[wed7]

Hi,

I like the FL of ~20mm in apsc that is why I think my DA 21 is always with me, but I am somehow limited by it in terms of speed, should I sell it and get a Fuji X100 series or how about a Ricoh GR? I usually use a 3 lens set up (21/35/70) but if I will get the Fuji, I do not want to go dual system, might be better even considered selling what I have now and go mirror less with X100T plus XT-1 with 1.2/56 and 2/90 from Fuji all the way. But I am afraid I will entirely miss the DSLR experience if I switch system . I am using my current kit mainly for general photography and sometimes for paid events for like weddings and prefer to shoot portraits in ambient lighting and mostly indoors.

PS
I feel silly asking this question since my only minor issue is the lack of a fast wide lens from Pentax that may eventually lead to changing system. (Of which I'd rather not since I do not want to spend more on another system but focus more on developing my skills)

Thank you.

---

Last edited by wed7; 10-20-2015 at 01:13 AM.

[Sandy Hancock]

Stick with your DA21. There is only 1/3 of a stop from f/2.8 to f/3.2 and it is a tiny lens with great handling, beautiful IQ and remarkable flare resistance.

[max_pyne]

I take your obsolete lenses for almost free you only pay for shipping? Drop me a PM if you want to get rid of your junk...:-)
seriously there is the DA 14mm F2.8 or the Samyang bunch (24 F1.4, 16 F2) there is the FA* 24 F2 and many more. Or some nice zooms like the sigma 18-35 F1.8, Tamron 17-50 F2.8, Pentax DA* 16-50 F2.8, DA 20-40 F2.8-4 etc.

[grispie]

do you want the speed or a bit more play with DOF?
In the first case, i see you have recent bodies that have good iso capability..
if the latter, add something like a sigma 30 1.4 (the fuji & the GR are also 28mm but only 2.8)

[TER-OR]

I really like the DA21. It has plenty of contrast, is compact and doesn't distort too much.

Look at the Sigma 30mm and 28mm options if you want really fast. Also, if you're doing more portrait type photography at the weddings, the 50mm f1.4 might be a good thought. It's really inexpensive and is well-regarded.

[wed7]

Thank you for all you input, you guys are amazing!

by fast, I mean more DOF play, I will not swap for just 2.8's. I am looking more like F2 or faster but I do not want a big lens, even if I go the FA route, there is no option from Pentax. FA331, FA77 would still leave me hanging without a fast wide angle.

[jrpower10]

Write Sigma and push for the 20 f1.4 in k-mount. No idea if they'll ever do it, but if enough people show enough interest to write....

[grispie]

Write Sigma and push for the 20 f1.4 in k-mount. No idea if they'll ever do it, but if enough people show enough interest to write....

I would think they will, with the FF coming, but it will take time. As usual :-)

[Scintilla]

by fast, I mean more DOF play, I will not swap for just 2.8's. I am looking more like F2 or faster but I do not want a big lens,...

At that focal length, on an SLR? Good luck.


Nikon's 20/1.8 weighs 355g and takes 77mm filters. Their 24/1.8 is the same weight and 72mm filters.
Sigma's 20/1.8 is even bigger, 520g and 82mm filters; their 24/1.8 is only slightly smaller; and their new "A" f/1.4 primes at those FLs are even bigger (the 20/1.4 weighs almost 1 kg). And their "A" 18-35 zoom is in the same ballpark.

[ChristianRock]

There's 3 ways you can go...

1. If you don't have a 2nd camera, make it one of the top of the line 16MP cameras if you don't have one - like K5 II or K5 IIs. K5 would also work since the AF performance should be fine. With the dynamic range and high ISO capability (better than K3) and 14-bit RAW you should be able to get your ISO higher to use smaller apertures - which you probably need in events anyway, when taking wider shots, to get most of the scene in focus.

2. A Sigma 17-50 or Pentax 16-50 in addition to the DA 21 would provide some added flexibility - a bit lower light capability, plus zooming and silent focusing - something you might need in a wedding that takes place in a darker cathedral or church, where mobility and light are issues. The Tamron 17-50 would also have great IQ but no silent focusing. The DA 20-40 Limited would give you f/2.8 only at the first couple of mm of focal length, but you could buy it replacing the DA 21 as IQ would be similar (if not better in the case of the 20-40).

