[chd]

I'm on the fence on picking up the HD FA 43mm F1.9 Limited prime lens, and I'm looking for thoughts on how much of an upgrade it would be...


I use the K-1, and I currently have the 28-105 kit lens, the 100mm 2.8 macro, and an older FA SMC 50mm 1.4.


The new 50mm 1.4 prime looks like a great lens, but it's pricey and (I gather) pretty big and heavy.


The 43mm 1.9 is a pretty old design, but it still seems to get good reviews, and it's smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the new 50mm; how much of an upgrade would it be from what I currently have?


Thanks!

[pepperberry farm]

have you looked at photos taken with the lens?

[pschlute]

I'm on the fence on picking up the HD FA 43mm F1.9 Limited prime lens, and I'm looking for thoughts on how much of an upgrade it would be...


I use the K-1, and I currently have the 28-105 kit lens, the 100mm 2.8 macro, and an older FA SMC 50mm 1.4.


The new 50mm 1.4 prime looks like a great lens, but it's pricey and (I gather) pretty big and heavy.


The 43mm 1.9 is a pretty old design, but it still seems to get good reviews, and it's smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the new 50mm; how much of an upgrade would it be from what I currently have?


Thanks!

My take:

the 28-105 (which I do not own) is a very sharp lens, covering a very significant FL. It is not a heavy lens to carry around

The FA 50mm 1.4 is an old school lens that I do own, and use it often when I want to travel light.

Now I own the FA 43mm (not the D-FA version), and again use it when I want to travel light. It is certainly a sharp lens. Some do not like the bokeh it produces.

Now to your question of "how much of an upgrade" will it be ? In my opinion it will not be an upgrade, it will be different. You have a capable zoom that covers that FL, and you have a faster 50mm. Get the 43mm by all means but I cannot see it will improve your photos.

I am firmly of the belief that in the hands of a good photographer a milk bottle selo-taped to the front of you camera will produce a great image. Do not think that a legendary lens will suddenly turn your images into contest winners. Only you can do that....and it matters not what lens you use

[chd]

have you looked at photos taken with the lens?

I have some, but I was curious to get opinions from folks who've used it more too. Sometimes it's hard (at least for me) to tell how much processing has been done for images posted online...

I have the "new" D FA* 50mm and it is fantastic but it is indeed a big and heavy lens. It never leaves my studio...

[mlag]

have you looked at photos taken with the lens?

What you can do here Advanced Search - Pentax User Photo Gallery and search for 43mm... (never did it before, so I had to look for it myself).

For me the attraction sits in the combination of compact size and image quality which made me buy this one... and the presence of an aperture ring. The other one drawing my attention was the more versatile 20-40mm but bigger and DA lens without aperture ring which put it on my waiting whish list...

[Belnan]

The FA 43 is an amazing lens. Buy a used one, if you don't like it resell it for the same price. But I don't think you will resell it.

[kiwi_jono]

Its always going to be subjective as to what you like to see in an image and definitely depends on what you like to shoot.

That said I'm lucky to have the FA 31, 43 and 77 limiteds and I really like them. I also have the DFA 28-105 which is a great lens but its not my most used lens.
I find the field of view of the FA43 is very useful on the K-1, its my most used lens, and like the lenses qualities - relatively fast at f1.9, really small, nice contrast / colours and I also like the bokeh rendering (ok in some scenarios it can be a bit busy but its much better than the DA40 IMO).
Basically the FA43 is always in my camera bag. Something else to consider: hopefully the quality control is good with the HD FA 43 but I know with the FA 43 there appears to be some less capable copies out there (with decentering and soft corners) but mine seems very usable at f1.9 - so if you get a chance to try before buying then thats a plus.

[btnapa]

The 43mm 1.9 is a pretty old design, but it still seems to get good reviews, and it's smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the new 50mm; how much of an upgrade would it be from what I currently have?

I have the lens. It has delivered many fantastic images when I was doing studio product photography. I did use the lens when I had my K3 and most of my experiences are with the K3/43 combo. I have tried it on my K1 and it is just as great but I have not done any paid or serious work with the K1 and 43 combo.

