Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-20-2014, 01:16 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Cupertino, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 391
Some Words on the 43 Limited

I am chiefly a prime shooter. Early in the year my choice selections were the Sigma 30/1.4, the DA 35/2.4, and the DA 40/2.8 Limited. As you can see, I have quite an overlap Throughout the normal range. Nevertheless, they all had their strengths and weaknesses: the Sigma was contrasty and fast with beautiful bokeh, but distorted and was extremely soft; the DA 35 had a perfect field of view and was insanely sharp, but the build quality was questionable and the autofocus made it unusable in quite settings; lastly, the DA 40 was stealthy and jewel-like, but the lack of micro contrast left the images flat. Needless to say, while my kit excelled in some areas, each lens had an annoying fault.

My favorite of these three was the DA 35/2.4. It was my choice everyday street and normal portrait lens. But its major issue, the build quality, made my fears a reality when it just broke. The autofocus just stopped working, and I never figured out why. The ring became oddly stiff to the point where even manual focusing would not be possible without fear of breaking it further.

Because of this, I decided it was time to sell these three lenses and replace them with one all-purpose lens. The lens I chose was the Japanese FA 43/1.9 Limited. And here is my experience after about six months. I know another option is the DA 35/2.8 Limited, and it does look fabulous, but it goes for even more than the 43, and that's just too much for a hobbyist.

First thing's first: this lens is absolutely gorgeous. And even more beautiful on my MX. I thought the build quality of the DA 40 was good, but the 43 is even better than I remember my M 50/1.4 being. The set of screws on the underside are a little odd though. Even the dampening of the focusing ring feels better (albeit slightly looser). The balance between auto and manual focusing of the throw is perfect; it's fast on my K-5IIs, but accurate on my MX.

What about image quality? Here's the troubling part. Don't get me wrong, it is easily the sharpest of all the lenses mentioned. Tack sharp at the center wide open, and the corners look great at 2.8, but that's from real world use, I've never used a chart or anything. The problem is, however, is it is just not that much better than the DA 35/2.4 at the same apertures. Not even the bokeh. The sharpness and micro contrast are similar enough, plus, the 35 has the benefit of that perfect field of view (on the K-5IIs). Although, overall contrast easily goes to the 43.

As far as color accuracy, the 43 cannot touch the 35, which is the most neutral of all the lenses, but whether or not that is a good thing is very subjective. It may be my imagination, but oddly the 43 seems cool at wide apertures, but warmer when stopped down. But this is not something I have actually tested for, just an observation. I keep a hood on it, so I don't really experience any flares or ghosting.

Lastly, I would like to bring up the focal length again. It is something magical on my MX. It's as if there's no camera there. But it's very strange on APS-C; it's hard to visualize and get used to. I'm not sure what I was expecting, as my range before was all wider, but when I'm using my F 35-70, I often find myself going for reach, so I figured it would be a great middle ground. But it's not. It's weird.

So, after all this do I like this lens? Yes, I guess. Optically, it's great, if slightly overrated. It is definitely not the end-all-be-all prime I was expecting (at least not for digital). And I may make some enemies, but I feel it may have been a better idea to save the money and just buy another DA 35/2.4. But does this mean I'll sell it? Hell no! At least not unless I'm desperate. It is too perfect of a match with my MX--I mean "Leica who?" good.

So those are my very unscientific thoughts on the FA 43/1.9 Limited. What are your's?

10-20-2014, 01:41 PM   #2
Ash
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,920
Like you, I have tried many primes in this focal length range, including the beautiful yet flimsy 35/2.4, and have come to the same conclusion. Except, in the 6 years I have had my 43 Ltd, I have found it excelling in all facets; though what I believe you are describing in the expectation of the 43 Ltd is that it should be heads and shoulders above that of the cheaper 35/2.4, and because it isn't in terms of IQ, then its reputation is exaggerated. I would go to say that because Pentax prides itself in producing primes of such magnificent IQ, you will find it hard to get much better images that what is available in the 35/2.4. As such the 43 has little to be able to improve on (it's hard to improve on excellent).

Even more comparable are the DA 40 and DA 40 XS. Optically, they are the same, but the build quality in the DA 40 makes it a lens for a lifetime. I would consider the DA 40 XS and 35/2.4 as knock about lenses, with a temporary life span (and you've proven that).

