prime, prime, everywhere a prime...

redcat · 03-20-2015, 03:15 AM

DA15 and DA70 are all very very good lens too ^^ you'll hardly need more than those 3 FL : 15, 31, 70 unless you want to shoot sport or macro ^^

biz-engineer · 03-21-2015, 02:07 AM - **1 Like**

Some elements for selecting prime lenses:

You Tube

**pepperberry farm** · 03-21-2015, 05:38 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Michaelina2

You're *not* in the game...

thank you - if that's the game, you are right.. I am not in it... but thank you for pointing it out...

normhead · 03-21-2015, 05:50 AM

Originally posted by pepperberry farm

Is a 35 mm lens that much of a different view than a 50 mm? Is an aperture of f1.8 that much more noticeable in low light than an f2.4? Should I be looking only at autofocus lenses vs manual?

ON APS-c I use the 50 all the time, the 35 is the current body cap on my old K20D in the display case. Even when I shot FF, film, the 35 was a hard lens to like. Not really wide angle, not really standard. The 50 1.8 is just the lens to have for low light. My first purchase after the two zooms I bought with the camera was the FA 50 1.7. And it's still a favourite for many uses. These days with tithe 50 1.8 being so cheap, 50 is a no brainer. If you don't have a 1.8 lens in your lens lineup, that's why you need one. The 50 is the cheapest way to get one.

**pepperberry farm** · 03-21-2015, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by normhead

ON APS-c I use the 50 all the time, the 35 is the current body cap on my old K20D in the display case. Even when I shot FF, film, the 35 was a hard lens to like. Not really wide angle, not really standard. The 50 1.8 is just the lens to have for low light. My first purchase after the two zooms I bought with the camera was the FA 50 1.7. And it's still a favourite for many uses. These days with tithe 50 1.8 being so cheap, 50 is a no brainer. If you don't have a 1.8 lens in your lens lineup, that's why you need one. The 50 is the cheapest way to get one.

thank you - after reading the reviews and opinions on the DA 50, I bought one from a member of the forum here... should be here Monday or so and I'll get to try it out...

Sagitta · 03-21-2015, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by normhead

ON APS-c I use the 50 all the time, the 35 is the current body cap on my old K20D in the display case. Even when I shot FF, film, the 35 was a hard lens to like. Not really wide angle, not really standard. The 50 1.8 is just the lens to have for low light. My first purchase after the two zooms I bought with the camera was the FA 50 1.7. And it's still a favourite for many uses. These days with tithe 50 1.8 being so cheap, 50 is a no brainer. If you don't have a 1.8 lens in your lens lineup, that's why you need one. The 50 is the cheapest way to get one.

Strangely, for me the 35 is my newest favorite length. I don't know if its the lens or the length, but I have a hard time keeping the 35 off the camera.

dakight · 03-21-2015, 08:23 AM

The above notwithstanding, you won't go wrong with the very excellent DA 50 1.8 and DA 35 2.4. Inexpensive, lightweight but by all accounts they deliver outstanding performance regardless of cost. Are they in the same league as the 31 limited? Probably not. Will they give excellent images using the K-50? Absolutely. Were you a professional photographer looking for the absolute best performance regardless of cost the advice might be different but if you, like me, are an average Joe, looking to improve your results on a minimal budget then you are definitely on the right track.

---------- Post added 03-21-15 at 08:29 AM ----------

Originally posted by Sagitta

Strangely, for me the 35 is my newest favorite length. I don't know if its the lens or the length, but I have a hard time keeping the 35 off the camera.

The 35 is a great walkaround lens for the APS-C format. I did notice the other day that the 50 is internal focus while the 35 is not but still the normal perspective of the 35 makes it more versatile for my uses. I have both and I expect both to get a lot of use... when I have a working body again with which to couple them, but that's a whole 'nother story.

**Rondec** · 03-21-2015, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by Michaelina2

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I sense that you missed my point. My intent is to offer a way to help you make a good decision and avoid launching yourself down the same bumpy path I took when faced with a similar choice...

From your post, I gathered that you were looking for ways to "up your game." After seven consecutive years of working on the same issue, I've found this "game" may help and is the one I'm referencing. Also, I've found the most useful and frugal way to play is by doing this. Plus, I'd saved a ton of time, money and fumbling around by learning how to use this as my 'go to...' from the beginning.

Just sayin' and good luck... M

I like the 31 fine, but it isn't my favorite lens, by any means.

I would say that as long as you don't over spend on your purchases, you are unlikely to lose money on a lens. I've flipped plenty of lenses that just didn't click with me and in the end, I have actually made money on a lot of the purchases. But I don't accumulate lenses just accumulate them. If I want something else, I'll get something else, but I'll sell the lens I don't like.

