[DavidNEW]

Just curious. The 20-40 is on a SPECTACULAR sale right now and I could rebuild my partially stolen kit with it, saving almost $400.00 cdn.

What do people think?

Thanks,
Cameron

have the 20-40mm limited
&
Love,Love,Love It!!!!!!
It's Magic,and largely mis-understood, I believe

[Cerebum]

Mine is in the air and on its way. Its black which is fine as I have a black K3 and a frankly glorious silver and black KP

[UncleVanya]

I have always preferred black cameras. My Yashica rangefinder was my first 35mm and it was black. My Nikon F2a was black. And almost all of my newer cameras are black with the exception of a Panasonic GX-7. But I have a silver da 20-40 and a silver fa 31. These were originally purchased by others and my own choice probably would have been black. But I’m the end, The optics are the same and a good deal on a silver lens is better than a bad one on a black lens!

[Cerebum]

I have always preferred black cameras. My Yashica rangefinder was my first 35mm and it was black. My Nikon F2a was black. And almost all of my newer cameras are black with the exception of a Panasonic GX-7. But I have a silver da 20-40 and a silver fa 31. These were originally purchased by others and my own choice probably would have been black. But I’m the end, The optics are the same and a good deal on a silver lens is better than a bad one on a black lens!

I am the same. Mine is coming from a PF friend. I know it is an excellent copy so buying it is a no brainer. I love a back story so the fact that my 18-135mm & 35mm have shot in Japan, my 40mm, France, my 20-40mm Australia and my Zeiss tessar, Portugal is way more important than the colour. I would like a silver limited prime or two but I think the 20-40mm is actually nicer in black.

[JPT]

I got the 20-40 last summer, but I haven't had much chance to use as yet because of the pandemic. From what I've seen, it performs very nicely, with distinctive rendering. I also had a few of the primes before that.

The kits I've used for traveling are:
- 21mm, F35-70 (I didn't have many lenses at that point in time)
- 21mm, 40mm, 77mm
- 10-17, 21, 40, 77
- 15, 21, 40, 77

These were great kits, but there wee a lot of lens changes.

I now expect to be using the 20-40 with the 77 most of the time, and then either the 15 or the 10-17 at the wide end, depending on what I'm doing.

[uhfiwdsf]

I love my 20-40, IMO the Image quality is comparable with the DA primes even wide open. WR seal and the quiet DC motor add much more value to 20-40.

[Waffles]

I think the 20-40+70 is a perfect two-lens kit. Pretty sure Id be happy with just this couple for many years

[Theov39]

I tend to prefer just using the 21mm LTD as it is so compact, but the 20-40 is a beautiful lens and you can't go wrong with it, specially at that price.

Seems like BH Photo is having a sale on this lens too:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1014041-REG/pentax_23000_hd_pentax_da...981&

[troika]

I had a 40/2.8 ltd for a while and sold it. It was good, but not great. There was distortion at times and it's slow for a prime in that range.

I have the 20-40/2.8-4 and I'm much happier with it. Fast DC Autofocus, great rendering and though it is a stop slower at 40mm, somehow it doesn't bother me as much, because it's not a prime. Fast 50s are abundant if I really need a fast prime in that range. I currently have an F50/1.7 and a K50/1.4 and prefer them to the 40 ltd.


The pancake aspect was cool, but the balance is odd and I like holding the camera with my right hand under the lens, which you can't do with it.

Like others said, personal preference, but that's my experience.

[Cerebum]

I had a 40/2.8 ltd for a while and sold it. It was good, but not great. There was distortion at times and it's slow for a prime in that range.

I have the 20-40/2.8-4 and I'm much happier with it. Fast DC Autofocus, great rendering and though it is a stop slower at 40mm, somehow it doesn't bother me as much, because it's not a prime. Fast 50s are abundant if I really need a fast prime in that range. I currently have an F50/1.7 and a K50/1.4 and prefer them to the 40 ltd.


