[zizo]

I have been reading excellent reviews for the FA 50mm f1.4 lens. I need such a lens to shoot in low light places. But with the 1.5 crop on DSLRs won't it be too narrow to use in places like churches, where you want to take a fairly wide image?
N.B: Do you know anything about the performance of the PENTAX SMC FA 43mm/F1.9 LIMITED? I've been told it is a great lens. How does it compare to the 50 mm f 1.4?

[Ole]

You should prabably consider something wider than even the 43mm. 24mm or 20mm. I have found 24mm quite useful (I use ISO 1600 and the 24-90mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom for curch photography).

You may still want the 50mm for capturing details.

On this site you'll find user opinions of Pentax lenses:

http://stans-photography.info/

[Sluggo]

The crop factor changes the function of the FA50-1.4 from a good general purpose lens to a good portrait lens. I just got mine a week ago (was one of the last to get one before all the stores ran out, apparently) and love it to pieces.

In addition to Ole's suggestions, in my opinion the kit 18-55 zoom does very well down to about the 21mm range when you have enough light. At 18mm you can get some vignetting, at least with a filter attached.

[joele]

I use the FA50/1.4 as a portrait lens and use the FA35/2 as I would the 50 on film...

The FA35/2 is an excellent lens in all respects..

[zizo]

You should prabably consider something wider than even the 43mm. 24mm or 20mm. I have found 24mm quite useful (I use ISO 1600 and the 24-90mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom for curch photography).

You may still want the 50mm for capturing details.

On this site you'll find user opinions of Pentax lenses:

http://stans-photography.info/

Well thanks for the help Ole, but i've been told that i need a lens with an aperture of at least 2 with 1.4 even better for low light. what do you think? as for 24mm zoom with ISO 1600, you get lots of noise don't you? Thanks for your help, i really value it.

[kjao]

Hi zizo

Well thanks for the help Ole, but i've been told that i need a lens with an aperture of at least 2 with 1.4 even better for low light. what do you think? as for 24mm zoom with ISO 1600, you get lots of noise don't you? Thanks for your help, i really value it.

The reason you need a f2 or bigger aperture (eg f1.7 or 1.4) is that a bigger aperture will allow more light in so the shutter speed will be faster, to reduce camera shakes caused by hand shakes. It will not introduce noise, or at least that's what I think. Under-exposing your shot will introduce more noise.

cheers
Kenny

[Ole]

Well thanks for the help Ole, but i've been told that i need a lens with an aperture of at least 2 with 1.4 even better for low light. what do you think? as for 24mm zoom with ISO 1600, you get lots of noise don't you? Thanks for your help, i really value it.

Ideally yes, you go with a fast lens. But the good thing about the DSLR is that you can bump up the ISO to 1600, even 3200 in lieu of using a faster lens. You can remove the noise in the photoediting software. Of course, you don't get quite the same quality as at ISO 200. On the other hand, with the fast lens you won't get any depth of field at f/1.4 and you will also lose some resolution.

I do have the 50 f/1.4; most often I use the 24-90 zoom at 24mm where it is a f/3.5 lens and bump the ISO.

It's really up to you. But saying that you "need" a fast lens is not quite right, you can make do with what you have, and then, perhaps when you from using the zoom get some experience in what focal length is your favorite, buy the right prime for you.

[Lucky Sky]

<<In addition to Ole's suggestions, in my opinion the kit 18-55 zoom does very well down to about the 21mm range when you have enough light. At 18mm you can get some vignetting, at least with a filter attached.>>

I took the suggestion of others and run my DA 18-55 at F/9 and seem to have cured the vignetting problem peculiar to that lens with a fairly wide open aperature.

Lucky Sky