**pepperberry farm** · 03-21-2015, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by dakight

The above notwithstanding, you won't go wrong with the very excellent DA 50 1.8 and DA 35 2.4. Inexpensive, lightweight but by all accounts they deliver outstanding performance regardless of cost. Are they in the same league as the 31 limited? Probably not. Will they give excellent images using the K-50? Absolutely. Were you a professional photographer looking for the absolute best performance regardless of cost the advice might be different but if you, like me, are an average Joe, looking to improve your results on a minimal budget then you are definitely on the right track.

bingo - just an average guy, just starting out with my K-50 and looking to move up from the kit lenses I bought with the camera.....

btw - the DA 50 arrived today and looks practically unused, original box and paperwork.....

**pepperberry farm** · 03-21-2015, 02:26 PM - **3 Likes**

grey, overcast day... shot with the new DA 50mm f1.8...

NickC · 03-22-2015, 04:45 PM - **1 Like**

My walk around kit is the 15mm Ltd, 35mm f/2.8 Macro Ltd and the 70mm Ltd. The 35 is most used as it is most flexible due to being Macro and is super sharp.
15 is my second choice.
The K3 has so much latitude for cropping that I find I can get away without a longer lens.

formercanuck · 03-22-2015, 04:52 PM

If I had a 35mm macro, I'd expect that I'd get a lot of use out of it. As a result, my 2 closest are Sigma 28mm f/2.8 mini-wide II and Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4.
When I'm not using those 2, I'm using my DA 18-135mm.

biz-engineer · 03-22-2015, 11:41 PM

Originally posted by pepperberry farm

grey, overcast day... shot with the new DA 50mm f1.8...

Nice pictures. Perhaps you were past the min focus distance of the lens?

**pepperberry farm** · 03-23-2015, 03:22 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Nice pictures. Perhaps you were past the min focus distance of the lens?

minimum is about 18"; I think I may have been right on the limit....

Na Horuk · 03-23-2015, 05:03 AM

Good photos! At MFD, the DoF is the shallowest, especially if you are using a wide aperture (low fnumber due to low light). So there might be only one or two millimeters that are actually in focus and sharp. That's just the physics of optics for ya

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Gone a little prime crazy	StevenMatchett	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	09-23-2013 05:49 AM
Nature A four (prime) lens walk	normhead	Post Your Photos!	12	05-16-2013 07:08 AM
Prime m -> prime ii	RonHendriks1966	Pentax K-30 & K-50	4	05-23-2012 10:38 AM
K Prime vs. M Prime	multiweb	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	28	02-23-2012 03:32 PM
Pentax prime vs Nikon prime	ladybug	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	58	09-19-2010 01:03 PM

03-20-2015, 03:15 AM	#61
redcat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Paris Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,939	DA15 and DA70 are all very very good lens too ^^ you'll hardly need more than those 3 FL : 15, 31, 70 unless you want to shoot sport or macro ^^

03-21-2015, 05:38 AM - 1 Like	#63
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,766 Original Poster	Originally posted by Michaelina2 You're not in the game... thank you - if that's the game, you are right.. I am not in it... but thank you for pointing it out...

03-21-2015, 05:50 AM	#64
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by pepperberry farm Is a 35 mm lens that much of a different view than a 50 mm? Is an aperture of f1.8 that much more noticeable in low light than an f2.4? Should I be looking only at autofocus lenses vs manual? ON APS-c I use the 50 all the time, the 35 is the current body cap on my old K20D in the display case. Even when I shot FF, film, the 35 was a hard lens to like. Not really wide angle, not really standard. The 50 1.8 is just the lens to have for low light. My first purchase after the two zooms I bought with the camera was the FA 50 1.7. And it's still a favourite for many uses. These days with tithe 50 1.8 being so cheap, 50 is a no brainer. If you don't have a 1.8 lens in your lens lineup, that's why you need one. The 50 is the cheapest way to get one.

03-21-2015, 05:59 AM	#65
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,766 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead ON APS-c I use the 50 all the time, the 35 is the current body cap on my old K20D in the display case. Even when I shot FF, film, the 35 was a hard lens to like. Not really wide angle, not really standard. The 50 1.8 is just the lens to have for low light. My first purchase after the two zooms I bought with the camera was the FA 50 1.7. And it's still a favourite for many uses. These days with tithe 50 1.8 being so cheap, 50 is a no brainer. If you don't have a 1.8 lens in your lens lineup, that's why you need one. The 50 is the cheapest way to get one. thank you - after reading the reviews and opinions on the DA 50, I bought one from a member of the forum here... should be here Monday or so and I'll get to try it out...

