[MadMathMind]

I'm thinking ahead to the FF camera. The FA31's texture rendering is just exquisite and I'm not sure I can live without it--it blows me away all the time. My issue is that I use my FA31 for portraits and cosplay and I think it's going to be too wide for close-ups--worried about perspective distortion. My plan was to use my FA50. The FA50 f/1.7 is a wonderful lens, truly. But it ain't the FA31. I suppose I could use the FA77 for these close-ups and FA31 for full-body portraits still, but I'm considering the FA43 because it's FOV is very nearly what the FA31 is on a FF camera.

Any thoughts?

[waterfall]

I have and love both the 31 and 43. The 43 renders contrast and color very much like the 31 and I only prefer the 31 on my K-3 because of the FOV. I highly recommend the 43 for FF.

[Sandy Hancock]

All three FA limiteds render very similarly in normal conditions. I compared them a while ago; the album is HERE

[heasley]

I'm thinking ahead to the FF camera. The FA31's texture rendering is just exquisite and I'm not sure I can live without it--it blows me away all the time. My issue is that I use my FA31 for portraits and cosplay and I think it's going to be too wide for close-ups--worried about perspective distortion. My plan was to use my FA50. The FA50 f/1.7 is a wonderful lens, truly. But it ain't the FA31. I suppose I could use the FA77 for these close-ups and FA31 for full-body portraits still, but I'm considering the FA43 because it's FOV is very nearly what the FA31 is on a FF camera.

Any thoughts?

I have all 3 of the FA limiteds. Out of my 10 lenses, these are easily my favorite. In some ways very similar but in other ways very different. Each has their own character to the extent that I can usually pick a photograph taken with one of them. The 43 is the most unforgiving and difficult to use of the three. However, once you appreciate its limitations it can be used to take some truly beautiful photographs.

Here is example of the beautiful rendering (not a great shot but it shows the wonderful out of focus rendering):

https://flic.kr/p/9QbwjG

[UncleVanya]

The 43 is the only one of the amigos I don't have - my friend who has the 43 and 77 and sold me his 31 says he loves the 43 but never clicked with the 31. I'm not sure what that means but there must be something different in them.

EDIT: I'm not implying they render different just that for him the focal length seems to be the issue. In truth I have no idea why. I love my DA 40 so buying the 43 is something I have pushed off for now.
'

[alamo5000]

The 43 is one of my most favorite lenses. Period. I have all the amigos and all three are superb. Absolutely nothing wrong with the 43. In fact its very very VERY good.

[Sandy Hancock]

To borrow some Kerrowdown nomenclature, the FA43 is my "lady in waiting" - waiting for the 135 full frame DSLR.
The other two FA limiteds are already very useful focal lengths on APS-C, but I also can't wait to get them working their full image circle in the near future.

But back on topic, their rendering is similar in most circumstances. The eight blade iris of the FA43 does however give it some different bokeh and starburst characteristics - not necessarily worse, just different.

[HYS]

I have and love both the 31 and 43. The 43 renders contrast and color very much like the 31 and I only prefer the 31 on my K-3 because of the FOV. I highly recommend the 43 for FF.

I agree.
I have both 43 and 31. They share the same spirit. The 31 is a bit sharper. Both are a pleasure to work with.

[redpit]

The 43 is one of my most favorite lenses. Period. I have all the amigos and all three are superb. Absolutely nothing wrong with the 43. In fact its very very VERY good.

^^ Exactly!

[Digitalis]

The FA31 is only really matched by the K/A 50mm f/1.2 for bokeh quality, the FA77 and FA43 have different bokeh characteristics from the FA31. Overall colour and contrast are practically identical with the FA limited lenses, though the FA31 is a standout as its resolution characteristic is more consistent across the frame than the FA43 and FA77 at wider apertures, especially on full format. At f/4, optically there is essentially no difference between the three limited lenses, apart from the missing aperture blade on the FA43.

I'm not sure if my experience on full format with the FA43 really translates - i'm using the LTM version of the FA43mm f/1.9 on the Leica M8/M9/Monochrom - and I have found it is very different from say the Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f/1.4 or the Rollei Sonnar 40mm f/2.8. Also one little known fact: the LTM version of the 43mm f/1.9 has an extra aperture blade - 9 instead of 8 for the Pentax FA version, this makes the bokeh a bit smoother at smaller apertures.


Leica Monochrom - Pentax LTM 43mm f/1.9 Special

On the Leica M9 the LTM 43mm f/1.9 Special takes a bit of getting used to, but that is perhaps an unfair critique as I'm more accustomed to using fast 50's on RF cameras. The fact that I'm using it on Leica rangefinders which on no account come with 40mm framelines makes things a bit awkward*. Though on the APS-H format M8 it gives the FOV of a 55.9mm lens, which is somewhat less awkward with the RF framelines.

*Pentax does make an external brightline viewfinder that comes with the LTM 43mm f/1.9 special. However, I'm not taking the risk of losing it: So I use a 40mm viewfinder from Voigtlander instead.

[Hattifnatt]

Should I get an FA 43 for like 270$? Excellent condition, seems like a good price to me.

[waterfall]

Good price. New sales price is around $489 usually.

[aleonx3]

I'm thinking ahead to the FF camera. The FA31's texture rendering is just exquisite and I'm not sure I can live without it--it blows me away all the time. My issue is that I use my FA31 for portraits and cosplay and I think it's going to be too wide for close-ups--worried about perspective distortion. My plan was to use my FA50. The FA50 f/1.7 is a wonderful lens, truly. But it ain't the FA31. I suppose I could use the FA77 for these close-ups and FA31 for full-body portraits still, but I'm considering the FA43 because it's FOV is very nearly what the FA31 is on a FF camera.

Any thoughts?

I have seen your work using the 31 Ltd in cosplay, since I have all 3 Ltd lenses, I can share my view on the 43. In all 3 lenses, I think the image rendering capability of the lenses is superb and as close to realism as it can get. Bokeh wise, they are all good but I prefer the 31 in particular, but that could be due to focal length perspective. Among the three, I use the 31 more and the 77 the least mainly due to focal length in crop mode. Also because I have the topcor 58f1.4 manual lens, the 77 Ltd. does not get used as much. Again, it is just a matter of taste on focal length (I find that 58mm seems to work quite nice). There is no question that I will likely try out the 43 Ltd when the Pentax FF is available - I expect that the 43 on a FF would be nice.

[Des]

I learn something new from every post by @Digitalis. If we had a Hall of Fame, he'd be the first nominated.

---------- Post added 12-30-15 at 01:13 PM ----------

All three FA limiteds render very similarly in normal conditions. I compared them a while ago; the album is HERE

Lovely.

What is it with these South Australians?

[lytrytyr]

Leica rangefinders which on no account come with 40mm framelines

Unless they're Leica CLs!