 31.

If I look at images I've taken with the 31 they are better, but the 20-40 is still just fine. Having said that, I do miss the 31 and could be tempted by another one if I can justify the cost one day! In the meantime, I have no problems with the 20-40.

[Apapukas]

There are a lot of threads about the Ltd zoom.
What I learned from them is that with the Ltd zoom there is no middle, you just love it or hate it

Personally, I find its "bang for your buck" ratio not very high.

[Dice]

Hi disya2. If you check the User reviews. I want to say there are at least 3 reviewers you might PM to get info from concurrent Ltd Zoom and FA31 users.

[Biro]

Do you mean the DA 20-40mm limited? It seems some people love it and others complain about it.

You can see the forum in-depth review here (compares it to some other lenses):
HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm Limited - Introduction - Pentax Camera Forums
You can check the user lens reviews here:
HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm F2.8-4 Limited DC WR Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

From what I read about it, it seems like this lens has a priority of having nice bokeh, tones and character to the photos, rather than just brutal sharpness with a flat field of focus. So it depends on your priorities. But ti seems a lot of people report they are using this lens instead of their primes since it is good enough and more convenient
Regarding the relatively slow aperture.. yeah, its not perfect, a lot of people were hoping for a constant f2.8, but with modern cameras high ISO performance f4 is not such a big problem anymore

I wish Adam would try doing the 20-40mm review with another copy. I suspect he got a bad one. Not that I think getting a bad copy of any Pentax Limited is acceptable. But it would be very interesting to find out how another example did.

[TroutHunterJohn]

I have to agree, the 20-40 is an excellent choice that balances the need to high IQ with the convenience of a zoom. Any improvements I need over what is produced by this lens, I can get with my NIK software. My 20-40 has replaced my primes and is WR, to boot.

[Yamakasi]

posted this in another forum before...DA20-40 vs FA31..at web size viewing, i dun think you can really differeniate with DA20-40mm at 31mm, f3.5 and FA31 at f3.5. However if pixel peep,i feel that the FA31 is slightly sharper in the center


DA20-40 @31mm f3.5 iso100



Link to original file http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7344/12875776424_b14d6409e3_o.jpg

FA31 @ f3.5, iso100



Link to original file http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3706/12875694494_38389e1eb4_o.jpg

[Apapukas]

Pictures like these make up for a thousand words!

Would be great to see more!

[disya2]

Thanks everyone for your input.

Yamakasi: thanks a lot for the pictures. They do look close but I and my wife tried "blind testing" and the winner in both cases was the photo from FA 31mm. So it makes it even more difficult for me now to make the decision

[Sandy Hancock]

Very impressive, and really hard to tell the two apart. Mind you, the FA31 has an extra two stops up its sleeve if needed.
But this is not where the zoom is weakest (or where mine was at least). I would be very interested in some comparisons at 21mm vs the DA21 at f/3.2 and f/5.6.

I may well have had a bad copy, but I don't regret returning it without replacement.

[lytrytyr]

Very impressive, and really hard to tell the two apart. Mind you, the FA31 has an extra two stops up its sleeve if needed.

That's saying the DA 20-40 glass is half empty.

Now let's rephrase that to say that the DA 20-40 glass is half full:

The pictures are comparing a prime lens stopped down two stops,
so at the classic sweet spot,
with a zoom lens fully open.

[kentishrev]

I too hesitated on the 20-40 Limited recognising, of course, Limited Primes would likely be better overall. But I bought it nevertheless. It has become my 'travel lens', rarely off the K-30. I can carry a 50mm f/1.8 in my pocket, and looking longer-term will do the same for a 77mm. But the 20-40 rarely lets me down, and covers a broad range of uses. And the quality is superb.

[TroutHunterJohn]

I've often wondered why there isn't more excitement over this lens on this forum.


Attached is what it is giving me. This is hand held with minimal pp.