Thinking about buying a DA 35mm f:2.4 AL

dakight · 01-12-2016, 05:45 AM

Just do it; you really can't go wrong. I've even seen them for as low as $99.00. The 35mm Plastic Fantastic is an epic bargain; it outperforms lenses at triple the price point. This little gem should be in every serious Pentax shooter's kit.

pathdoc · 01-12-2016, 06:34 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by dakight

This little gem should be in every serious Pentax shooter's kit.

The only reason I don't have one and won't be getting it is because I already own the DA 35 Limited, which I specifically bought for the macro capability, and (going from the sublime to the almost ridiculous) the 35mm Super Takumar, which gives excellent results if you're willing to deal with the obvious Takumar limitations (manual focus, stop-down metering, requires M42-K adapter).

There are two major (but still friendly) schisms in this community - the first is between those who debate the various merits of the 16-85 and 18-135 zooms, and the other is between those who have to choose between this lens and the DA50/1.8. There are times I'm tempted to buy this one simply to see what the fuss is all about, but I already have the focal length so well covered with good glass (both AF and MF, zoom and prime) that I really can't justify it.

amp · 01-12-2016, 07:19 AM

I have the 35mm 2.4 and the 70mm 2.4, and I honestly prefer the plastic fantastic. I usually shoot indoors in tight quarters, so that's my reason. It all depends on your needs. Additionally, I had the 50mm 1.8 with which I was very happy. Can't go wrong with any of the Pentax primes.

Mattox · 01-12-2016, 11:19 AM

But the fa 35mm f2. Much better.

http://www.mattbishopphotography.com/img/s11/v27/p1665598270-5.jpg

This lens on the k5 works so well. Imagine how well it will shine as a true 35 on the new full frame. The Pentax FA 35mm F2 al

ChristianRock · 01-12-2016, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by Mattox

But the fa 35mm f2. Much better.

http://www.mattbishopphotography.com/img/s11/v27/p1665598270-5.jpg

This lens on the k5 works so well. Imagine how well it will shine as a true 35 on the new full frame. The Pentax FA 35mm F2 al

You realize that the FA 35 f2 and the DA 35 2.4 are the same lens with slightly different coatings (including the Super Protect on the DA), and the aperture is restricted to f2.4 on the DA, and that they are both full frame lenses, right? Which means the DA 35 2.4 will also shine like a true full frame lens on the new FF.

**bobbotron** · 01-12-2016, 11:44 AM - **1 Like**

I own the 35 2.4... In practice I find it's focus throw too short, it's user error but often I find critical focus is missed at the range of around 5 to 10 feet. I really want to like the lens, but my 18 to 135 gets used all the time, the 50mm quite a bit... 35, not very often at all! :/

ChristianRock · 01-12-2016, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by bobbotron

I own the 35 2.4... In practice I find it's focus throw too short, it's user error but often I find critical focus is missed at the range of around 5 to 10 feet. I really want to like the lens, but my 18 to 135 gets used all the time, the 50mm quite a bit... 35, not very often at all! :/

This is true, the DA 35 2.4 doesn't lend itself well to manual focusing. I do it, and it's not hard because the lens is very sharp so you can see when you are in focus, but I do miss shots because the focus throw is so short. Fortunately I only needed a small adjustment in my K-r and K20D for it and it now focuses well.

Originally posted by Mattox

But the fa 35mm f2. Much better.

Again - Regarding FA 35 f2 vs DA 35 2.4 vs DA 35 2.8 Limited. They are all supposed to be excellent with very good borders from wide open. The DA 35 2.4 and FA 35 f2, as proven elsewhere many times, are both based on the exact same full frame design.

DA 35 2.4:

FA 35 f2:

(look at the graphs, not the number of lines, as they were tested with different cameras which give different LPmm)

The difference wide open is because the FA 35 goes down to f2 so it's not quite as sharp as the DA 35 2.4 at 2.4. but the FA 35 at 2.4 should be just as good

if that makes sense. Also, the DA 35 2.4 2nd meaurement is at f3.2 while the FA 35 f2 is at f2.8, again explaining the difference. For the rest you see how the numbers are so very similar - the DA borders are not quite as sharp but that might be sample variation as a lot of people here will tell you the lens is sharp all over. If you look in photozone's website, even the vignetting and distortion figures are practically identical. The DA 35 2.4 has better CA control, probably due to the newer SMC coatings.

Now the DA 35 2.8 Limited is a whole different design, it's not full frame and it's a flat field macro design (The DA 35 2.4/FA 35 f2, like all Hirakawa Jun designs, has some field curvature which he deemed essential for the images to have the characteristics that he liked).

So here's the DA 35 2.8 Limited

The advantages of that lens is the flat field required for macro, better micro contrast as the coatings are again different, lower distortion and of course that wonderful rendering that the Limiteds are known for. But for sharpness alone, any Pentax 35 will do, and the DA 35 2.4 isn't worse than any of them.

