[mike.hiran]

I'd be inclined to say that given what you alreasdy have, the most flexible lens would be something wide and fast. I think Sigma makes a couple fast primes that I think some people have been happy with, but if you stick w/ pentax, then the 35/2 would be my choice. If you're going to be taking street shots and if the markets/ streets are anything like I've seen in other countries with a dense population, things will be cramped at times so the wider the better. the sigma 24/1.8 sells on amazon for $350, and the sigma 28/1.8 sells for $305 right now. Given the choice, I'd go w/ the 24 assuming image quality between the two would be roughly equal.

My feeling is that if you're going to accept a 2.8, you'd be much better served by a zoom like the 17-50/2.8 by tamron or sigma. The only downside to the zooms would be size and weight, but if you've only got the two lenses, we're not talking about a heavy kit. Granted, the primes would likely give you some benefits, but if it were me and if I had the k20, km, k100/110 or k200, I'd probably go w/ the zoom just because temples and markets, you're gonna want something very wide, but reasonably fast.

[Marc Sabatella]

here you said it yoursef, one don't often/always have several minutes to wait for your subject to becume relatively still, and that's when faster lenses come to play...

True again. This is where you get into another question - just how important is it that you not "miss" a shot, and how acceptable is it to pop the flash every once in a while if you feel the risk of missing the shot is too great to stand. How you feel about those issues will also influence your decision.

I fully admit I might be unusual in not really caring if some shots are missed. There will always be other shots, and I might just as easily have missed the shot due to being in the wrong place or looking the wrong direction or having the wrong lens mounted, as well as due to too shallow DOF (which, I think you will admit, *can* be an issue when shooting non-stationary subjects). But then, I'm not doing this professionally, either, so there's nothing at stake. Similar issues comes up regarding prime versus zoom, of course.

I do think I'm *more* reluctant than the average shooter to resort to flash, but I will do so when it seems necessary.

This combination of attitudes makes me OK with the shots I do get with the DA40 and not concerned about the ones I don't.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to put your opinion down here or something, I have a lot of respect for DA40 myself, I just still think that in regards to OP's needs it wouldn't be the pick of the bunch he offered...

The way I look at it, expressing opinions are valuable when we explain *why* we feel a certain way. There's no guarantee anyone else will have the same preferences as we do. I figure its my "job" (a job I volunteered for, of course, by expressing my opinion) to explain why I feel the way I do so someone can have the information they need to decide for themselves. And it's your "job" to do the same.

So I don't feel there is any conflict here whatsoever. On the contrary, I'm very glad both "sides" of this are being presented, because that's all the more info for the OP to consider.

And FWIW, I do figure you're probably right - for "most" people, the FA35 probably makes more sense.

[axl]

@Marc

nice to be able politely and in civilized manner find an agreement on different opinions...
take my bow...

btw, you do get some really good shots with DA40

Best Regards Marc

Peter