[twilhelm]

Here's my 2 cents. I have entirely more lenses than I need, mostly primes. I recently purchased the 20-40 and am in love with it. It is my most used lens as the color, contrast, WR and the sharpness of the lens are phenomenal! Paired with the 50-135, I have a great walk around 2 lens kit that are like having a bag full of primes.

Good luck in your decision!

[BarryE]

As to the macro aspect, you might consider selling your 35mm LTD as well as the 21mm, and after getting your new kit, also acquiring the DFA 50mm f/2.8 macro to address such a need. It is not of the build quality of the 35mm LTD, but it does have a very high rep for top-notch sharpness, and adds onto the FL range of your kit instead of duplicating within it. Like the DA 35mm, it is of screw-drive design and does not have WR. It would also be very usable with your K-1, since it is a FF lens. The price is not bad either.

I agree about the DFA 50mm, Mike. I do have one and it is my favourite, and most successful lens by far on my K1. It is therefore an option for the K3, not WR, but it's there to complement.

Thanks all, you're nudging me to move to the 20-40. Strangely I see the limited range as a bonus, as it will still make me use it as a prime, with a little adjustment available.

I want to continue to rationalise my lenses (don't many of us) and the one for two option appeals especially as the sale of the 21 & 35 would fund it, as I'm trying to be price neutral for a while. I wonder how long 'while' will be ;-) ?

[Ishpuini]

I have been using two kits of lenses for many years. Albeit always on one camera body (APS-C only)...

1) A DA* kit including the DA*16-50/2.8 and the DA*50-135/2.8 as a base, complemented with UWA zoom (sig 8-16) and/or longer tele (FA*300/4.5 or DFA150-450 more recenty) depending on the need. This set is mostly for longer travel (where I might encounter dusty and wet circumstances) and important-to-get-the-shot photography where I won't have time to switch lenses. Basically situations where my preferred kit is not an option.
2) My preferred kit: fixed focal length lenses. This set used to consist of 5 limiteds, i.e. DA15, DA21, FA31, FA43 and FA77. Those covered all my general purpose needs. However after many years the set started evolving more recently. One element is the appearance of the excellent Samyangs, esp the 16/2 and OTOH the DA20-40. I got that one as a WR backup lens in the prime kit, but since adding it, my habits have changed considerably. Main victims are the two DA limiteds. I started leaving the DA21 at home first, and after getting the Samyang 16/2, use of the DA15 also dropped... I still take the FA limiteds though.

Recently I also purchased a DA35/2.8 macro (my B&M store was selling an as-good-as-new demo copy at an excellent price). I use this quite a lot, but mainly when visiting gardens or parks (which I do frequently). As a standard prime however its FOV is slightly too tight for my personal taste, but YMMV. I prefer the FA31's FOV. The DA20-40's centering around 30mm (when it is physically shortest) is actually just about perfect for me.

Comparing DA21+DA35 to DA20-40... I think I would take the DA20-40 in 80% of situations. Even in the above use case of gardens and parks, I would rather complement the DA35 macro with the DA20-40 than take the DA21. My DA21 only remains in my bag for situations where I might want a street photography lens and need my setup to be as small as possible... A rare case...

hth, Wim

[yorik]

I agree about the DFA 50mm, Mike. I do have one and it is my favourite, and most successful lens by far on my K1. It is therefore an option for the K3, not WR, but it's there to complement.

Thanks all, you're nudging me to move to the 20-40. Strangely I see the limited range as a bonus, as it will still make me use it as a prime, with a little adjustment available.

I want to continue to rationalise my lenses (don't many of us) and the one for two option appeals especially as the sale of the 21 & 35 would fund it, as I'm trying to be price neutral for a while. I wonder how long 'while' will be ;-) ?

If you're thinking about the 20-40 +DFA 50 as a good combination... How about the 20-40 and the DFA WR 100? There is a bigger gap (40 - 100), but also
a bigger possible range. And the 100 is not very large, certainly not heavy.

Don't want to make the choice too easy...

[mikesbike]

I agree about the DFA 50mm, Mike. I do have one and it is my favourite, and most successful lens by far on my K1. It is therefore an option for the K3, not WR, but it's there to complement.

Thanks all, you're nudging me to move to the 20-40. Strangely I see the limited range as a bonus, as it will still make me use it as a prime, with a little adjustment available.

I want to continue to rationalise my lenses (don't many of us) and the one for two option appeals especially as the sale of the 21 & 35 would fund it, as I'm trying to be price neutral for a while. I wonder how long 'while' will be ;-) ?

I am glad that you already have the DFA 50mm macro! Great that it is so useful for both your FF and APS-C needs. This fact would seem to simplify matters, at least potentially. Along with your DA 15mm LTD, it would make for a terrific kit combined with the DA 20-40mm LTD! If I should get a K-1, it would mainly be for primes and other shorter FL high-quality FF zoom lenses, which I already have.

