Limited Primes or 20-40?

**paulpines** · 02-17-2017, 03:57 PM

Hello Pentax Universe,

I've been bitten by the Limited bug. I'm not sure if I should get them individually or get the 20-40 to start with. I know the primes are awesome, but I also like the convenience of the zoom in that range. I will be looking at the da70 as well. The da15 will be last because I don't do a lot of wide shots.

Also, are the HD versions a lot better than the SMC versions?

What to do?

VoiceOfReason · 02-17-2017, 04:03 PM

I'd do the 20-40 because it covers the 21 and 40, and some in between, is WR, and still pretty small.

Na Horuk · 02-17-2017, 04:26 PM

I have SMC DA 21mm and DA 40mm XS. Both super compact, snappy AF, nice contrasts and colors. Not super fast aperture, but the 20-40mm doesn't have superfast aperture either. The 20-40mm has an advantage that it is WR and you don't have to switch lenses. Choose your priorities. I enjoy primes, don't really use any zooms.

I think there is no point in paying extra for HD versions, but eh.

**Wingincamera** · 02-17-2017, 04:31 PM

I have the 20-40 and use it a lot. I also have the 15, 35, 50 and 70 which all get used. I believe the primes are a little sharper and focus faster and more accurate than the 20-40, especially in dim light. The 20-40 is sharp enough for me and is WR when needed. I would get the 20-40 just for the convenience and being WR. A few years ago while on a motorcycle trip I had brought my primes plus the 18-135 which is WR. Because of the wet, foggy and sometimes windy weather the WR lens stayed on the camera the whole time. It's difficult to change lens while sitting on a bike in the rain.

Groove · 02-17-2017, 04:45 PM

I had the 21 and sold it, and now have the 40 and the 20-40. At 20mm the 20-40 stopped down is as good as the 21. I have a GR as my small camera, so the 40 on the K3 is rarely used. The 20-40 has good but not great IQ. Its advantages are mostly physical - handling, balance, WR. It feels "perfect" on the K3.

wed7 · 02-17-2017, 04:56 PM

get the 20-40 (because that is what you want and you are comfortable with it) then 100 macro (portrait and macro since you lose the 35 macro if you get the 20-40) and finally the 15. You get 2 WRs and a macro as well without the size/bulk issues. You'll be pretty covered with those.

I included the 100 Macro beacuse it renders beautifully as limited lens.

but my sig begs to differ as I love my 21

pathdoc · 02-17-2017, 05:16 PM

I have all the DA Limited primes, and a year ago I took the 15, 21, 40 and 70 to a big city (Melbourne, Australia). The 21 did most of the work, the 40 next, the 70 a little and the 15 did a very few shots that no other lens I owned at the time could have managed.

I think it fair to say that if I had owned the 20-40, it might in that situation never have come off my K-5, and for a long time before I found this forum I used the DA40 for almost everything. But the reason I will not buy it (and shed the DA21 and DA40 in the process) is that my intended next DSLR is the K-1 (and the 20-40 isn't full frame) while my current other DSLR is the *istDS (which can't drive the DC AF).

I am far more likely to trade both my SMC-M 40 and my DA40 in towards the FA43 at some future time; just not yet.

jddwoods · 02-17-2017, 05:27 PM

I have the primes all of them SMC except the 40 which is the HD version. I do use them all but the 21 and 40 get the most use mainly because they are so small and lightweight. I like the idea of the Limited zoom for quiet autofocus and WR but not enough that I would give up the primes for it. switching between two primes is not a big inconvenience and the 21 and the 40 take up a lot less space and are lighter than any zoom, Lately my travel kit is the DA 15, 21 and 40 Limiteds and the 55-300 PLM. This covers almost anything and is not a lot to lug around with my K-3.

**jlstrawman** · 02-17-2017, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by paulpines

What to do?

You could check the reviews on PF.

Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

madphys · 02-17-2017, 05:41 PM

With the HD versions it is quite impossible to get a lens flare - if you think about it - it seems good, but sometimes you just desperately want that flare.
In my mind the only advantage of the 20-40 is weather seals - other than that it is a bulkier lens that doesn't add much to a variety of focal lengths one might need. Yes - when you work at close distances - I don't know - some wedding shots then it might be of some importance but then again F4 at 40 mm and so so AF + rather many reports about not so splendid copies. 21 and 35 macro - that is my choice. If I need a wide shot - I go with the 21 and it doesn't matter if I can or cannot zoom to 30 mm - at these focal lengths it is not that big of a difference. Primes are simpler in design, they don't have a built in motor which can fail and I suspect Pentax will continue to support the legacy AF approach. So with primes you would have less problems, better image rendering. But keep in mind - this is how I look at these things...There was a time when I also wanted a 20-40, but then I tried it and landed - wasn't meant for me.

**UncleVanya** · 02-17-2017, 05:43 PM

I own the DA SMC 15 and 40 ltds, and the FA 31 ltd. Finally I own the DA HD 20-40 ltd. I recently acquired the DA* 16-50 as well.

The 20-40 seems like it would not be as useful as it turns out. The fact that it goes wider than normal and longer than normal makes it a bit more useful than you might think. It isn't far off what the 35-70 did for film cameras vs. a 35mm a 50mm for example. Also it is worth noting that the primes are f/3.2 and 2.8 in the reverse order of the zoom which is 2.8 at the 20mm end and f/4 at the long end.

Personally I find I love the DA 40 as well - but I'm a bit of a lens freak.

Outis · 02-17-2017, 07:54 PM

I have the 20-40, the 21, the 31, and the 40. I wrote a lengthy comparison in the Lens Reviews section (see my review of the 20-40), but to sum up:

-- They're all great, and they all have a place in my bag because they fulfill different niches. I take the 20-40 on trips when I can only have one lens, when I need the weathersealing, and when I need that extra stop at 20mm. I use the 21 when I want a walkaround prime, the 31 for portraits and museums, and the 40 for portraits and as a walkaround lens.

As far as quality comparison goes:

-- The 20-40 is sharper than the 21 but has more distortion.

-- The 31 is sharper than the 20-40.

-- The 40 is sharper than the 20-40 and the 20-40 has heavy vignetting.

At some point I made a bokeh comparison album, but the bottom line is that I couldn't see much of a difference.

Honestly, the differences in IQ aren't that important unless you are making giant wall prints. I would decide based on form factor and weather sealing.

mikeSF · 02-17-2017, 08:00 PM

Nothing beats the FA31 in its range, so if you want the best possible IQ, get the primes. Otherwise, the 20-40 is a sweet convenient range of focal lengths.
I can't imagine it beats the DA21, but haven't compared them.

Nick Siebers · 02-17-2017, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by mikeSF

Nothing beats the FA31 in its range, so if you want the best possible IQ, get the primes. Otherwise, the 20-40 is a sweet convenient range of focal lengths.
I can't imagine it beats the DA21, but haven't compared them.

I like the images from my 20-40 as much as the ones I got with a DA21. My limited zoom is a little weaker at the long end, but really quite good short. I don't have reason to put on the 31 unless I am really going for maximum quality. And with that said, the 31 tens to be a bit more temperamental - my best shots ever are mostly with it, but I get some that I am not that happy with. I am sure it is user error, but the 20-40 seems to give more even results.

Right now I have found the 20-40 and the 77 cover almost everything I tend to shoot. But I have a bunch more, just because.

Outis · 02-17-2017, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by Nick Siebers

I like the images from my 20-40 as much as the ones I got with a DA21. My limited zoom is a little weaker at the long end, but really quite good short. I don't have reason to put on the 31 unless I am really going for maximum quality. And with that said, the 31 tens to be a bit more temperamental - my best shots ever are mostly with it, but I get some that I am not that happy with. I am sure it is user error, but the 20-40 seems to give more even results.

Right now I have found the 20-40 and the 77 cover almost everything I tend to shoot. But I have a bunch more, just because.

I concur-- the 20-40 really is stronger on the short end. The 31 and 40, on the other hand, are two of the sharpest lenses I own. I can't think of any way I could improve either of them.

02-17-2017, 03:57 PM	#1
paulpines Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Toronto Posts: 64	Limited Primes or 20-40? Hello Pentax Universe, I've been bitten by the Limited bug. I'm not sure if I should get them individually or get the 20-40 to start with. I know the primes are awesome, but I also like the convenience of the zoom in that range. I will be looking at the da70 as well. The da15 will be last because I don't do a lot of wide shots. Also, are the HD versions a lot better than the SMC versions? What to do?