To me, the most magical of the lenses, that has the wow factor in my results, is the 77 Ltd. The FA 100/2.8 macro comes in at a close second for portraiture and event photography (with the added bonus of being a beautiful macro lens). But the 77 produces the sharpness I like at f/2.8-f/4, throwing the background into a rich, smooth bokeh that is very pleasing to the eye, and the micro-contrast that leaves me not wanting to do any post-processing on the results.

I am now finding myself using the FA Ltds at every opportunity, except for more wide angle shots when I go to the DA 21 (great little lens) or the 12-24. But in the normal range, the 43 fits the bill for me every time. There are other members here who shoot with it almost exclusively and post their images often. The extra stop of speed over that of the 35/2.4 does make it a touch more practical in available light photography, but indeed if Pentax did make a 35/2.4 in a metal build, it would probably compete with the 43 Ltd in sales.
10-20-2014, 03:24 PM   #3
Veteran Member
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,354
I personally love the 43mm LTD. I think it is the most underrated lens Pentax has.
Yes, it is a little long on APS-C...but to me that is an advantage. Focal length preference is 100% subjective, and in my opinion, normal lenses (28-35mm for crop sensor cameras) are kind of boring.
10-20-2014, 04:38 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,611
QuoteOriginally posted by bsamcash Quote
I am chiefly a prime shooter. Early in the year my choice selections were the Sigma 30/1.4, the DA 35/2.4, and the DA 40/2.8 Limited. As you can see, I have quite an overlap Throughout the normal range. Nevertheless, they all had their strengths and weaknesses: the Sigma was contrasty and fast with beautiful bokeh, but distorted and was extremely soft; the DA 35 had a perfect field of view and was insanely sharp, but the build quality was questionable and the autofocus made it unusable in quite settings; lastly, the DA 40 was stealthy and jewel-like, but the lack of micro contrast left the images flat. Needless to say, while my kit excelled in some areas, each lens had an annoying fault.

My favorite of these three was the DA 35/2.4. It was my choice everyday street and normal portrait lens. But its major issue, the build quality, made my fears a reality when it just broke. The autofocus just stopped working, and I never figured out why. The ring became oddly stiff to the point where even manual focusing would not be possible without fear of breaking it further.

Because of this, I decided it was time to sell these three lenses and replace them with one all-purpose lens. The lens I chose was the Japanese FA 43/1.9 Limited. And here is my experience after about six months. I know another option is the DA 35/2.8 Limited, and it does look fabulous, but it goes for even more than the 43, and that's just too much for a hobbyist.

First thing's first: this lens is absolutely gorgeous. And even more beautiful on my MX. I thought the build quality of the DA 40 was good, but the 43 is even better than I remember my M 50/1.4 being. The set of screws on the underside are a little odd though. Even the dampening of the focusing ring feels better (albeit slightly looser). The balance between auto and manual focusing of the throw is perfect; it's fast on my K-5IIs, but accurate on my MX.

What about image quality? Here's the troubling part. Don't get me wrong, it is easily the sharpest of all the lenses mentioned. Tack sharp at the center wide open, and the corners look great at 2.8, but that's from real world use, I've never used a chart or anything. The problem is, however, is it is just not that much better than the DA 35/2.4 at the same apertures. Not even the bokeh. The sharpness and micro contrast are similar enough, plus, the 35 has the benefit of that perfect field of view (on the K-5IIs). Although, overall contrast easily goes to the 43.

As far as color accuracy, the 43 cannot touch the 35, which is the most neutral of all the lenses, but whether or not that is a good thing is very subjective. It may be my imagination, but oddly the 43 seems cool at wide apertures, but warmer when stopped down. But this is not something I have actually tested for, just an observation. I keep a hood on it, so I don't really experience any flares or ghosting.

Lastly, I would like to bring up the focal length again. It is something magical on my MX. It's as if there's no camera there. But it's very strange on APS-C; it's hard to visualize and get used to. I'm not sure what I was expecting, as my range before was all wider, but when I'm using my F 35-70, I often find myself going for reach, so I figured it would be a great middle ground. But it's not. It's weird.

So, after all this do I like this lens? Yes, I guess. Optically, it's great, if slightly overrated. It is definitely not the end-all-be-all prime I was expecting (at least not for digital). And I may make some enemies, but I feel it may have been a better idea to save the money and just buy another DA 35/2.4. But does this mean I'll sell it? Hell no! At least not unless I'm desperate. It is too perfect of a match with my MX--I mean "Leica who?" good.

So those are my very unscientific thoughts on the FA 43/1.9 Limited. What are your's?
I was kinda disappointed by PF review of the 43 and the rating it received.

