[twinda1]

I'm with OGL. The DA35 is nice enough, especially if you want 1:1, close focus, etc., but it doesn't have the glow of the FA31/49/77. It has a clinical sharpness, but lacks soul.

With so much vociferous praise for the DA35, why not a few dissenting voices. I find OGL's strongly worded opinions rather charming.

[jsherman999]

I'm with OGL. The DA35 is nice enough, especially if you want 1:1, close focus, etc., but it doesn't have the glow of the FA31/49/77. It has a clinical sharpness, but lacks soul.

With so much vociferous praise for the DA35, why not a few dissenting voices. I
find OGL's strongly worded opinions rather charming.

This can be applied to all the DA limiteds in general, IMO - although I wouldn't go
so far as to say they 'have no soul', I would say that they're well behaved, and
that can come across as 'clinical'. But you make an insightful point, and I agree,
to a degree.

The 40's not the 43, and the 70's not the 77, definitely.

One thing to keep in mind - some of the 'magic' you see in the FA limiteds can be
attributed to the charming effect of CA coming from a fine optic - or the contrast
between edge and higher center sharpness at the higher apertures.
Since the DA limiteds are 'better behaved', they lose some of those imperfections,
and are thus less charming to (some) eyes than the FA's. (myself included, all
in all I prefer what I see from the FA limiteds.)

If Pentax hadn't brought out the DA 35ltd macro, many of us would be saying now
"wouldn't it be nice if Pentax could get creative and come out with a 1-1 macro
D-normal?!?" It fills a niche very, very nicely.


.

[ogl]

I'm with OGL. The DA35 is nice enough, especially if you want 1:1, close focus, etc., but it doesn't have the glow of the FA31/49/77. It has a clinical sharpness, but lacks soul.

With so much vociferous praise for the DA35, why not a few dissenting voices. I find OGL's strongly worded opinions rather charming.

Thank you for understanding.
I don't any wish to abuse (!!!!) DA35,
it's really VERY-VERY good MACRO lens, but it's not LIMITED and not walk-around lens.
I feel that I feel...
DA pancakes are really LIMITED pancakes, not fast, but very good.
FA LIMITED are another history.

But, DA35...I'm confused...

[q10]

I want to start by emphasizing that the DA35 isn't a prefect lens, and there are lots of good reasons to like or dislike it for one's personal photographic style.

That said, I'm rather confused by the "it's not a REAL limited" complaints. Why do I care? I mean, why does that affect whether it's a lens worth having? What, for that matter, does it even mean? "Limited" isn't exactly a technical term - the only distinguishing feature specifically attributed to this keyword on the Pentax website is metal construction.

[GaryM]

I'm with OGL. The DA35 is nice enough, especially if you want 1:1, close focus, etc., but it doesn't have the glow of the FA31/49/77. It has a clinical sharpness, but lacks soul.

Oh no! I was really enjoying my DA35, but now I've discovered that it HAS NO SOUL! <snif> <snif>

With so much vociferous praise for the DA35, why not a few dissenting voices. I find OGL's strongly worded opinions rather charming.

Much like the DA35, we apparently have a different opinion about the meaning of *charm*

[MikePerham]

Benjikan is right. Couldn't live without a wide angle! Love my 16-45 and 10-17. Eyeing that 12-24.
thanks
barondla

I was planning on getting the 12-24 till Tokina came out with the 11-16 f2.8 ...so now waiting to see if we get a DA* version of that lens. Perfect compliment to my 16-50 and 50-135.

Mike.

[LaRee]

Oh no! I was really enjoying my DA35, but now I've discovered that it HAS NO SOUL! <snif> <snif>



Much like the DA35, we apparently have a different opinion about the meaning of *charm*

I love my DA35. I've used it in all kinds of situations and it's always impressed me with it's output and performance. It is a keeper for me. I like the focal length better than the 43 ltd I own and the performance for me is right in line with the 43. Makes me wonder if it is sample variations? Just look at the great images posted in this thread!

[augustmoon]

When this lens came out I liked the images I saw users here on this forum post, but since I already have the DA40 and the FA43, I put this way down on my wish list (I think number 18 out of 20)

Plus I really don't do that much macro and I already have the Tamron SP 90 macro.

But I happened to be out shopping for a different lens, and tried this lens out in person, I found it to be sharp and have a different look and feel than the DA 40 and FA 43. So I bought it anyway. One of the Few Pentax lenses that for some reason are cheaper in Canada than US as well.

I have to say that I prefer the way the FA 43 renders images leaps and bounds over the 35 for portrait, and some other uses, and I agree with OGL for the most part, as I said, I wasn't actually planning on buying the lens. But, even though I'm not really doing macro with it, I really like the close-focusing ability, and I really like the way it renders other scenes as well.

So call me silly or wasteful, but I'm keeping all the above lenses. It is because it is so different from the FA 43 that I am keeping it, it's always good to have a variety of looks to be able to choose from.