02-17-2017, 04:56 PM	#6
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421	get the 20-40 (because that is what you want and you are comfortable with it) then 100 macro (portrait and macro since you lose the 35 macro if you get the 20-40) and finally the 15. You get 2 WRs and a macro as well without the size/bulk issues. You'll be pretty covered with those. I included the 100 Macro beacuse it renders beautifully as limited lens. but my sig begs to differ as I love my 21 Last edited by wed7; 02-17-2017 at 05:04 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Limited 20-40 - Sample Images requested	Blacknight659	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	10-05-2016 08:30 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA 20-40 Limited DC WR	TroutHunterJohn	Sold Items	3	02-01-2016 05:35 AM
Pop Photo test on Limited 20-40	lesmore49	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	04-29-2015 07:03 AM
Suggestions for Pentax 20-40 Limited Filters	Finchj	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	5	03-21-2015 03:05 AM

02-17-2017, 04:03 PM	#2
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	I'd do the 20-40 because it covers the 21 and 40, and some in between, is WR, and still pretty small.

02-17-2017, 04:26 PM	#3
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	I have SMC DA 21mm and DA 40mm XS. Both super compact, snappy AF, nice contrasts and colors. Not super fast aperture, but the 20-40mm doesn't have superfast aperture either. The 20-40mm has an advantage that it is WR and you don't have to switch lenses. Choose your priorities. I enjoy primes, don't really use any zooms. I think there is no point in paying extra for HD versions, but eh.

02-17-2017, 04:31 PM	#4
Wingincamera Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Pine Haven, Wyoming Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,182	I have the 20-40 and use it a lot. I also have the 15, 35, 50 and 70 which all get used. I believe the primes are a little sharper and focus faster and more accurate than the 20-40, especially in dim light. The 20-40 is sharp enough for me and is WR when needed. I would get the 20-40 just for the convenience and being WR. A few years ago while on a motorcycle trip I had brought my primes plus the 18-135 which is WR. Because of the wet, foggy and sometimes windy weather the WR lens stayed on the camera the whole time. It's difficult to change lens while sitting on a bike in the rain.

02-17-2017, 04:45 PM	#5
Groove New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 23	I had the 21 and sold it, and now have the 40 and the 20-40. At 20mm the 20-40 stopped down is as good as the 21. I have a GR as my small camera, so the 40 on the K3 is rarely used. The 20-40 has good but not great IQ. Its advantages are mostly physical - handling, balance, WR. It feels "perfect" on the K3.

02-17-2017, 05:16 PM	#7
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	I have all the DA Limited primes, and a year ago I took the 15, 21, 40 and 70 to a big city (Melbourne, Australia). The 21 did most of the work, the 40 next, the 70 a little and the 15 did a very few shots that no other lens I owned at the time could have managed. I think it fair to say that if I had owned the 20-40, it might in that situation never have come off my K-5, and for a long time before I found this forum I used the DA40 for almost everything. But the reason I will not buy it (and shed the DA21 and DA40 in the process) is that my intended next DSLR is the K-1 (and the 20-40 isn't full frame) while my current other DSLR is the *istDS (which can't drive the DC AF). I am far more likely to trade both my SMC-M 40 and my DA40 in towards the FA43 at some future time; just not yet.

02-17-2017, 05:27 PM	#8
jddwoods Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Newark, Delaware Posts: 1,035	I have the primes all of them SMC except the 40 which is the HD version. I do use them all but the 21 and 40 get the most use mainly because they are so small and lightweight. I like the idea of the Limited zoom for quiet autofocus and WR but not enough that I would give up the primes for it. switching between two primes is not a big inconvenience and the 21 and the 40 take up a lot less space and are lighter than any zoom, Lately my travel kit is the DA 15, 21 and 40 Limiteds and the 55-300 PLM. This covers almost anything and is not a lot to lug around with my K-3.