03-21-2015, 07:17 AM	#66
Sagitta Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,081	Originally posted by normhead ON APS-c I use the 50 all the time, the 35 is the current body cap on my old K20D in the display case. Even when I shot FF, film, the 35 was a hard lens to like. Not really wide angle, not really standard. The 50 1.8 is just the lens to have for low light. My first purchase after the two zooms I bought with the camera was the FA 50 1.7. And it's still a favourite for many uses. These days with tithe 50 1.8 being so cheap, 50 is a no brainer. If you don't have a 1.8 lens in your lens lineup, that's why you need one. The 50 is the cheapest way to get one. Strangely, for me the 35 is my newest favorite length. I don't know if its the lens or the length, but I have a hard time keeping the 35 off the camera.

03-21-2015, 08:23 AM	#67
dakight Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,216	The above notwithstanding, you won't go wrong with the very excellent DA 50 1.8 and DA 35 2.4. Inexpensive, lightweight but by all accounts they deliver outstanding performance regardless of cost. Are they in the same league as the 31 limited? Probably not. Will they give excellent images using the K-50? Absolutely. Were you a professional photographer looking for the absolute best performance regardless of cost the advice might be different but if you, like me, are an average Joe, looking to improve your results on a minimal budget then you are definitely on the right track. ---------- Post added 03-21-15 at 08:29 AM ---------- Originally posted by Sagitta Strangely, for me the 35 is my newest favorite length. I don't know if its the lens or the length, but I have a hard time keeping the 35 off the camera. The 35 is a great walkaround lens for the APS-C format. I did notice the other day that the 50 is internal focus while the 35 is not but still the normal perspective of the 35 makes it more versatile for my uses. I have both and I expect both to get a lot of use... when I have a working body again with which to couple them, but that's a whole 'nother story.

03-21-2015, 08:30 AM	#68
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by Michaelina2 Correct me if I'm wrong, but I sense that you missed my point. My intent is to offer a way to help you make a good decision and avoid launching yourself down the same bumpy path I took when faced with a similar choice... From your post, I gathered that you were looking for ways to "up your game." After seven consecutive years of working on the same issue, I've found this "game" may help and is the one I'm referencing. Also, I've found the most useful and frugal way to play is by doing this. Plus, I'd saved a ton of time, money and fumbling around by learning how to use this as my 'go to...' from the beginning. Just sayin' and good luck... M I like the 31 fine, but it isn't my favorite lens, by any means. I would say that as long as you don't over spend on your purchases, you are unlikely to lose money on a lens. I've flipped plenty of lenses that just didn't click with me and in the end, I have actually made money on a lot of the purchases. But I don't accumulate lenses just accumulate them. If I want something else, I'll get something else, but I'll sell the lens I don't like.

03-21-2015, 01:41 PM	#69
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,766 Original Poster	Originally posted by dakight The above notwithstanding, you won't go wrong with the very excellent DA 50 1.8 and DA 35 2.4. Inexpensive, lightweight but by all accounts they deliver outstanding performance regardless of cost. Are they in the same league as the 31 limited? Probably not. Will they give excellent images using the K-50? Absolutely. Were you a professional photographer looking for the absolute best performance regardless of cost the advice might be different but if you, like me, are an average Joe, looking to improve your results on a minimal budget then you are definitely on the right track. bingo - just an average guy, just starting out with my K-50 and looking to move up from the kit lenses I bought with the camera..... btw - the DA 50 arrived today and looks practically unused, original box and paperwork.....

03-22-2015, 04:45 PM - 1 Like	#71
NickC Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 53	My walk around kit is the 15mm Ltd, 35mm f/2.8 Macro Ltd and the 70mm Ltd. The 35 is most used as it is most flexible due to being Macro and is super sharp. 15 is my second choice. The K3 has so much latitude for cropping that I find I can get away without a longer lens.

03-22-2015, 04:52 PM	#72
formercanuck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: SoCal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 518	If I had a 35mm macro, I'd expect that I'd get a lot of use out of it. As a result, my 2 closest are Sigma 28mm f/2.8 mini-wide II and Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4. When I'm not using those 2, I'm using my DA 18-135mm.

03-22-2015, 11:41 PM	#73
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,242	Originally posted by pepperberry farm grey, overcast day... shot with the new DA 50mm f1.8... Nice pictures. Perhaps you were past the min focus distance of the lens?

03-23-2015, 05:03 AM	#75
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Good photos! At MFD, the DoF is the shallowest, especially if you are using a wide aperture (low fnumber due to low light). So there might be only one or two millimeters that are actually in focus and sharp. That's just the physics of optics for ya