I have been shooting a product assignment and the 43 has been my primary lens. I do have the three amigos and the F50 Macro as well. I am using it on my K3 and the results are outstanding. Prior to this assignment, I used the 31 and the 77 and F50 Macro for most of my work but for this particular situation the 43 focal length seems to be ideal.

The only gripe I have of any of my Limited FA lenses is the serious CA issue wide open. Otherwise, kudos to Pentax for these works of art called FA limited lenses.

10-20-2014, 04:41 PM - 2 Likes   #5
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,669
I had both the FA 43 and DA 35 2.4. I gave my DA 35 2.4 away for free. Images although sharp, were just plain flat and boring. I can take pixie dust images all day long with the FA 43. I will never part with the FA 43.
10-20-2014, 04:59 PM   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,590
The FA 43 is the least used of my ltds I'm just not a fan of "normal", I guess.
10-20-2014, 05:53 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Cupertino, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 391
Original Poster
Thanks for the replies everyone!

Just to clarify, I do think the FA 43/1.9 is an amazing lens. I just feel that its full potential won't be realized until Pentax releases a full frame.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
it's hard to improve on excellent
That is an excellent point. The DA 35/2.4 is a great, so it may be unrealistic of me to expect too much more.

10-20-2014, 07:06 PM   #8
Senior Member
Trudger1272's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Photos: Albums
Posts: 288
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
To me, the most magical of the lenses, that has the wow factor in my results, is the 77 Ltd.
This was my surprise. Being that the FA31 cost so much more, I figured it would shine the most. But when I saw my 77mm test shots, "my jaw dropped." I think the fact 31 as a Normal focal length, cheats itself out of some of it's true glory.

My take on Limiteds in general:
Even though the FA43 is the least used of my FA Ltds, my sorry behind has been avoiding a classmate who tried it once while we were shooting together, and keeps mentioning wanting to use it again. So being I won't ever let anyone touch it again, I'd probably never sell it. (Ltds costs too much for me to replace) I never used the DA35 2.4 and probably won't because I also own a FA31 Ltd. Got rid of the FA50 1.4 because the FA43 bumped it out of the bag. Kind of want to replace my FA100 2.8 Macro with the DA100 2.8 Macro WR, because it's built like a Limited. In fact I think I will, but after I get a DA21. As far as my FA77 is concerned: "It's not going anywhere!" With all this said I feel great knowing my lenses should last years if not decades, and I don't have to keep spending money trying to find better. If I were to keep upgrading from lens to lens, I'd eventually spend more than I would've spent by buying the best in the beginning. Fortunate for my pockets, I haven't shot with any * lenses. That might end in a LBA nightmare. Outside of Limiteds I only want to add the 70-200 2.8 when released. But for a totally different style of shooting. Your Limited is well worth keeping.(IMO) If you've read a lot of threads here you've read how several members sold off Limiteds, only to miss them so much they had to buy them again. "I know I would!"
10-20-2014, 07:18 PM   #9
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
I dont know if a 65mm equiv is "normal" os apsc. I see that range more like a short tele. The 28 (43 equiv) and 35 (53 equiv) do feel like normal.
I've never used the 43 but I can't get LBA for it Of all the Limiteds it's the one I have the least desire, but that could change as I shoot more film.
Also, the 35 2.4 might not be as saturated as other Pentax lenses but that's a one slide adjustment in PP... I love it.
10-20-2014, 07:32 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Nebraska
Photos: Albums
Posts: 902
The 43 has a beautiful character to it. Honestly, this is why people love it dearly. It is a story telling lens, and it does it magnificently. What it does not do - match the DA colors. The 35 2.4 is such an amazing lens. It is sharp, the colors are sweet, and it is very sharp. The 35 doesn't tell stories though. It will do sceneries with the best, but it doesn't do what the 43 does. If you nail the 43s strengths it is every bit as good as people say. I couldn't get that out of my 43 as much as my da*55 (optically perfect for portraits) so I sold it. There are people that are much better at this trade than me. The DA 35 is a steal and a jack of all trades master of none.
10-20-2014, 07:54 PM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,782
Primes in this length are new to me; I've got a collection of long and very long that I shoot almost always. I have a 12-24 that seems to stay in my bag and an A50 1.4 that I won't part with because it is sharp and special, but a bit too long. I picked up a 35 limited and love the view. It seems natural and I found it produced nice shots in the mountains; just wide enough but not vista. Unfortunately my copy is soft, so I picked up a FA43. It seems to stick on my body. If I take it off, it somehow migrates back. It is a bit longer that I would like, and it does have different temperature wide open and stopped down, but it is sharp. I can't say that I've gotten many shots with it that I like, maybe it demands more skill than I have, but I can't seem to keep it off, I just want to shoot with it. I'm getting a DA35, an inexpensive stopgap while I send my 35 macro for repair, and will see what happens.