3. Trading your DA 21 for an FA 20 2.8 would give you an f/2.8 aperture and - according to some - better IQ.

[jrpower10]

Here's another option: get a Pentax FF body and a FA 31 limited. Admittedly it's the money-is-no-object option, but it keeps you in a Pentax DSLR and a pretty darn sweet set-up with the same field of view.

[grispie]

Here's another option: get a Pentax FF body and a FA 31 limited. Admittedly it's the money-is-no-object option,

large DOF at wide angle is a big reason why i want a FF. & I already have the 31.
at least pentax FF should be cheaper than the new leica.. :-)

But above comments are right: you can't expect small size & big aperture at wide angle

[TER-OR]

I have a Sigma 28mm macro f1.8. It's not a small lens, but it's really quite nice. I was getting better results with it stopped down, shooting close to the subject when chasing tiny bees in the back yard than with the FA100 which is my most-used macro. Both can be stopped down aggressively. The Sigma seemed to give me better DOF - or at least more controlled photography than the FA100 at that point.

And by small bees I mean lasioglossum and hylaeus bees which are roughly 5mm long. You can have a look in my Flickr catalog to see them. Any breeze would sway that goldenrod enough to make photography very challenging.

[Sandy Hancock]

by fast, I mean more DOF play, I will not swap for just 2.8's. I am looking more like F2 or faster but I do not want a big lens, even if I go the FA route, there is no option from Pentax. FA31, FA77 would still leave me hanging without a fast wide angle.

So you want wide, fast, and not big? Change the laws of optics and you're in

I have the FA*24/2.0 and it's quite substantial. It's heavy and the filter diameter is 67mm. It is quite reasonable wide open, but from f/3.2 I reckon my DA21 is comparable.

[Nicolas06]

by fast, I mean more DOF play, I will not swap for just 2.8's. I am looking more like F2 or faster but I do not want a big lens, even if I go the FA route, there is no option from Pentax. FA331, FA77 would still leave me hanging without a fast wide angle.

To be honest, WA even on an FF are quite limited in term of dof play.

Imagine your subject is 2 meters away:
- 21mm f/3.2 on APSC => 117cm of deph of field.
- 21mm f/2 on APSC => 70cm of deph of field.
- 21mm f/1.4 on APSC => 50cm of deph of field.

32mm on FF, same framing on FF than 21 on APSC:
- 32mm f/3.2 on FF => 76cm of deph of field.
- 32mm f/2 on FF => 47cm of deph of field.
- 32mm f/1.4 on FF => 33cm of deph of field.

To me, it is only with f/1.4 on APSC or f/2 on FF that you really get a significant difference. An FF with signa 35mm f/1.4 (23mm equiv on APSC for framing, f/1 for deph of field) + sigma 50mm f/14 (equivalent to 33mm f/1 on APSC) + 100mm f/2 (66mm f/1.4 equiv on APSC). would not cost more than the fuji route and would offer more dof play in all situations. It could be bigger.

The Fuji would not be that much smaller in the end because you would need a big heavy lense on APSC (like samyang or sigma 24mm) sure, but the 70mm from Pentax is also much smaller than a Fuji APSC tele or FF tele with longer focal length to keep the reach. Also take into account that overall the Fuji offering is more limited than the offering of Pentax, Canon or Nikon both in term of body (no FF, no 24MP, specific sensor not that much supported by photo editing softwares) or lenses (far less choice, no bargain, small used market size).

What count in the end is how important this is for you.

Is this theroretical that it exist in Fuji and you want it and may use it 10 times a years maybe or that you want to try the practice and may stop using it after a few months ? In that case, really don't do it, it is not worth it just to post a few pictures with shallow deph of field on flickr with you WA while you could have got much more subject separation with a tele shoot took from a longer distance.

Or is it really something you are after, integral to the style of shoots you are after: you really want the kind of perspective distorsion you get with a (here moderate) WA, the imersion of WA angle provide and want to avoid the perspective compression of a tele and still get this subject separation and dof control? You want the shallow deph of field and be able to be near the subject.

Then if you think it is key for your photography and style, go for it. Even if it expensive, if you are sure, do it because otherwise you'll always think you are limited, you'll be always tempted and may decide to do it anyway later. Really in that case the minimum would be f/1.4 on APSC but really better would be to go FF, so you get the best of it and don't need to upgrade again later... If finally you are wrong and don't use it that much, at least you learned it and don't feel the constant need to try or constant limitation by being limited.