Originally posted by pepperberry farm I need a prime lens... and I have questions...
...
What i want a prime for: portraits, landscape and as a walking around lens...
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?
I pair DA21 with DA*55 (+DA10-17) for my photo walk. It used to be with FA50 macro. I get 55* for its WR feature otherwise I would still be with the 50 macros.
I used to use F28 and FA35 before I switch to FA20 and later DA21. IMHO, 28 looks closer to 50 in FF but FA35 produces a very nice-looking image. I like it a little more than the 28. But both 28 and 35 mm are not for me. Most of the time, they are either too long or too short. I am more comfortable with 20mm. I guess my combo makes it very similar to 20-40.
If you don't mind stitching images, 21 can produce something similar to 15mm with 2 - 3 image stitching.
Aperture: yes, it is noticeable in low light when I switch from FA50macro f2.8 to DA*55 f1.4 and I like to do night street photos. If you take a lot of night, low light photos, get a fast lens will always help. IMHO.
I think it depends on what it will be used for.
I shot predominantly at night and I have very bad eyesight + things moving all the time on the street. Autofocus + Live view is my solution. It's true that you can pre-focus and wait. But interesting things can happen on street at any moment. Autofocus lenses can help you capture the moment better. if I use mirrorless I might like manual lenses more because I can confirm the focus using EVF.
if it is landscape, cityscape photos, I think manual lenses are good to go. And if you are very comfortable with Pentax focus peak, manual lenses could be a very good and economic choice. Keep in mind it is "white", I found it next to useless in many cases. I wish I could have red as an option.