Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-20-2008, 09:51 AM   #226
Veteran Member

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
the FA43 does have some "je ne sais quoi" factor to it. i can't really pin it down and i'm not alone in this statement, if you dig a bit you'll find a lot of people prefer the FA43 the best out of all the limiteds.

07-20-2008, 11:28 AM   #227
Inactive Account

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, San Diego, Seattle
Posts: 456
I prefer the look of the FA43 for myself, and find it very well suited for work in the studio both with portraits and with some still life. The super sharp center with the nice OOF edges, work real well for me when I am looking for that look.

I have had both and kept the FA43 for the work I needed in that focal length. As a walk-around lens, I wanted something a little wider. But in the few months I had the DA40 (before going wider) it was my favorite walk-around lens.

It is small and focuses very very fast, and is a plus with the easy quick-shift focus feature.

The DA40 perhaps performs a little more predictably outdoors, with its absence of purple fringing, and its more even sharpness and sharper in the edges and corners at 2.8.

If I had to pick only one of these lenses for many different uses, I'd probably pick the DA40 (which I did until I got the FA43) and if I didn't need to go wider. If I had unlimited funds, I'd kept both. (which I didn't) I'd keep the FA43 for indoors and take the DA40 everywhere else. If they had made a DA30 Ltd. which was exactly like the DA40 Ltd (except for focal length), That'd been perfect.

I am sure I will get another DA40 one day when I have more money.

07-20-2008, 03:00 PM   #228
Veteran Member

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
I went for DA 40.
Never regreted it since, I think there is only one word to describe it:
especialy with it's price tag...
07-30-2008, 09:30 PM   #229
Site Supporter
knyghtfall's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 348
Just to show the sharpness, colour and bokeh of the FA 43

Wide open at f1.9, no pp.

07-31-2008, 07:15 PM   #230
Forum Member

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 57
real stupid question... is the FOV the same for the DA and FA?

If so, why do some people mention that the focal length is easier to work with using the DA? surely 3mm can't make that big of a difference?

lastly... not to hijack the thread... but for a walkaround, would the Tamron 28-75 top these at their focal lengths?
07-31-2008, 08:54 PM   #231
Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Suwanee, GA USA
Posts: 153
Love the 40mm. Never used the 43mm, so I can't compare or comment on "something special" quality folks attribute to it. I'm sure most would have no regrets with either.

But the 40mm has always delivered the goods.

08-01-2008, 07:03 AM   #232
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228

I like the DA 40 for a couple reasons, one of which is that if focuses
quickly and allows you to capture moving/bobbing objects:

Also, it's sharpness kinda gets overlooked, but this is an extremely sharp lens.
I often print things at 8x10 and more, and one of the sharpest prints I've made if not
the sharpest has come from this lens. The image below, when printed large, is
stunningly sharp:

That being said, I think I've seen more 'wow' shots online from the 43 than the

But you can get the 40 for ~$200 used, so it's one of those lenses you can talk
yourself into easily.

08-01-2008, 05:04 PM   #233
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
The DA 40 is the perfect walk-around lens, and very sharp as well.
The FA 43 may have the sharpest center resolution of any K mount lens money can buy (as far as I know).

08-02-2008, 10:59 AM   #234
New Member
vindrum's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: moscow
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15
you can try Voigtlander Ultron-the same construction as 43 and 40mm long.very interestig lens
08-12-2008, 04:27 PM   #235
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
40/2.8 or 43/1.9 -- help!

I know this has been debated before, but I still can't decide. I can get a 40/2.8 for $175 or a 43/1.9 for ~$290. Lens tests give the nod to the 43mm, but in real world shooting there doesn't seem to be a huge difference between the two. The 40 gets superb reviews everywhere and is a little wider.

Help me decide!
08-12-2008, 05:23 PM   #236
Loyal Site Supporter

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,611
There are a few other pluses the 43 has.
Full frame lens, if you have old film camera or Pentax eventually decides to go FF you are set, with the 40 you are sunk.
The 43 focuses manually much more easily than the 40.
The 43 is a gem of a lens, the build quality is simply supurb.
The 43 is faster by 1.5 stops.