Each long lens I shot with taught me something. The same is happening with these focal lengths. I might actually start taking photos of people.
10-20-2014, 08:28 PM   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,594
QuoteOriginally posted by derekkite Quote
Each long lens I shot with taught me something. The same is happening with these focal lengths.
Man, I agree with this so much. I learn something with every new lens... its actually kinda wonderful.
10-20-2014, 09:04 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,348
I purchased a MIJ copy of this lens from a fellow forum member recently. It's only seen a few days of use on my K-30 but I am beginning to understand what it is and what it is not.

I think this lens follows in the Pentax tradition of rendering your photograph as if they were drawn by hand. In this case, I would say the photographs look like they were drawn with gentle pastels. The colors are slightly muted, the contrast is turned down, and the corners are soft - even when stopped down in many cases. The mood conveyed is generally sweet and docile. It has been well noted that the lens was not designed to excel at MTF numbers or at photographing flat test sheets. Compare that with the FA 50mm f/1.4. I think the FA 50mm renders colors brightly and vividly. It's like the photographs were hit with bright splashes of wet paint! Contrast is higher and the corners can be extremely sharp.

Some people compare the FA 43mm to the DA 35mm f/2.4. The DA 35mm lens is a bit wider and significantly cheaper. Colors sit somewhere in between the FA 43mm and the FA 50mm and contrast is taken down a notch. This lens renders more photographically if you can call it that. Is it sharper than the FA 43mm? Honestly, in some cases, yes it is. Part of it has to do with the increased DoF due to the wider angler and slower f-stop but I think it has a lot to do with how the lens was designed. The DA 35mm f/2.4 is meant to be more of a general use, daily life, take-me-on-vacation lens. A user's expectations would be very different.

I could see the following use cases.

DA 35mm f/2.4
Use it daily in all lighting conditions. Great for golden hour shots and daytime at the beach! At f/2.4 the lens works well for indoor events.

FA 43mm f/1.9
When you feel creative and want to express a mood. Portraits. Subdued days. Fall colors. Seriously! Try it with reversal film, maybe? Magical pixie dust and plenty of it.

FA 50mm f/1.4
Excellent portrait lens on APS and perfect for capturing daily life on film. Use it from f/2.8 onward since that is where the magic begins. It likes the light an hour or two before the golden hour. A spicier blend of pixie dust if you can imagine that.

Add a wide angle 28mm and telephoto 70mm to 85mm and you have a complete kit. Just be sure to pick the right lens for the right application with the right expectations.
10-20-2014, 11:11 PM - 2 Likes   #14
Veteran Member
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,776
They only way the 43ltd could be any better is attached to a pentax FF dslr. I suspect people who don't get the lens don't realise the lens was designed with photo journalism in mind, not portraiture. The idea is to stop the lens down so the background is only slightly blurred, but still recognisable. Then the incredible centre sharpness and microcontrast of the 43ltd then makes things pop in an amazing 3D fashion. The lens really needs to be perfectly calibrated for AF, even slightly out and indeed the images will be underwhelming.

May as well post an example of what I'm talking about
10-20-2014, 11:54 PM   #15
Veteran Member
noelpolar's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Goolwa, SA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,310
QuoteOriginally posted by robjmitchell Quote
May as well post an example of what I'm talking about
Nice!
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!
apertures, build, contrast, da, dslr, f1.9, ff, k-5iis, k-mount, length, lens, lenses, mean, mx, pentax lens, post, quality, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA 43 1.9 Limited AIV (Open to some trades) zbrueningsen Sold Items 9 10-05-2014 06:35 AM
FA 43/1.9 Limited on the K-5IIs -experience? DonovanDwyer Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 12 11-23-2013 12:06 AM
People The FA 43 Limited is my ideal people lens deadwolfbones Post Your Photos! 8 04-05-2011 05:07 PM
Full Frame Fisheye Zoom F and 43 Limited on K5D (Sample Photos) RiceHigh Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 10-09-2008 10:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:35 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