The pancake aspect was cool, but the balance is odd and I like holding the camera with my right hand under the lens, which you can't do with it.

Like others said, personal preference, but that's my experience.

Now, I love my 40mm limited but I do wonder how often it will be out once the 20-40 arrives

[3by2]

Now, I love my 40mm limited but I do wonder how often it will be out once the 20-40 arrives

In my Limited LTD opinion, they have different qualities, slightly different rendering and depth of field. I find the 40 better at isolating things and has a beautifully smooth tonality. I could well be imagining the latter, who knows. Don't know if you've got the HD or smc 40, I find the SMC slightly warmer than my HD 20-40. I could be imagining that too but I'm happy in my imaginary world so I don't care.

[UncleVanya]

In my Limited LTD opinion, they have different qualities, slightly different rendering and depth of field. I find the 40 better at isolating things and has a beautifully smooth tonality. I could well be imagining the latter, who knows. Don't know if you've got the HD or smc 40, I find the SMC slightly warmer than my HD 20-40. I could be imagining that too but I'm happy in my imaginary world so I don't care.

I too have an SMC 40 and the HD 20-40. I would echo your comments. The rendering isn’t identical, put part of it could just be my bias. I like both and use both.

---------- Post added 06-28-21 at 09:39 AM ----------

The pancake aspect was cool, but the balance is odd and I like holding the camera with my right hand under the lens, which you can't do with it.

Like others said, personal preference, but that's my experience.

I grew up holding cameras, “the right way” in that same basic way. But for me that way meant resting the camera body on my left hand with my fingers around the lens to focus and adjust aperture. This was most evident when using smaller lenses. With longer lenses the hand moved out a bit more and the body might no longer rest on the palm.

The point is the da 40 never felt odd since the main goal was to rest the weight of the body on my left hand.

[Cerebum]

In my Limited LTD opinion, they have different qualities, slightly different rendering and depth of field. I find the 40 better at isolating things and has a beautifully smooth tonality. I could well be imagining the latter, who knows. Don't know if you've got the HD or smc 40, I find the SMC slightly warmer than my HD 20-40. I could be imagining that too but I'm happy in my imaginary world so I don't care.

I did a single in with the 40mm, it was excellent. The sharpness and render is stunning. Mine, like the rest of my limited primes is an SMC. The only HD I have is the 55-300mm wr. I think the limited primes are exceptional whereas I am expecting the 20-40mm to be only brilliant, lol, but way more convenient. I also have the fa35mm f2 for when I need something faster. My son plays in a band and the lighting is generally awful. I am expecting the 20-40mm to be my walk around but the primes will always get lots of love

[troika]

I meant "left" hand, not right. It's hot here and my brain is slow.

You described it better. When taking a photograph the body rests on my left palm and the webbing between my left thumb and 1st finger cradle the lens or my fingers focus/zoom.

The 40 was a good lens, just didn't stick for me. A 43 had been an obsession, but the 35/2 is spectacular and a fast 50 seems more useful to me.

In truth, the 20-40 zoom is a bit of an odd duck too. Could be longer, could be wider, could be constant 2.8, but size, weight, balance, build quality, AF, weather sealing, and of course rendering are all stellar, so I give it a pass for those other things.

[Cerebum]

I meant "left" hand, not right. It's hot here and my brain is slow.

You described it better. When taking a photograph the body rests on my left palm and the webbing between my left thumb and 1st finger cradle the lens or my fingers focus/zoom.

The 40 was a good lens, just didn't stick for me. A 43 had been an obsession, but the 35/2 is spectacular and a fast 50 seems more useful to me.

In truth, the 20-40 zoom is a bit of an odd duck too. Could be longer, could be wider, could be constant 2.8, but size, weight, balance, build quality, AF, weather sealing, and of course rendering are all stellar, so I give it a pass for those other things.

I shoot urban stuff and the insides of churches and live around the 20-40mm range so it is a no brainer, especially for travel. I just can't wait to see if it lives up to the hype. I know its a good copy, so that isn't a worry