[mkawada]

I currently have a K100D Super with the FA 35mm F2 and DA 50-200mm F4-5.6.

Debating on one of the following options:

1) Purchase 21mm F3.2 limited (21, 35, 50-200 covered)
or
2) Sell 50-200mm and purchase 70mm F2.4 limited and 21mm F3.2 limited (21, 35, 70)
or
3) Sell 35mm F2 and purchase DA* 16-50mm (16-50, 50-200)

[troyz]

Of the three options I'd recommend (1) for now; you can always swap out the 50-200 for the 70/2.4 (or another lens of comparable focal length) later if you strongly prefer primes and never use the long end of the 50-200.

I wouldn't sell the 35/2.0; it's very useful to have at least one moderately fast lens for indoor work.

[HermanLee]

mkawada,
are you sure 21Ltd will be enough for you? make sure that it is the right focal length for your need first.
Consider the new Pentax DA17-70mm/4 which will come out soon.
I have enough primes to play with but for walkaround I'm still thinking to get the Sigma 17-70 since I only have K100D not the super one, so I can't use Pentax DA17-70.

Unless I get myself a weather sealed body like K200D/K20D, maybe I'll consider DA*16-50.

[knyghtfall]

I'm a primes person, so I would choose to have 3 prime lenses instead of the zoom plus I seldom shoot that long, so have no need for the 55 - 200 zoom.

But that's just me - for you, do you prefer the sharpness of a primes lens over the versatility of a zoom? Actually, you should get an outfit that shoots your shooting style, so just go for whichever makes you comfortable. Unless you really need the image quality, then you should go for primes.

[fearview]

buy 16-45 f/4 .. buy 50 f/1.4 ..sell 35 f/2



i dont need zoom lens in 'kit focal' to be able open 2.8, 50 1.4 needed so i can shoot low light while having dinner with a friend.
you can keep 50-200 if you like shooting long. but if you dont, sell it for fa 77 while it still last.

[gkopeliadis]

Right now (to be precise for 6 months now) I need a zoom in the 70-200mm range, f2,8 for sports coverage under low light conditions. That puts any other thoughts* to the far background.


* except the heretic thought that if I was on the Canikon trains I would have some solutions already

[jeff1101]

Buy the 21. That way you have 2 very useful primes 21 and 35 and a long zoom for those instance where you need 50-200.

I have 2 lenses the 24 F2.8 prime and the kit lense 18-55. Although I often use the 24 because it is fast, there are times I need wide so I use the 18-55.

You might consider buying an additional lens to cover 16-20 for those times that 21mm is still not wide enough.

[mkawada]

Thanks for all the responses!

So lately (and probably for a while) I've been doing a hike a week here in Hawaii. We've started a little hike group of friends. The 35mm sometimes can't get as wide a shot as wanted, but far exceeds the 50-200mm, which was way too narrow and on the larger side.

I think I've found my answer--the 21mm: pancake size and more than 33% wider FOV than the 35mm, not to mention the 3.2 is probably more than enough!

I'll think about the telephoto side later, if/when my needs change. Can't really complain about the 50-200mm...it's quite compact for a zoom!

[heatherslightbox]

Instead of a 21, how about picking up a DA12-24/4. You would get more versatility in focal length and there's only a .8 difference in lens speed at 21mm.

Instead of getting a 70, you might consider getting a *50-135/2.8, again for greater versatility and speed. If you don't anticipate needing to go beyond 135mm in length, you can always get rid of the 50-200.

While it's not as fast as your 35/2, you might consider getting a DA35/2.8 macro. Granted, it isn't as fast as the 35/2, but it's macro abilities make it a versatile addition to your kit.

You also might consider picking up a fast 50, if you plan on doing any low-light shooting.

Your kit would look like this:
DA12-24/4
FA35/2 or DA35/2.8 macro
50/1.4 (or 1.7)--manual or autofocus
DA *50-135/2.8

All in all, a good fast kit.

HTH,
Heather

[Peter Zack]

I agree with heather. The Pentax or Sigma 12-24mm's are both great lenses and not that much slower. In daylight landscape work, it doesn't matter anyway. Sharp and a nice wide FOV.

[CheddarGav]

If there is a situation where you can end up with the 21 and 70, do it! Go for class over range

[gkopeliadis]

Go for a balance/compromise with class over range

[osv]

no one can really advise you on this, because we don't know what your subject matter typically is.

buy glass based on what you will be shooting, and what you'll be doing with the pics... poster-sized prints mean prime glass, etc.

[philbaum]

Since i got the Sigma 10-20, i don't use my DA-21 much, just as sharp at all FL.

You could debate the color rendition but i like it a lot and it goes down to 10mm.

Offers a lot of creativity options you don't have with a DA-21. Nothing against the 21, i haven't and probably won't sell mine.

[creampuff]

You've not mentioned any budget. Presumably you're looking for something wider than your 35mm. I'd suggest the DA 16-45, which makes a good combination with what you already have and it is very affordable. The DA 21 is good if you want something compact but it may not be wide enough.

The DA* 16-50 or DA 12-24 are options as well but will cost quite a bit more. I find the DA 50-200 a compact and versatile lens. Don't think it is worthwhile to change it with the DA 70.