[nj1975]

I had been considering the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 lens for taking photos of my young niece and nephew indoors (playing/going about normal everyday life), however given the issues with AF in the recent review I am reluctant to buy this now. Has anyone any experience of using the Pentax DA 35mm f2.4 AL Lens for this purpose please? - any comments/photo examples would be very much appreciated, thank you

[ChristianRock]

I think it's perfect for that purpose. I don't really post pictures of my family online, but I use it a lot. In fact right now I'm editing pictures from a couple outings we did, from indoors and outdoors, and the pictures look great. It works well indoors even with my older K20D camera. I've bought mine almost a year ago and it's been my family pictures workhorse.

Can't comment on the Sigma, as I've never played with one.

[Na Horuk]

Oh, there are plenty of opinions and samples of the DA 35mm f2.4! Its a great, affordable lens, so it is very popular. I personally don't have experience using it for children or fast-moving subjects, I mostly take nature and landscape photos. But maybe these threads can help you.
Photo thread, all with DA 35mm f2.4:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/196639-da35-f2-4-plastic-f...c-club-40.html
User lens reviews:
SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL Reviews - DA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
PentaxForums in depth review from 2011:
Review: Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 - Review | PentaxForums.com Reviews

I think you will find everything you want in those threads, including sample photos. You can find more sample photos here: Pentax Camera & Lens Sample Photo Search Engine - PentaxForums.com

I very often recommend the DA 35mm f2.4 on these forums. But you should also consider the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. It is almost as bright, AF almost as fast, but has a convenient zoom range. Also at a good price.

[bsamcash]

The DA 35/2.4 is a wonderful lens for this purpose among many others. And it's like a sixth of the price. I have used it on my nieces and nephew many times.

[esrandall]

Like the others have said -- great lens for teh price. You would be pleased with the results it would give you, and it's also very small and lightweight. They routinely sell in the $150 range in the Marketplace.

[Na Horuk]

Oh, and one more thing. The Sigma 18-35mm is a great zoom lens, but it is huuge. I wouldn't want to carry it around all day long

[jimfellows]

Oh, and one more thing. The Sigma 18-35mm is a great zoom lens, but it is huuge. I wouldn't want to carry it around all day long

I have been wanting a 35mm lens for a while and have always wanted the older FA 35mm 2.0. This goes pack to when I was shooting film with a Z-5. I like the the faxk it is a bit faster and full frame, but am I really giving much up by going with the DA 35mm 2.4? I also like the idea of keeping a bit more money in my pocket!

Jim Fellows

[kiwi_jono]

I have been wanting a 35mm lens for a while and have always wanted the older FA 35mm 2.0. This goes pack to when I was shooting film with a Z-5. I like the the faxk it is a bit faster and full frame, but am I really giving much up by going with the DA 35mm 2.4? I also like the idea of keeping a bit more money in my pocket!

Jim Fellows

I have the FA35 f2 and its a wonderful all round lens IMO. I find I use the f2 quite a lot (its sharp enough) but then there is not a huge difference between f2.4 and f2. The DA 35 f2.4 is certainly the value king but if you found a nice second hand FA35 you would not regret it.

[kharry2012]

I didn't like the da 35 2.4. My copy was flat and artless. I think the best so-called "pub lens" that won't drain your bank account is the DA 40 Limited. Indoor photos turn out nice--sharp, dimensional, & contrasty. Its performance at infinity, though, can be poor (or at least for my copy), which is mostly a problem for outdoor shooting. And the FL can be tight in some rooms. The Tamron 17-50 is also a good choice. The zoom is really handy indoors and its rendering is excellent (but still a half notch below the 40 Limited in my experience).

[6BQ5]

I have been wanting a 35mm lens for a while and have always wanted the older FA 35mm 2.0. This goes pack to when I was shooting film with a Z-5. I like the the faxk it is a bit faster and full frame, but am I really giving much up by going with the DA 35mm 2.4? I also like the idea of keeping a bit more money in my pocket!

Jim Fellows

From what I read on the forum here and the internet beyond is that the DA 35mm f/2.4 is a tweaked version of the FA 35mm f/2.0. I don't know if that means the optical formula is the same or not. From personal experience I have verified that the DA 35mm f/2.4 works as a FF lens. I shot a roll of Agfa Vista 200 with that lens on my ZX-60. Corner to corner the images were very nice.

[Na Horuk]

I have been wanting a 35mm lens for a while and have always wanted the older FA 35mm 2.0. This goes pack to when I was shooting film with a Z-5. I like the the faxk it is a bit faster and full frame, but am I really giving much up by going with the DA 35mm 2.4? I also like the idea of keeping a bit more money in my pocket! Jim Fellows

Yeah, I thought about that lens as well, but where I am it costs three times as much! Not worth the big difference, not for me. And the DA 35mm can also be used on full frame, the image circle is big enough. The only problem is lack of aperture ring, so some older film bodies cannot select aperture (same thing if you put the lens on macro bellows).

[jimr-pdx]

I find the DA50/1.8 technically superior with its extra aperture blade, but I prefer the 35/2.4 for its field of view. I have sold both and if one gets replaced it will be the 50 - but that's because the 20-40 has landed in my bag and settled in for a long stay.

[eddie1960]

Yeah, I thought about that lens as well, but where I am it costs three times as much! Not worth the big difference, not for me. And the DA 35mm can also be used on full frame, the image circle is big enough. The only problem is lack of aperture ring, so some older film bodies cannot select aperture (same thing if you put the lens on macro bellows).

plus 1 on this I've shot a couple of rolls on my SF1 with the plastic fantastic and it is indeed very sharp and apparently just a reworked FF design

[jimfellows]

plus 1 on this I've shot a couple of rolls on my SF1 with the plastic fantastic and it is indeed very sharp and apparently just a reworked FF design

Unless I find the older FA for a bargin, it looks like the DA will work well for me.

Jim

[6BQ5]

Yeah, I thought about that lens as well, but where I am it costs three times as much! Not worth the big difference, not for me. And the DA 35mm can also be used on full frame, the image circle is big enough. The only problem is lack of aperture ring, so some older film bodies cannot select aperture (same thing if you put the lens on macro bellows).

True, true! You need a body with Av mode or use Tv mode to force a shutter speed that gives you the right aperture.