Neo_ · 01-12-2016, 12:28 PM

I was impressed with my one as soon as I took it out of the box, it's really impressive image quality for the price, I eventually also got the 50mm 1.8, very happy with both.

pericombobulation · 01-12-2016, 01:56 PM

If I had to pick one lens with which to be stuck on a desert island, it would be the 35/2.4.

Mattox · 01-12-2016, 03:02 PM

What do you mean when you say the focus throw is too short. I have found that with landscapes the lens basically always focuses in at infinity.

**bobbotron** · 01-12-2016, 03:19 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Mattox

What do you mean when you say the focus throw is too short. I have found that with landscapes the lens basically always focuses in at infinity.

I don't have it in front of me, but I remember focusing from min focal distance to max takes a very small turn of the lens compared to most of my lenses. I've found this results in difficulty doing fine focus adjustments, I like more throw in my normal lenses.

Reed · 01-13-2016, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by bobbotron

I don't have it in front of me, but I remember focusing from min focal distance to max takes a very small turn of the lens compared to most of my lenses. I've found this results in difficulty doing fine focus adjustments, I like more throw in my normal lenses.

But also by this very short throw, the auto focus action is a flash compared to for example DA50/1.8. It is one of fastest focusing lenses I have.

dakight · 01-13-2016, 05:14 AM

Manual focus is 1/4 turn lock to lock which, as noted is great for autofocus but perhaps not ideal for manual focus.

Here's one I took last night with the DA-35 mounted on a K-50:

**bobbotron** · 01-13-2016, 05:27 AM

Originally posted by Reed

But also by this very short throw, the auto focus action is a flash compared to for example DA50/1.8. It is one of fastest focusing lenses I have.

For sure. I notice I get more af misses with it too, which I partially attribute to the short throw.

Electric Eye · 01-13-2016, 05:43 AM

I find the lens doesn't render that well,it has a (no pun intended) plasticky look to it!,almost grainy but not high ISO grain.It focuses' fast,colors are great and it's sharp...this is in comparison with a Pentax A 50 1.7 and a K55 1.8,they have something special that the 35 doesn't...just my opinion!.Would love to try the Da 1.8 though.

01-13-2016, 05:14 AM	#28
dakight Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,216	Manual focus is 1/4 turn lock to lock which, as noted is great for autofocus but perhaps not ideal for manual focus. Here's one I took last night with the DA-35 mounted on a K-50: Last edited by dakight; 01-13-2016 at 06:07 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC-DA 35mm f/2.4 AL New in Box	rosettaquarrier	Sold Items	3	04-15-2015 06:34 PM
DA 35mm f/2.4 AL old model?	Spodeworld	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	11-15-2014 03:28 PM
DA 35mm f/2.4 AL	budihartono	Visitors' Center	6	02-06-2014 09:51 AM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F/2.4 AL	rrwilliams64	Sold Items	3	01-26-2014 12:39 PM

01-12-2016, 05:45 AM	#16
dakight Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,216	Just do it; you really can't go wrong. I've even seen them for as low as $99.00. The 35mm Plastic Fantastic is an epic bargain; it outperforms lenses at triple the price point. This little gem should be in every serious Pentax shooter's kit.

01-12-2016, 06:34 AM - 1 Like	#17
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by dakight This little gem should be in every serious Pentax shooter's kit. The only reason I don't have one and won't be getting it is because I already own the DA 35 Limited, which I specifically bought for the macro capability, and (going from the sublime to the almost ridiculous) the 35mm Super Takumar, which gives excellent results if you're willing to deal with the obvious Takumar limitations (manual focus, stop-down metering, requires M42-K adapter). There are two major (but still friendly) schisms in this community - the first is between those who debate the various merits of the 16-85 and 18-135 zooms, and the other is between those who have to choose between this lens and the DA50/1.8. There are times I'm tempted to buy this one simply to see what the fuss is all about, but I already have the focal length so well covered with good glass (both AF and MF, zoom and prime) that I really can't justify it.

01-12-2016, 07:19 AM	#18
amp Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 168	I have the 35mm 2.4 and the 70mm 2.4, and I honestly prefer the plastic fantastic. I usually shoot indoors in tight quarters, so that's my reason. It all depends on your needs. Additionally, I had the 50mm 1.8 with which I was very happy. Can't go wrong with any of the Pentax primes.

01-12-2016, 11:19 AM	#19
Mattox Senior Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 292	But the fa 35mm f2. Much better. http://www.mattbishopphotography.com/img/s11/v27/p1665598270-5.jpg This lens on the k5 works so well. Imagine how well it will shine as a true 35 on the new full frame. The Pentax FA 35mm F2 al

01-12-2016, 11:33 AM	#20
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,910	Originally posted by Mattox But the fa 35mm f2. Much better. http://www.mattbishopphotography.com/img/s11/v27/p1665598270-5.jpg This lens on the k5 works so well. Imagine how well it will shine as a true 35 on the new full frame. The Pentax FA 35mm F2 al You realize that the FA 35 f2 and the DA 35 2.4 are the same lens with slightly different coatings (including the Super Protect on the DA), and the aperture is restricted to f2.4 on the DA, and that they are both full frame lenses, right? Which means the DA 35 2.4 will also shine like a true full frame lens on the new FF.