@ twilhelm: I agree with all your comments regarding the DA 20-40mm LTD and DA* 50-135mm combo. It has become a favorite kit with my KP, along with the tiny DA15mm LTD in the front accessory pocket. I then have the capability of a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens on a FF body at a fraction of the weight and size, and a wonderful small-size additional kit for covering the range below 50mm. I have this tele zoom in a belt holster on one side of me, with the camera and 20-40mm in a holster with cross-shoulder strap and belt loop on the other side. This is also just large enough so if I switch lenses it will accommodate the tele lens on camera as well.

@ishpuini: You do have some very fine gear! I have the Limited primes you mention, except for the FA 31mm, which is yet another great lens. I don't use the FA 43mm very often, as fine as it is. I seem to go for wide-to slightly wide, or for short to longer tele. On 35mm film bodies it has gotten more use. It is one of those waiting for my first FF DSLR. The FA 77mm Limited is a marvelous lens, whether FF or APS-C!

[adjutant]

I own the 20-40 and it was definitely worth it. It's surprising how much of a difference such a small zoom range makes in usability. The 20-40 is nearly permanently attached to my K-3 II, it does everything. Well, nearly everything. I really wish there was a 10-20 Limited lens in the same style as the 20-40. Who wouldn't buy that! And a 40-120 Limited (f/2.8-4) for a Limited triple-trifecta. At events I'd rather have a touch wider than a touch longer compared to my 50-135, and I never shoot it at 2.8 at the long end anyways. The latter is a rather personal demand, so I'm not sure how many people would be such a lens.

Anyways, to go back to the subject of this thread. I'd definitely get a 20-40, especially over the 21 and 35 is macro is not needed.

[gm4life]

Well having the 15 HD and 35 HD Macro and the 20-40 HD all in my bag... The 20-40 is by far my most used lens of the three. It is really two primes in one! It has punchy colors, good contrast and awesome IQ. It is most always on my KP. I would never give up my dreamy 15 or tack sharp 35 but... If I had to keep one lens on my KP this would be it...

In fact I am making a trip to Colorado end of Sept. I am taking the body grip off the KP and traveling with the 20-40 only! I don't think I will even bring anything else, OK maybe I will slide the 15 and 55 * in but nothing else.

[normhead]

I'm making a note of how many people never shoot longer than 55mm.

My theory has always been, cover the range you want to shoot with zooms. Fill in the focal lengths you shoot most with lightweight primes. on a typical outing with he K-3 I'll take the DA 18-135 and the DA*60-250, with the 21, 40 XS and 50 macro and 1.4 and 1.7 TCs tucked into the bag. I can also take the Sigma 8-16, Pentax 10-17 fisheye , or for FF the FAJ 18-35 or Tamron 300 2.8, if I suspect the situation may warrant it.

Given my MO I the 20-40 is so narrow in range it really wouldn't contribute to the process. I'm still trying to get over the fact that people go out with less FL capability than a kit lens. My 18-135 does everything including pretty good pseudo macro for a one lens walk around. The idea of 20-40 as a walk around is so far out of my mind set it's hard for me to even offer a meaningful response.

So, I'll quit trying.

Thankfully, everyone's different. I don't have to understand it, but if it makes folks happy, then it's worth doing, at least for some people, even though I'd miss 3/4s of what I see and shoot using such a narrow range of FL.

My whole "take my picture " series is shot for the most part at 200mm or over. So is all my wildlife and bird photography.



https://www.flickr.com/photos/149541448@N08/albums/72157685849362036/with/34922943744/

[Scorpio71GR]

With the K-1 I find I cover almost everything I need with the DFA 28-105 and the FA 50 macro. Sometimes I bring DFA 100 Macro WR since it is so compact. The DFA 28-105 continues to constantly impress me. Something a lens has not done in quite awhile. What I really wish Richoh would do is get off their rump and release a DFA 24-105 f4. It would rarely leave my K-1.

[normhead]

With the K-1 I find I cover almost everything I need with the DFA 28-105 and the FA 50 macro. Sometimes I bring DFA 100 Macro WR since it is so compact. The DFA 28-105 continues to constantly impress me. Something a lens has not done in quite awhile. What I really wish Richoh would do is get off their rump and release a DFA 24-105 f4. It would rarely leave my K-1.

The 3D rendering of that lens ( the 28-105) borders on phenomenal. It is just excellent at creating the illusion of depth,micro contrast and highlighting fine detail. Tess is out guiding a trip right now and it and her Tamron 90 macro were the only two lenses she wanted to take. She did throw in the DA*200 and TC in case there was any wildlife, but it's a very capable performer, even on her K-5.

I also wanted a 24-105, but we've found the 28-105 to be so good, you sort of end up saying "don't change anything". I'll find a different solution for 24mm.

For some time now, I've only bought lenses that are FF capable. That's my biggest knock on the 20-40. I like to go out with both my K-3 and K-1. Just in terms of weight and convenience, I want lenses that will work on both. he 40XS and 50 macro and 60-250,are all awesome for that. It turns out, so is the 28-105.

