[dakight]

I have a number of zooms in my kit but my only prime is an old SMC Pentax-A 50mm f2.0. Depending on what I find beneath the Christmas tree tomorrow I may be on the hunt for something a tad wider. My budget is limited and I can spend no more than $200. I've narrowed it to a couple of choices:


SMC DA 35mm f2.4 "Plastic Fantastic" which I've seen as low as $115 used.
SMC A 28mm f2.8 at less than $100.


Both of these lenses are favorably reviewed and both are affordable and in fact I could probably buy both but I don't think that's necessary.


Are there any others I should be considering?

[ZoeB]

LOVE the plastic fantastic 35. Cheap, small, sharp as a tack.

[severalsnakes]

I have several 50mm lenses, one 35 and a couple 28s. I don't think 35 feels much "wider" than 50; I say go for the 28.

[mixberry]

I have several 50mm lenses, one 35 and a couple 28s. I don't think 35 feels much "wider" than 50; I say go for the 28.

don't forget some lens are for full frame, so calculate first before buy 35mm (FF) -> 50mm (APSC), 28mm FF (FF) -> 42mm (APSC)

[Tamia]

Earlier this year I bought the Pentax SMC M-28mm f/2.8 from a forum member and find it's the lens I most often have on my camera. The additional field of view provided by the old manual 28mm on the APS-C sensor is just right for the kind of pictures (landscapes) I so often shoot.

The cost of my M-28mm was low, the lens is solid, and it's acceptable sharp. So if you're looking for more field of view than you get with the old 50mm (or even the APS-C 50mm) and decide to go with the A-28mm, I don't think you'll be disappointed.

[Docrwm]

Depends on what type of shooting you do most and how comfortable you are with manual focus. If you want wide AND are good with MF then the 28 is a terrific little lens. If you need AF then the 35. I find wider is better inside and often for street shooting. There is a reason that back in the film days of slr's 28+50+135 was the most sold 3 lens combination. Wide+Normal+Telephoto. Merry Christmas.

[savoche]

don't forget some lens are for full frame, so calculate first before buy 35mm (FF) -> 50mm (APSC), 28mm FF (FF) -> 42mm (APSC)

A 50 mm lens is 50 mm, a 35 mm lens is 35 mm. Always. No exception. Ever.

[Docrwm]

A 50 mm lens is 50 mm, a 35 mm lens is 35 mm. Always. No exception. Ever.

On a PRACTICAL level thats just not true. Yes, academically, pedantically it is but when I put a 50 on an SLR the image that results is NOT the same as when I put it on my dSLR. Perspective and composition are different - period.

[savoche]

On a PRACTICAL level thats just not true. Yes, academically, pedantically it is but when I put a 50 on an SLR the image that results is NOT the same as when I put it on my dSLR. Perspective and composition are different - period.

Yes, but, at least the way I read what I responded to, a 50 mm lens is 50 mm no matter what system it was designed for.

What system you mount it on matters, yes.

[dakight]

"Equivalence" is a trap that causes more confusion than it solves. I've gotten ensnared by it a time or two myself. It's useful in a crutch sort of way to estimate the field of view if you're used to film or other FF format but I'm trying very hard to get away from it and just learn the characteristics of my equipment.


A 28mm is a short normal lens, a 35mm is "normal" perspective and a 50mm is a short telephoto. I'm looking for a "normal" lens so the 28 or the 35 would serve the purpose. It will be used for landscape and similar scenes and in a pinch it could be used for portraits, especially group portraits though I would have to remember to back out a bit and crop for the desired framing.


Down the road I may look for something in the 70-80mm range and probably a wide angle as well; something around 15mm but for now I'm needing the "normal" prime.

[Docrwm]

"Equivalence" is a trap that causes more confusion than it solves. I've gotten ensnared by it a time or two myself. It's useful in a crutch sort of way to estimate the field of view if you're used to film or other FF format but I'm trying very hard to get away from it and just learn the characteristics of my equipment.


A 28mm is a short normal lens, a 35mm is "normal" perspective and a 50mm is a short telephoto. I'm looking for a "normal" lens so the 28 or the 35 would serve the purpose. It will be used for landscape and similar scenes and in a pinch it could be used for portraits, especially group portraits though I would have to remember to back out a bit and crop for the desired framing.


Down the road I may look for something in the 70-80mm range and probably a wide angle as well; something around 15mm but for now I'm needing the "normal" prime.

Given all that the 28 sounds like it is more appropriate for your uses. Good luck.

[ZoeB]

I prefer to not spend so much time thinking about crop factors and equivalence, and more time shooting.

[dakight]

I prefer to not spend so much time thinking about crop factors and equivalence, and more time shooting.

Bingo!

[baro-nite]

You won't go wrong with either of those lenses, however, since you are willing to consider manual focus, you have lots of choice in that range of focal lengths. Even more if you are willing to go with non-A lenses (stop-down metering only on a Pentax DSLR). You could pick up the M28/2.8 for very cheap, for example. The K28/3.5 is an exceptional lens and still well within your budget, but harder to find. Likewise for the K35/3.5. The M28/3.5 is also highly regarded and is cheaper and much easier to find than the K version.

[redrockcoulee]

Earlier this year I bought the Pentax SMC M-28mm f/2.8 from a forum member and find it's the lens I most often have on my camera. The additional field of view provided by the old manual 28mm on the APS-C sensor is just right for the kind of pictures (landscapes) I so often shoot.

The cost of my M-28mm was low, the lens is solid, and it's acceptable sharp. So if you're looking for more field of view than you get with the old 50mm (or even the APS-C 50mm) and decide to go with the A-28mm, I don't think you'll be disappointed.

And I was given a M28 2.8 and it was the least used lens on my DSLR. I used it more on my Pentax film camera but perhaps as was used to of it with my Spotmatic F.

My point is each of us have favourite and least used focal lenghts, it is a very personal decision, I found the 28 was not wide enough for wide and too wide for normal if that makes any sense. I love the 35 2.4 and find it quite different from the F50 1.7. Whichever one you get you would like though.