On the other hand...

The 40 is tiny and is better for street photography,
The 40 has quick shift
It's size and weight make it an excellent travel lens

NaCl(just to make your choice a little easier )H2O
08-12-2008, 05:30 PM   #237
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
I can get a 40/2.8 for $175 or a 43/1.9 for ~$290.
US? New? Those prices are considerably lower than any *legitimate* prices I've seen (eg, not from a scam dealer).

Lens tests give the nod to the 43mm
Not necessarily. The 43 does better in some respects, the 40 in others. But as you say, in the real world, the differences that show up in tests aren't always noticeable.

Anyhow, as someone who chose the 40 over the 43, I'd say the main factors were the price (of course), the fact that 40 is a little wider (which I wanted), quick shift focus (and I will not buy an AF lens without this feature), the fact that the DA40 is about the fastest focusing lens Pentax makes, and the fact that the DA40 really makes the camera a significantly smaller package, which appealed to me for the main purpose for which I bought the lens (for indoor "snapshot" use)

I couldn't have cared less about any claimed difference in IQ - CA, sharpness, or bokeh - as they both seemed worlds better than the kit lens. But of course, the fact that the DA40 is only f/2.8 gave me pause. Long pause. And after getting it and using on my DS, I have to say that *was* a bit of an issue, as it was *borderline* fast enough in many situations, and *occasionally* it just wasn't. On my K200D, though, SR is such that f/2.8 is virtually *always* good enough. It helps that I have no qualms about ISO 1600, of course, and that I shoot RAW and don't mind pushing exposure in PP as necessary. And that I've come to realize that any environment in which it is too dark to take a decent picture at ISO 1600 and f/2.8 is generally an environment in which neither increasing ISO (which was possible on the DS) nor opening the aperture further (which is possible on my A50/1.7) is going to give me a very compelling picture. If it's *that* poorly lit, the picture is going to look pretty lifeless no matter what. I'd rather turn on another lamp or use flash.
08-12-2008, 05:45 PM   #238
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
1.5 stops? I figured it was more like 1.1 or 1.2 (1.5 would be f/1.7 right?).

Looking at shots now... and so far I actually do prefer the 40 for its bokeh, the 43 has some funky looking bokeh that doesn't quite agree with me.

Thanks for the input!
08-12-2008, 05:49 PM   #239
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
Mark: it's a legit price (though it isn't entirely straightforward; I'll post the details if you are interested). Not Broadway Photo or any of its many incarnations!

I am looking to use the 40/43 not so much for indoor stuff, but as a compact walk-around prime. I have the 16-45/4 and love it to death (either they don't get enough attention or mine is an unusually good sample), but it'd be nice to have something more compact at times. That, and I love the 'restrictions' imposed by a prime lens. Helps foster creativity!

As for the speed, since I have a K20D I get shots I am happy with at ISO 3200 so unless I am shooting in a dimly lit room (and as you point out, at that point it'll probably be a dull shot regardless) that won't concern me...

Hmm, I am talking myself into the 40 it seems here.
08-12-2008, 06:02 PM   #240
Senior Member

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Suwanee, GA USA
Posts: 153
I went with the 40 as well. It is sharp across the whole frame at 2.8 and very to extremely sharp stopped down. I also have a SMC-F 50mm 1.7 so I didn't need the speed.

But that said at those prices I would get both.

  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
43mm, fa 43mm, filter, k-mount, ltd, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA 43mm f.19 LTD TOUGEFC Ask B&H Photo! 8 08-09-2010 03:35 PM
the FA 43mm DanLoc78 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 06-05-2009 10:59 AM
Where to get the 43mm? ankit Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 01-24-2008 06:42 PM
40 or 43mm chals Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-15-2007 02:37 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:55 AM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]