[aslyfox]

I am surprised that no one recommended the DA 40 ltd or DA 40xs. I have the FA 35 and FA 31 LTD as well as the DA 15, 40, and 70. The lenses are all nice, but with the 15/70 and your budget the 40 fits in quite nicely. It also is exceptionally small and makes for a nice albeit long normal lens.

I have the DA 40mm 2.8 XS, I found an one mounted on a K - 01 at my local brick and mortar photography store in the " experienced " Pentax bin, asked the forum members about it and bought the lens, leaving the camera body behind ( couldn't afford both )

it is reported to be the smallest and lightest APS-C lens that Pentax produces and is at the top of its class ( a class of one admittedly )


" The SMC Pentax DA 40mm XS is based on the optical design of the SMC Pentax DA 40mm Limited, but its exterior is designed by Marc Newson so as to match the design of the K-01 mirrorless camera. The lens will work with Pentax DSLRs as well as with the K-01. "


Read more at: SMC Pentax-DA 40mm F2.8 XS Reviews - DA XS Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

" DA 40mm f/2.8 XS

Though extremely similar (perhaps even identical) to the DA 40/2.8 Limited in terms of specs and optical construction, the DA 40mm f/2.8 XS is even more compact (9.2mm vs 15mm thick) and more lightweight (1.8 oz. vs 3.2 oz.). "


Read more at: Pentax DA 35mm F2.4 vs 40mm XS vs 40mm Limited Review - Design and Handling | PentaxForums.com Reviews

"The DA 40 XS is by far the smallest and lightest APS-C lens currently being made, and is a brilliant street-shooting tool, much like its skinny-but-not-emaciated elder brother.

Read more at: Pentax DA 35mm F2.4 vs 40mm XS vs 40mm Limited Review - The Bottom Line | PentaxForums.com Reviews.

it does not qualify as a limited because it doesn't have an all metal body

" Its body is entirely plastic, aside from the somewhat surprising inclusion of a metal mount, but it feels very well built all the same.
The lens is so small that there’s not really much to comment on. The body is comprised solely of the focusing ring and a narrow fixed band that gives you something to grasp as you screw it onto the body. The nine aperture blades on this model are curved to produce a more circular opening as the lens is stopped down. This is one of the few significant differences between it and the earlier DA 40/2.8 Limited, and one whose effects we’ll examine during our bokeh test.


Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/da-35mm-40mm-limited-xs-shootout/design...#ixzz56bv9c5XE

I like it quite a lot

---

Last edited by aslyfox; 02-09-2018 at 04:50 AM.

[JASMAZ77]

I meant it to say primes for a Pentax, not pentax brand only primes

[JASMAZ77]

I have the DA 40mm 2.8 XS, I found an one mounted on a K - 01 at my local brick and mortar photography store in the " experienced " Pentax bin, asked the forum members about it and bought the lens, leaving the camera body behind ( couldn't afford both )

it is reported to be the smallest and lightest APS-C lens that Pentax produces and is at the top of its class ( a class of one admittedly )


" The SMC Pentax DA 40mm XS is based on the optical design of the SMC Pentax DA 40mm Limited, but its exterior is designed by Marc Newson so as to match the design of the K-01 mirrorless camera. The lens will work with Pentax DSLRs as well as with the K-01. "


Read more at: SMC Pentax-DA 40mm F2.8 XS Reviews - DA XS Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

" DA 40mm f/2.8 XS

Though extremely similar (perhaps even identical) to the DA 40/2.8 Limited in terms of specs and optical construction, the DA 40mm f/2.8 XS is even more compact (9.2mm vs 15mm thick) and more lightweight (1.8 oz. vs 3.2 oz.). "


Read more at: Pentax DA 35mm F2.4 vs 40mm XS vs 40mm Limited Review - Design and Handling | PentaxForums.com Reviews

"The DA 40 XS is by far the smallest and lightest APS-C lens currently being made, and is a brilliant street-shooting tool, much like its skinny-but-not-emaciated elder brother.

Read more at: Pentax DA 35mm F2.4 vs 40mm XS vs 40mm Limited Review - The Bottom Line | PentaxForums.com Reviews.

it does not qualify as a limited because it doesn't have an all metal body

" Its body is entirely plastic, aside from the somewhat surprising inclusion of a metal mount, but it feels very well built all the same.
The lens is so small that there’s not really much to comment on. The body is comprised solely of the focusing ring and a narrow fixed band that gives you something to grasp as you screw it onto the body. The nine aperture blades on this model are curved to produce a more circular opening as the lens is stopped down. This is one of the few significant differences between it and the earlier DA 40/2.8 Limited, and one whose effects we’ll examine during our bokeh test.