Looking at your lens line up, I think the focal length is covered. Personally, after buying the 28-105, my 31/43/77 Limiteds are collecting dust in my camera cabinet. The reason is that the 28-105 covers all the focal lengths and then some. It is slow but for most outdoor situations it delivers an image that is as good as my FA Limited lenses. Yes it is slow and that is the only downside. The fast focus and weather sealing of the 28-105 are additional bonuses over the FA Limiteds. Would I sell my Three Amigos anytime soon? Not a chance. They are legends. You do not sell legends! If you decide to get the 43 and start building your Limited Trio collection, be aware that wide-open all three have serious purple fringing issue that does not go away until you stop down to f4 or even smaller. Easy fix in Photoshop and Lightroom but it is still there nevertheless.

[mikesbike]

I too like the FA 43mm f/1.9 for its FOV being wider than 50mm lenses on my K-1 II. Same reason I liked it on my 35mm film bodies over 50mm lenses. Small, lightweight and useful for many scenes. Its being a fast lens, good for low light situations. Now there is an improved version with HD coatings, better against flair for improved clarity.

You might also consider the less expensive but excellent HD FA 35mm f/2 lens which will provide a moderate wide angle, letting yet more into your frame without being too wide so as to make more distant aspects of your scene become too far away. This lens performs exceptionally well, edge-to-edge, even wide open! One of the best faster primes for multiple scenarios, including low light uses.

The DFA 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 is a fine, versatile zoom lens for use in good lighting. Of course, it can do what zoom lenses do best- allowing instant framing for a variety of scenes without changing your location.

[Oakland Rob]

I have had the same internal debate more than once when I see a copy pop up because I LOVE the 40mm focal length more than 50mm. I had the DA 40mm and sold it, and still miss it.

But I can't justify the 43mm. All the user and PF staff shots I've seen have it quite soft in the sides, which is fine if that's what one wants. But I have other lenses that will do that, and if I crop out some of the side softness I'm quickly back to 50mm. I DO have the HD *1.4, and although it's huge it is a fantastic lens. And I have the 31mm, which I love. The softness I see in it's corners seem to be more tolerable to me, maybe because of the wider FOV. I realize this is highly subjective, but as you can see it might be tough to fit the 43mm into the similar lineup you have and get very different results.

I noted there's one for sale in the Marketplace here; maybe at that price it's worth a whirl. Good luck.

[wadge22]

I don't have the 43mm, so won't give too strong of an opinion on that.

I do have the DFA* 50mm, and it's a truly impressive lens. Sharp all over the frame, very nice bokeh and the aperture to be able to make use of it. Plus weather sealing, quickshift, silent internal focus motor (which is quite quick). Also, it is indeed large, but looks and balances great on a K1.
I would also note about that if you shop used, they have come down in price quite a bit from the original new price (I sometimes see them on ebay for under $800). Still a sizeable chunk of change, and a sizeable chunk of glass. It is a definite step up from an older 50mm lens, although those are of course very capable.


The 43mm Limited and the DFA* 50mm are very different lenses. Small, fairly affordable (esp used), "pixie dust" image qualities, oldschool heirloom quality build for the 43mm, vs large, fairly expensive, "modern high-end no-compromises" image qualities, and modern pro level build quality for the * 50mm. There are more contrasts than compares between the two, even though they are close in focal length. I would think your shooting style would tell you which of the two to consider buying, although not to say there's a wrong answer.

[nosliwmit]

I think there are a handful of debates about the 43mm Ltd in this forum, so there's plenty to read about it.

If someone told me I could only use one of my current lenses for the rest of my photo-taking days it would be the FA 43mm Ltd. Easy decision.

[aslyfox]

I'm on the fence on picking up the HD FA 43mm F1.9 Limited prime lens, . . .

The 43mm 1.9 is a pretty old design, but it still seems to get good reviews, and it's smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the new 50mm; how much of an upgrade would it be from what I currently have?

Thanks!

of course, there is the issue of " pixie dust " to consider

[Jonathan Mac]

There are a great number of reviews to check - look at both HD and SMC since they're virtually the same.

Personally, I have not found the SMC 43mm to be any better than the F 50/1.7 lens which is much, much cheaper. I wouldn't even say the build quality is better (it is better than the FA 50/1.7 though). If you don't need AF then the M 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.7 variants are both better optically and in build. The FA 43mm has no pixie dust, I'm afraid.

If I had a K-1 then I'd want a good, fast normal prime to use on it but I doubt that the 43mm is any better than the 50/1.4 you already have.