[david94903]

You could buy nothing. Hard, but possible.

Inconceivable!!!

[Bertrand3000]

Get the DFA 50 Macro. You need it.

It's a very sharp lens. And if you already have the DFA 100 Macro WR, please note that when it comes to macro, the DFA 50 Macro has something that the latest DFA 100 WR has not: the Clamp switch. What? Yes, because thanks to this switch, you can use Catch-in focus by setting the lens to MF (with the Clamp) and the body to AF ; you set the desired magnification before setting the Clamp, then you get closer slowly until camera gets focus and takes the shot just at the right time!

Oh, and there is nothing wrong with LBA.

[mikesbike]

That is the question-do you need it? You'd have to get closer for macro shots than your very fine DFA 100mm. My FF experience is from many years with 35mm film. The FA 35mm f/2 was designed for this, and I bought one back in the day, and still have it. I use it less with APS-C as it presents like a 50mm fov on FF.

I can tell you when I used it on my (FF) film bodies, I very seldom went back to using my 50mm primes. it was just so much more versatile of a FL but not so WA as to exaggerate perspective too much like a 28mm might. It is a great walk around general prime lens on a FF body, and for lighter carrying. I used it a lot. Now they have the HD version. I highly recommend it.

[Sailor]

Thanks, everyone, for all of the thoughtful and/or humorous replies.

I placed an order for a DFA 50/2.8 last night - given that I was buying a lens simply for the sake of doing so, its price and capability allow me scratch my itch with something I can enjoy for not much money.

I was tempted a bit by the DFA 15-30, but - as I said above - I seem to use lenses with this FOV sparingly, and the size and weight of the 15-30 would contribute to my tendency to leave it in the cabinet. Also, I have a sizable collection of DA lenses that includes the FE and others that allow me access a wide FOV with my K-3 in those rare times I feel the need to do so. Having said this, should Pentax introduce a FF wide angle zoom smaller, slower and cheaper than the 15-30, I admit I'd probably pull the trigger on one.

Jer

[aslyfox]

Thanks, everyone, for all of the thoughtful and/or humorous replies.

I placed an order for a DFA 50/2.8 last night - given that I was buying a lens simply for the sake of doing so, its price and capability allow me scratch my itch with something I can enjoy for not much money.

I was tempted a bit by the DFA 15-30, but - as I said above - I seem to use lenses with this FOV sparingly, and the size and weight of the 15-30 would contribute to my tendency to leave it in the cabinet. Also, I have a sizable collection of DA lenses that includes the FE and others that allow me access a wide FOV with my K-3 in those rare times I feel the need to do so. Having said this, should Pentax introduce a FF wide angle zoom smaller, slower and cheaper than the 15-30, I admit I'd probably pull the trigger on one.

Jer

sounds like a wise decision

would love to see some photos should chose to post some

[Bertrand3000]

Congratulations. I'm sure you will give this DFA 50 Macro the love it deserves. I got the same lens less than a week ago, and for the same reasons as you (i.e. no real reason except LBA)

[savoche]

I placed an order for a DFA 50/2.8 last night - given that I was buying a lens simply for the sake of doing so, its price and capability allow me scratch my itch with something I can enjoy for not much money.

Sometimes that's all the justification you need. When I got my K-1 it was simply "because I bloody well deserve it" - a good a reason as any, I'd say.

[bdery]

Then it dawned on me, I have - after all these years since my last film SLR - a FF camera but lack a classic 50 mm lens; the focal length is, of course, covered with my 28-105 and my FA 43 comes pretty close, but - hey - it seems only fitting to have a 50 for my K-1. It's OK to succumb to mysticism on rare occasion as long as you recognize you're doing just that.

There appear to be three choices. Of those, I owned an FA 50/1.4 in the past and found it to be more-or-less useless until stopped down to f/2.8, and the new DFA 50/1.4 is overkill (for me) in size and price. So . . . . . I think I'll get a DFA 50/2.8 macro; it's reasonably fast, has a macro function and - best of all - it's cheap, a mystical combination if I ever saw one.

Your 43 should serve you perfectly well, except that it's not a macro and that the corners will be sharper with the DFA50. So who am I to say you should be content with what you have?

That being said, if you're looking for absolutely the best IQ from any Pentax lens, like ever, the DFA 50 F1.4 is that lens. It lacks the pixie dust of the FA Limited, but it's brutally devoid of optical flaws.

[pathdoc]

Unfortunately, it took a header attached to the K-1,

It sacrificed itself for the greater good.

[mlt]

It sacrificed itself for the greater good.

True. So glad it acted as a cushion for the K-1. The D-FA 100 macro is terrific and really should be considered part of the Limited line with its metal body and appearance.