02-17-2017, 05:39 PM	#9
jlstrawman Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Midwest US Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,058	Originally posted by paulpines What to do? You could check the reviews on PF. Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

02-17-2017, 05:41 PM	#10
madphys Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Riga, Latvia Posts: 98	With the HD versions it is quite impossible to get a lens flare - if you think about it - it seems good, but sometimes you just desperately want that flare. In my mind the only advantage of the 20-40 is weather seals - other than that it is a bulkier lens that doesn't add much to a variety of focal lengths one might need. Yes - when you work at close distances - I don't know - some wedding shots then it might be of some importance but then again F4 at 40 mm and so so AF + rather many reports about not so splendid copies. 21 and 35 macro - that is my choice. If I need a wide shot - I go with the 21 and it doesn't matter if I can or cannot zoom to 30 mm - at these focal lengths it is not that big of a difference. Primes are simpler in design, they don't have a built in motor which can fail and I suspect Pentax will continue to support the legacy AF approach. So with primes you would have less problems, better image rendering. But keep in mind - this is how I look at these things...There was a time when I also wanted a 20-40, but then I tried it and landed - wasn't meant for me.

02-17-2017, 05:43 PM	#11
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,381	I own the DA SMC 15 and 40 ltds, and the FA 31 ltd. Finally I own the DA HD 20-40 ltd. I recently acquired the DA* 16-50 as well. The 20-40 seems like it would not be as useful as it turns out. The fact that it goes wider than normal and longer than normal makes it a bit more useful than you might think. It isn't far off what the 35-70 did for film cameras vs. a 35mm a 50mm for example. Also it is worth noting that the primes are f/3.2 and 2.8 in the reverse order of the zoom which is 2.8 at the 20mm end and f/4 at the long end. Personally I find I love the DA 40 as well - but I'm a bit of a lens freak.

02-17-2017, 07:54 PM	#12
Outis Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Cambridge, MA Posts: 935	I have the 20-40, the 21, the 31, and the 40. I wrote a lengthy comparison in the Lens Reviews section (see my review of the 20-40), but to sum up: -- They're all great, and they all have a place in my bag because they fulfill different niches. I take the 20-40 on trips when I can only have one lens, when I need the weathersealing, and when I need that extra stop at 20mm. I use the 21 when I want a walkaround prime, the 31 for portraits and museums, and the 40 for portraits and as a walkaround lens. As far as quality comparison goes: -- The 20-40 is sharper than the 21 but has more distortion. -- The 31 is sharper than the 20-40. -- The 40 is sharper than the 20-40 and the 20-40 has heavy vignetting. At some point I made a bokeh comparison album, but the bottom line is that I couldn't see much of a difference. Honestly, the differences in IQ aren't that important unless you are making giant wall prints. I would decide based on form factor and weather sealing.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-17-2017, 08:00 PM	#13
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	Nothing beats the FA31 in its range, so if you want the best possible IQ, get the primes. Otherwise, the 20-40 is a sweet convenient range of focal lengths. I can't imagine it beats the DA21, but haven't compared them.

02-17-2017, 08:29 PM	#14
Nick Siebers Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,165	Originally posted by mikeSF Nothing beats the FA31 in its range, so if you want the best possible IQ, get the primes. Otherwise, the 20-40 is a sweet convenient range of focal lengths. I can't imagine it beats the DA21, but haven't compared them. I like the images from my 20-40 as much as the ones I got with a DA21. My limited zoom is a little weaker at the long end, but really quite good short. I don't have reason to put on the 31 unless I am really going for maximum quality. And with that said, the 31 tens to be a bit more temperamental - my best shots ever are mostly with it, but I get some that I am not that happy with. I am sure it is user error, but the 20-40 seems to give more even results. Right now I have found the 20-40 and the 77 cover almost everything I tend to shoot. But I have a bunch more, just because.

02-17-2017, 09:30 PM	#15
Outis Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Cambridge, MA Posts: 935	Originally posted by Nick Siebers I like the images from my 20-40 as much as the ones I got with a DA21. My limited zoom is a little weaker at the long end, but really quite good short. I don't have reason to put on the 31 unless I am really going for maximum quality. And with that said, the 31 tens to be a bit more temperamental - my best shots ever are mostly with it, but I get some that I am not that happy with. I am sure it is user error, but the 20-40 seems to give more even results. Right now I have found the 20-40 and the 77 cover almost everything I tend to shoot. But I have a bunch more, just because. I concur-- the 20-40 really is stronger on the short end. The 31 and 40, on the other hand, are two of the sharpest lenses I own. I can't think of any way I could improve either of them.