Read more at: Pentax DA 35mm F2.4 vs 40mm XS vs 40mm Limited Review - Design and Handling | PentaxForums.com Reviews

I like it quite a lot

Ok, everyone, I am trying to absorb everything like a sponge, but a lot of information to take it in. I have pretty much discounted everything below 35mm.
From what I have been reading some posts if I already have the SMC Pentax-D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro WR there is no point in getting the 35mm ltd, although it is highly recommended overall. I have read the lens comparison on the "fifty's" and would go for a SMC Pentax-DA 50mm F1.8 out of those, but it does not compare the DA*55 in that comparison so im left in the dark with that.
With regards to lenses that are "FF" full-frame support if I go for one of these like the "SMC Pentax-D FA 50mm F2.8 Macro" (as an example) does that mean it only works on a K-1, or will it still work on my K-3 and what will it do on my K-3 if it's designed for the K-1?
I think now the HD Pentax-DA 40mm F2.8 Limited is also in the mix but again that is FF rated. The review rated the DA 40mm ltd (green ring) the best on the comparo but it does not review it against the HD version, which people in the lens review section have rated the HD version lower then the older non-HD version.
Thanks

[BigMackCam]

With regards to lenses that are "FF" full-frame support if I go for one of these like the "SMC Pentax-D FA 50mm F2.8 Macro" (as an example) does that mean it only works on a K-1, or will it still work on my K-3 and what will it do on my K-3 if it's designed for the K-1?

Lenses designed for full-frame use project an image circle from the rear of the lens that is large enough to cover a full-frame sensor, with resolution and vignetting performance out to the borders that's considered good enough on that larger sensor. Some of the DA lenses designed for APS-C (such as the DA40 Limited) have an image circle large enough to cover a full-frame sensor, but the resolution and/or vignetting may not be acceptable to some users.

All of that said, you can use any lens designed for full-frame on your APS-C K-3. The field of view captured by the sensor will be cropped at the top, bottom and sides, because the sensor is physically smaller and captures less of the image circle projected by the lens.

EDIT: This "Cambridge in Colour" article explains how the cropped sensor will affect your images compared to full-frame...

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-09-2018 at 06:52 AM.

[aslyfox]

Lenses designed for full-frame use project an image circle from the rear of the lens that is large enough to cover a full-frame sensor, with resolution and vignetting performance out to the borders that's considered good enough on that larger sensor. Some of the DA lenses designed for APS-C (such as the DA40 Limited) have an image circle large enough to cover a full-frame sensor, but the resolution and/or vignetting may not be acceptable to some users.

All of that said, you can use any lens designed for full-frame on your APS-C K-3. The field of view captured by the sensor will be cropped at the top, bottom and sides, because the sensor is physically smaller and captures less of the image circle projected by the lens.

EDIT: This "Cambridge in Colour" article explains how the cropped sensor will affect your images compared to full-frame...

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

what he said

and you may want to look at this as well

Crop Factor Explained

Full Frame Sensor vs Crop Sensor: Which is Right For You?

for anyone wondering how lenses designed for the smaller APS-C sensor will work with the larger sensor of the FF K 1, follow this link

https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-k-1-review/available-lenses.html

[JASMAZ77]

Lenses designed for full-frame use project an image circle from the rear of the lens that is large enough to cover a full-frame sensor, with resolution and vignetting performance out to the borders that's considered good enough on that larger sensor. Some of the DA lenses designed for APS-C (such as the DA40 Limited) have an image circle large enough to cover a full-frame sensor, but the resolution and/or vignetting may not be acceptable to some users.

All of that said, you can use any lens designed for full-frame on your APS-C K-3. The field of view captured by the sensor will be cropped at the top, bottom and sides, because the sensor is physically smaller and captures less of the image circle projected by the lens.

EDIT: This "Cambridge in Colour" article explains how the cropped sensor will affect your images compared to full-frame...

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

I think I see what you mean?
Like the full-frame lens that displays the image onto the larger sensor will do the same with the aps-c sized sensor (which is smaller) but the edges of that full image will not be on there as they are (in my words) cut off around all edges? so if the edges of the full frame image are blurry they will not appear on the aps-c sensor as they will be cut off (cropped) as people say it. Is that correct?

[BigMackCam]

I think I see what you mean?
Like the full-frame lens that displays the image onto the larger sensor will do the same with the aps-c sized sensor (which is smaller) but the edges of that full image will not be on there as they are (in my words) cut off around all edges? so if the edges of the full frame image are blurry they will not appear on the aps-c sensor as they will be cut off (cropped) as people say it. Is that correct?

Exactly!

[JASMAZ77]

Exactly!

Thank you!! I was trying to word it correctly in this post and converting it from my mind how i was picturing it. I am not known for writing exactly how I feel and coming across the right way.

---------- Post added 02-09-18 at 11:13 PM ----------

Exactly!

From what I can read on other articles in the net if you like to take more landscape and architecture type photo's a full-frame camera and lens is better suited. Where as an aps-c camera would be more suited to sports, wildlife and nature as you can get maximum detail at longer distances.

[normhead]

Thank you!! I was trying to word it correctly in this post and converting it from my mind how i was picturing it. I am not known for writing exactly how I feel and coming across the right way.

---------- Post added 02-09-18 at 11:13 PM ----------


From what I can read on other articles in the net if you like to take more landscape and architecture type photo's a full-frame camera and lens is better suited. Where as an aps-c camera would be more suited to sports, wildlife and nature as you can get maximum detail at longer distances.