[BarryE]

Ok folks thanks for your input. Decision made. I've ordered the 20-40 (oddly in silver - I came over all alternative). I'll expect to sell the 21 & 35 later this year if I haven't made a mistake. This will reduce my lens count down by one, which is the plan as I move to FF and re-purpose my use of my cropped format kit. Getting a little closer to finishing rationalising what I need/want, after the move to FF ... I hope ...

So the plan for a walkabout is for the K3 and 20-40, with 15 &/or 50 &/or 100 in pocket.

I kicked off another thread a couple of days ago (and received the usual help/guidance) on whether a K3/20-40 combo would be OK (weight wise) with a wrist strap. Seems the option is, probably. So with a birthday looming I'm going to get a wrist strap to hang the K3/20-40 from, rather than my usual neck strap. Let's see if this frees me up a little from my otherwise sloooow photo mindset ie - tripod/MUP/remote etc

I'm in the middle of a six day Open Studio event. One potential customer from this morning is interested in buying a print to use as a fake window/project in a basement. She's talking 6 foot wide !! Side lit with LEDs etc. Mmmm this will be a challenge ... May well need advice on this ...

[normhead]

I'm in the middle of a six day Open Studio event. One potential customer from this morning is interested in buying a print to use as a fake window/project in a basement. She's talking 6 foot wide !! Side lit with LEDs etc. Mmmm this will be a challenge ... May well need advice on this

I've always hoped someone would commission one of those. I'm sure I'd spend so much time getting it perfect I'd end up working for 25 cents an hour, but I'd still like to try.

But I have to ask, why would you buy a 20-40 if you are thinking of a K-1? I'm the opposite. My K-3 is my long glass wildlife/birds body, and my K-1 will be my wide angle/ landscape body. The 28-105 is wider on a K-1 than the 20-40 is on a K-3.

What do i do these days when I want 21 mm on a K-3? Shoot 35mm on a K-1.
What do i do when I want 750mm on a K-1? Shoot 500mm on a K-3.

[BarryE]

I've always hoped someone would commission one of those. I'm sure I'd spend so much time getting it perfect I'd end up working for 25 cents an hour, but I'd still like to try.

But I have to ask, why would you buy a 20-40 if you are thinking of a K-1? I'm the opposite. My K-3 is my long glass wildlife/birds body, and my K-1 will be my wide angle/ landscape body. The 28-105 is wider on a K-1 than the 20-40 is on a K-3.

What do i do these days when I want 21 mm on a K-3? Shoot 35mm on a K-1.
What do i do when I want 750mm on a K-1? Shoot 500mm on a K-3.

Too true about the 25 cents, Norm. It would be stupid to try and argue that the various shows etc I do are a career, but it helps supplement my very prematurely taken pension from IBM and I like the challenges it throws up, even at 20p an hour ...

The 20-40/K3 is all about a more carefree usage of my APSC kit. I don't do wildlife/birds (as well) as you do, preferring static subjects, for this I take my FF kit and heavy tripod etc, which allows my to blow my prints up. This kit is my 'professional' kit. The APSC kit is either for a few longer FL landscapes often in poor weather (50-135), or a wander around the countryside, lightly, not aiming for 'masterpieces', more for illustrative use and lucky finds. In the back of my mind is always the nagging fear that I might have the opportunity to capture a large printable shoot, but an 'inferior' lens fitted, which is why I went for the Limited. Not having to take a tripod or at least a monopod for these wanderings is probably where I need 'help'.

A 28-105 on the K-1 would serve a similar, walkabout option, but I know I would not be especially relaxed about using my main camera in this way, and anyway the K3 needs to get some exercise ... Irrational or what

[normhead]

Too true about the 25 cents, Norm. It would be stupid to try and argue that the various shows etc I do are a career, but it helps supplement my very prematurely taken pension from IBM and I like the challenges it throws up, even at 20p an hour ...

The 20-40/K3 is all about a more carefree usage of my APSC kit. I don't do wildlife/birds (as well) as you do, preferring static subjects, for this I take my FF kit and heavy tripod etc, which allows my to blow my prints up. This kit is my 'professional' kit. The APSC kit is either for a few longer FL landscapes often in poor weather (50-135), or a wander around the countryside, lightly, not aiming for 'masterpieces', more for illustrative use and lucky finds. In the back of my mind is always the nagging fear that I might have the opportunity to capture a large printable shoot, but an 'inferior' lens fitted, which is why I went for the Limited. Not having to take a tripod or at least a monopod for these wanderings is probably where I need 'help'.

A 28-105 on the K-1 would serve a similar, walkabout option, but I know I would not be especially relaxed about using my main camera in this way, and anyway the K3 needs to get some exercise ... Irrational or what

I took the K-3 out this morning. For a varielty of reason, closer focusing lenses, lighter to carry, more range on the APS_c zooms, you just get better walk around images with APS-c, unless at sunset or sunrise.

I suspect M 4/3 would be even better/

[BarryE]

I took the K-3 out this morning. For a varielty of reason, closer focusing lenses, lighter to carry, more range on the APS_c zooms, you just get better walk around images with APS-c, unless at sunset or sunrise.

Yup, I agree. The DR of the FF helps at extremes, but at a 'cost' - the cost often being creativity, at times too