01-12-2016, 11:44 AM - 1 Like	#21
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	I own the 35 2.4... In practice I find it's focus throw too short, it's user error but often I find critical focus is missed at the range of around 5 to 10 feet. I really want to like the lens, but my 18 to 135 gets used all the time, the 50mm quite a bit... 35, not very often at all! :/

01-12-2016, 12:27 PM	#22
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,910	Originally posted by bobbotron I own the 35 2.4... In practice I find it's focus throw too short, it's user error but often I find critical focus is missed at the range of around 5 to 10 feet. I really want to like the lens, but my 18 to 135 gets used all the time, the 50mm quite a bit... 35, not very often at all! :/ This is true, the DA 35 2.4 doesn't lend itself well to manual focusing. I do it, and it's not hard because the lens is very sharp so you can see when you are in focus, but I do miss shots because the focus throw is so short. Fortunately I only needed a small adjustment in my K-r and K20D for it and it now focuses well. Originally posted by Mattox But the fa 35mm f2. Much better. Again - Regarding FA 35 f2 vs DA 35 2.4 vs DA 35 2.8 Limited. They are all supposed to be excellent with very good borders from wide open. The DA 35 2.4 and FA 35 f2, as proven elsewhere many times, are both based on the exact same full frame design. DA 35 2.4: FA 35 f2: (look at the graphs, not the number of lines, as they were tested with different cameras which give different LPmm) The difference wide open is because the FA 35 goes down to f2 so it's not quite as sharp as the DA 35 2.4 at 2.4. but the FA 35 at 2.4 should be just as good if that makes sense. Also, the DA 35 2.4 2nd meaurement is at f3.2 while the FA 35 f2 is at f2.8, again explaining the difference. For the rest you see how the numbers are so very similar - the DA borders are not quite as sharp but that might be sample variation as a lot of people here will tell you the lens is sharp all over. If you look in photozone's website, even the vignetting and distortion figures are practically identical. The DA 35 2.4 has better CA control, probably due to the newer SMC coatings. Now the DA 35 2.8 Limited is a whole different design, it's not full frame and it's a flat field macro design (The DA 35 2.4/FA 35 f2, like all Hirakawa Jun designs, has some field curvature which he deemed essential for the images to have the characteristics that he liked). So here's the DA 35 2.8 Limited The advantages of that lens is the flat field required for macro, better micro contrast as the coatings are again different, lower distortion and of course that wonderful rendering that the Limiteds are known for. But for sharpness alone, any Pentax 35 will do, and the DA 35 2.4 isn't worse than any of them.

01-12-2016, 12:28 PM	#23
Neo_ Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 153	I was impressed with my one as soon as I took it out of the box, it's really impressive image quality for the price, I eventually also got the 50mm 1.8, very happy with both.

01-12-2016, 01:56 PM	#24
pericombobulation Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 103	If I had to pick one lens with which to be stuck on a desert island, it would be the 35/2.4.

01-12-2016, 03:02 PM	#25
Mattox Senior Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 292	What do you mean when you say the focus throw is too short. I have found that with landscapes the lens basically always focuses in at infinity.

01-12-2016, 03:19 PM - 1 Like	#26
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	Originally posted by Mattox What do you mean when you say the focus throw is too short. I have found that with landscapes the lens basically always focuses in at infinity. I don't have it in front of me, but I remember focusing from min focal distance to max takes a very small turn of the lens compared to most of my lenses. I've found this results in difficulty doing fine focus adjustments, I like more throw in my normal lenses.

01-13-2016, 01:02 AM	#27
Reed Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Location: Warsaw Photos: Gallery Posts: 638	Originally posted by bobbotron I don't have it in front of me, but I remember focusing from min focal distance to max takes a very small turn of the lens compared to most of my lenses. I've found this results in difficulty doing fine focus adjustments, I like more throw in my normal lenses. But also by this very short throw, the auto focus action is a flash compared to for example DA50/1.8. It is one of fastest focusing lenses I have.

01-13-2016, 05:27 AM	#29
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	Originally posted by Reed But also by this very short throw, the auto focus action is a flash compared to for example DA50/1.8. It is one of fastest focusing lenses I have. For sure. I notice I get more af misses with it too, which I partially attribute to the short throw.

01-13-2016, 05:43 AM	#30
Electric Eye Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 238	I find the lens doesn't render that well,it has a (no pun intended) plasticky look to it!,almost grainy but not high ISO grain.It focuses' fast,colors are great and it's sharp...this is in comparison with a Pentax A 50 1.7 and a K55 1.8,they have something special that the 35 doesn't...just my opinion!.Would love to try the Da 1.8 though.