That being said, IMHO APS-c is the most versatile format. APS-c is better at landscape, than FF is at wildlife. IF it's choice, you can sell APS-c nature images. It's just way too hard to get FF wildlife images (at least in Pentax city, that's not at all true of the other major brands)., because of the slow frame rate and small buffer. At least in Pentax land. Canon has the 1Dx and Nikon the D4, which have great frame rates and buyers, and price tags. It's great when you do get them with an FF, it's just harder to get them with a K-1.

These days for me anyway the features I want are a nice solid build and WR.

What I take when I go out....
of the FA 50 macro, Sigma 70 macro, Tamron 90 macro and Pentax 100 macro, I usually take the 100 macro. It's WR, and it's the lightest of the group. But if it's going to be a one lens walk around I take the 50 macro. If I'm not going far and it's a bright sunny day, I like the Sigma 70 macro.

Based on my usage, my favourite is the 100 macro, if I was looking for a lens to also use for portraits it would be the Sigma 70 macro. The Tamron 90 macro, would probably be my only macro, if my wife hadn't decided it was hers. Buying the other 3 was completely a function of not having the Tamron and not wanting two copies of the same lens. But these are all great lenses. The Sigma is the heaviest and will give you the smoothest bokeh, but the others are within a hair of it.

But then most of my images are taken in the great outdoors. I'm sure a more indoor person would see this completely differently.

I generally only use sub ƒ2 lenses in the dark. I own 1, the FA 50 1.7, and it rarely gets used. Everyone should have 1. But I use it so rarely used it's hard to say I might like 2 or 3. Out doors, given a choice between 1.7 and macro, macro is needed more often.

[BigMackCam]

From what I can read on other articles in the net if you like to take more landscape and architecture type photo's a full-frame camera and lens is better suited. Where as an aps-c camera would be more suited to sports, wildlife and nature as you can get maximum detail at longer distances.

Yes, there's some truth to that...

The cropping effect of a smaller sensor gives the impression of being closer to the subject and hence making it bigger. That may be considered a disadvantage when you want to capture a very wide field of view (e.g. for a city-scape), or an advantage if you're photographing distant animals, birds, footballers etc.

That said, by choosing the right lenses and standing at an appropriate distance from your subject, there's no reason why you can't take great landscapes and architecture shots with an APS-C camera, and great wildlife shots with a full-frame camera too

[normhead]

The cropping effect of a smaller sensor gives the impression of being closer to the subject and hence making it bigger. That may be considered a disadvantage when you want to capture a very wide field of view (e.g. for a city-scape), or an advantage if you're photographing distant animals, birds, footballers etc.

Accept for the part where the Sigma 8-16 on APS_c is a wider FOV than anything you can get for the K-1. If I want really wide, I take the Sigma and K-3. The 15-30 on a K-1 is massive compared to the 8-16 on a K-P as well. But again, that's just Pentax.

You will have more pronounced distortion with the wider lens on the smaller sensor, but most of the time that's not relevant, in that the picture looks just as good either way.

[KC0PET]

Accept for the part where the Sigma 8-16 on APS_c is a wider FOV than anything you can get for the K-1. If I want really wide, I take the Sigma and K-3. The 15-30 on a K-1 is massive compared to the 8-16 on a K-P as well. But again, that's just Pentax.

You will have more pronounced distortion with the wider lens on the smaller sensor, but most of the time that's not relevant, in that the picture looks just as good either way.

I understand the Sigma 8-16 is a fine lens and hope to own one some day. I recently bought the Samy (Rokinon) 10mm f/2.8 and I am having fun with it. APS-C is certainly capable of wide landscapes at least from an amateur point of view (IMO). I have also had success with the DA15 (that JASMAZ77 has) in that regard.

Rokinon 10mm:



DA15:



Anyway I know I am on a rabbit trail from the original topic...

[pres589]

Accept for the part where the Sigma 8-16 on APS_c is a wider FOV than anything you can get for the K-1. If I want really wide, I take the Sigma and K-3. The 15-30 on a K-1 is massive compared to the 8-16 on a K-P as well. But again, that's just Pentax.

You will have more pronounced distortion with the wider lens on the smaller sensor, but most of the time that's not relevant, in that the picture looks just as good either way.

This is one of the reasons why I think it's a shame both Sigma and Tamron have quit bringing new lens designs to market with a k-mount attached. The new Tamron 10-24 is supposed to be much better than the old one that was sold in k-mount, and the Sigma 8-16 seems to have some real fans here (whom I trust when they share their opinion). I'm glad that Mother Ricoh is putting effort behind the DA* 11-18.

[aslyfox]

I think I see what you mean?
Like the full-frame lens that displays the image onto the larger sensor will do the same with the aps-c sized sensor (which is smaller) but the edges of that full image will not be on there as they are (in my words) cut off around all edges? so if the edges of the full frame image are blurry they will not appear on the aps-c sensor as they will be cut off (cropped) as people say it. Is that correct?

" By George I think [ he ] 's got it "

[JASMAZ77]

Those are some great photo's KC0PET I will try and get some done like that on my 15mm ltd one day