[seachongo]

I've read reviews of each and seen photos of each, but haven't seen much direct comparison between the two. I'm looking for people's opinions that have used both. Which do you consider the better lens and which do you think is the sharper lens at 21mm?
I typically shoot landscape with K-5 using a Tamron 17-50, always on tripod. I'll be getting a K-3ii as soon as it comes out. I've found that ~ 2/3 of my landscapes have been taken at 21mm. I guess I just like that perspective. If you have used both lenses and have any input, I'd love to hear it!

[chrisfer]

I have the 21mm and have owned 20-40mm. The results are very similar.
But the two 20-40 I had had problems. The first was not specific in focus (FF at 20mm BF at 40mm). The second was, at 40mm, in focus on the edges or at the center not both at the same time...

[hcc]

Apples and oranges.

Honestly you cannot compare apples and oranges. These are two very different lenses: a DA zoom WR lens versus a prime Limited lens.

IMHO you should think in terms of your lens line-up. You have already a Tammy 17-50, The DA21 Ltd is the obvious choice to complement your Tammy.

My 5 cents.

[carlb]

I only have the 21 and I love it. But the 20 - 40 is a great looking lens. That's probably not a sufficient reason to buy it though.

[Zygonyx]

I have both and keep the 21mm specifically for it's compactness (e.g. with K01 or KS1) and it's starburst effects when taking night photographies.

[Nick Siebers]

I replaced the 21 with a 20-40 and have had no regrets. Depending on how good your Tammy is you may not see a huge boost in sharpness, but I like the colors and contrast of the DA Limiteds better.

[BennyBoy]

I've had both, and I kept the 20-40 because it looked better. I had two copies in a row of the 21, both had issues. Both had lose barrels, and both were very soft on the edges wide open(the 20-40 is not soft anywhere wide open),

[seachongo]

Thank you all for your insights! It seems that there is a narrow preference towards the 20-40mm. I was wondering if anyone could address the relative performance between the two lenses at 21mm, specifically: sharpness at center and edges, wide open and at F/8.

[WPRESTO]

Digital camera reviews, photography techniques, photography gallery and photography forums has tested both lenses. For the 20-40mm @ 20mm vs the 21mm, both at F5.6~8.0 it's a near toss-up in terms of sharpness, with perhaps a slight edge to the 21mm. It's doubtful anyone presented with a series of images taken each lens at f8.0 would be able to consistently tell which lens was used.

Way back in the 60's two shutterbug friends and I did business at a local camera store whose owner swore that Leica lenses were superior to all others and images taken with a Leica could readily be distinguished from those taken by "amateur" cameras. Two of us used Pentax, while CF used a Leica M3 with the legendary Sumicron 50mm f2.0. We brought the dealer about 20 slides we had taken side-by-side of the same scenes. He refused even to try to identify the Leica images from those taken with a Pentax.

[mannyquinto]

I only owned the HD DA 21 and a 16-45. The DA 21 is always attached to the camera and is only replaced if I needed a wider angle of view. I guess your preference would depend if you like primes or zooms. Don't fuss about the quality at f8, I think any modern lens would be good at that aperture. This is where the Pentax Limited advantage will come into play. Size, rendering, resistance and bokeh are in the favor of the DA 21. Also, the DA 21 has a floating element which makes close-up rendering better than one with-out.

[seachongo]

Digital camera reviews, photography techniques, photography gallery and photography forums has tested both lenses. For the 20-40mm @ 20mm vs the 21mm, both at F5.6~8.0 it's a near toss-up in terms of sharpness, with perhaps a slight edge to the 21mm. It's doubtful anyone presented with a series of images taken each lens at f8.0 would be able to consistently tell which lens was used.

Way back in the 60's two shutterbug friends and I did business at a local camera store whose owner swore that Leica lenses were superior to all others and images taken with a Leica could readily be distinguished from those taken by "amateur" cameras. Two of us used Pentax, while CF used a Leica M3 with the legendary Sumicron 50mm f2.0. We brought the dealer about 20 slides we had taken side-by-side of the same scenes. He refused even to try to identify the Leica images from those taken with a Pentax.

That was exactly the type of info I was looking for, thank you very much! Thanks all for your help as well.