[snaaark]

i thought a about a fa 50 1.4 as well but i prefer 35mm. i could imagine it being a nice low light alternative with the da 35 f2.8 but i dont see a real use for it together with the fa f35 2.0.

im not really sure but i tend to get the fa 35mm because of the extra light. although i really really like the 1:1 macro and the sexyness of the da 35 ltd. tough decission

[lawsonstone]

Is the FA 31mm f/1.8 Ltd not an option? I have that, and the DA 40mm Ltd f/2.8. I love the size of the 40 but the faster 31mm seems to win out despite being larger.

[Nick Siebers]

I bought the DA40 when I realized my M50/1.7 wasn't going to cut it as an everyday lens on my K100 - a little long, manual metering tricky. (I've since figured it out, but so it goes.) I love everything about the DA40 except that it doesn't focus QUITE closely enough for some flower pictures I like to take. I use a bounce flash for extra light indoors, works far better for me than opening up too far and having a little too slow shutter speed. I did get a Super Takumar 35/2 but it was too soft at f/2 to use a lot, and above that the DA35 was better. Not sure about how the FA 35/2 stacks up. I alos have a CZJ 35mm f/2.4 that will do 1:2 macro, but I most often use the DA40.

There is also the F 35-70 zoom, I like that for outside chasing kids with a flower shot here and there on macro mode.

[Marignac]

The DA 40 is a great lens, no doubt (as are the DA 21 & DA 70 limiteds). It's become my simple setup to have in a small pack on walks or when you want to be less intrusive. What I've found though is that when I go out with my usual DA* 16-50 the limited lenses get left behind. Totally a personal choice on that.

I can relate to this statement: my usual setup when walking around used to be the DA21 - FA35 or FA43 - Cosina 100. But more and more I'm just going out with Tamron 28-75/2.8 and the Cosina 100. When I do need speed I'll be having the FA35 with me.

In fact - when I decided to buy the Tamron, the idea was to spare myself buying FA35, DA40, FA43, DA70 because they are all incorporated in that zoom. but then I bought the FA35 for its speed/sharpness and overall excellent price/quality relation. I could not imagine NOT having this lense. I bought the FA43 for its shiny shimmers and its 3-D effects. And I do love these lenses. But as I said - more often than not it's the Tamron, which appeared too bulky first hand, but which revealed to be the ideal companion.

But I'm digressing. I would always build my gear on a FA35 - it's the multi tasker.

[rparmar]

I have found that this focal range on cropped sensor simply doesn't do it for me. I need something wider (28mm) or more tele (starting with the FA43 and its unbeatable rendering).

But if I was to choose I'd go for the DA35 Ltd. Very handy and lovely images.

[jeffrey r]

I can relate to this statement: my usual setup when walking around used to be the DA21 - FA35 or FA43 - Cosina 100. But more and more I'm just going out with Tamron 28-75/2.8 and the Cosina 100. When I do need speed I'll be having the FA35 with me.

In fact - when I decided to buy the Tamron, the idea was to spare myself buying FA35, DA40, FA43, DA70 because they are all incorporated in that zoom. but then I bought the FA35 for its speed/sharpness and overall excellent price/quality relation. I could not imagine NOT having this lense. I bought the FA43 for its shiny shimmers and its 3-D effects. And I do love these lenses. But as I said - more often than not it's the Tamron, which appeared too bulky first hand, but which revealed to be the ideal companion.

But I'm digressing. I would always build my gear on a FA35 - it's the multi tasker.

Agree with much of what you said. My Tamron 28-75 is a great walk-around lens, and my primes in that range are a bit redundant, but it doesn't mean I am getting rid of my M 28/3.5, FA 35, DA 40 or DA 70 anytime soon. They're all great, but there is something very useful about mounting one of these walk-around zooms on your camera when going out and about. Frankly, I've been choosing my Tamron 17-50 over my 28-75 from time to time, as it is a bit smaller and lighter, and obviously wider which comes in handy in certain circumstances.

[alexeyga]

As a current owner of the DA35lim, i'd peak that one anytime over the others... that little thingy is just damn sharp wide open and the close-focusing ability does come handy quite often... or maybe it's just my shooting style...

The only downside of the DA35... as others have mentioned is it's strong and it's weak point at the same time... When shooting in "no-light" and the lens starts hunting... you just plain hate it... it rotates about 2deg. to get from infinity to 2ft... and than it does another 90deg. to do the rest... Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...... G-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That being said, in normal lighting conditions the focusing is more than adequate... no complaints in that department...

---

Last edited by alexeyga; 06-27-2009 at 07:23 AM.

[snaaark]

its getting more and more complicated. i didnt consider the fa 43 because of its pricetag but i did consider a nice and fast standard zoom. unfortunately i cant get both. a nice prime still would a nice tool to concentrate more on the crop but still a zoom is more versatile especially when youre in the field.

[alexeyga]

its getting more and more complicated. i didnt consider the fa 43 because of its pricetag but i did consider a nice and fast standard zoom. unfortunately i cant get both. a nice prime still would a nice tool to concentrate more on the crop but still a zoom is more versatile especially when youre in the field.

In this case the winning combination might be the 16-45 + the 50/1.4... I had that for a while, used the 50 for special and low-light situations and zoom for everything else including landscaping and plain traveling... But i wanted to go wider when traveling and opted for the 12-24 and DA35 combination...

[cooldude14es]

As a current owner of the DA35lim, i'd peak that one anytime over the others... that little thingy is just damn sharp wide open and the close-focusing ability does come handy quite often... or maybe it's just my shooting style...

The only downside of the DA35... as others have mentioned is it's strong and it's weak point at the same time... When shooting in "no-light" and the lens starts hunting... you just plain hate it... it rotates about 2deg. to get from infinity to 2ft... and than it does another 90deg. to do the rest... Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...... G-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That being said, in normal lighting conditions the focusing is more than adequate... no complaints in that department...

I am also considering the DA35 but I would also like to shoot indoors with it and dont know how will it perform...

[snaaark]

poll results:

pentaxforum:
da35: 7
da40: 3
fa35: 2

german dslr forum:
fa35: 10
da35: 3
da40: 2

total:
fa35: 12
da35: 10
da40: 5

[alexeyga]

I am also considering the DA35 but I would also like to shoot indoors with it and dont know how will it perform...

Define "indoors" please... This focal length is perfect for shooting inside, if there's enough light for the AF to have something to hold on to... however if you're speaking about shooting interiors - i'd opt for something ultra-wides-ish...

[snaaark]

Define "indoors" please... This focal length is perfect for shooting inside, if there's enough light for the AF to have something to hold on to... however if you're speaking about shooting interiors - i'd opt for something ultra-wides-ish...

i guess what he ment was if getting enough light (for the AF to hold on to) seems to a problem sometimes. or do u think it is not that much of an issue most of the time.

[alexeyga]

i guess what he ment was if getting enough light (for the AF to hold on to) seems to a problem sometimes. or do u think it is not that much of an issue most of the time.

The issue is not in "having enough light", in this matter DA35 performs just like any other lens... problem is, when the AF starts hunting with that lens it takes long... I mean really LO-O-O-O-O-NG time.... in similar conditions to go from infinity to closest focal distance

FA 31lim will do:
B-z-z-z-z-z....

On the other hand, the DA 35lim will do:
B-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z....



That's the price to pay for some VERY close-focusing ability... For some it's not that important, for others... let's just say that it's my favorite feature of the DA35... something I really miss with other lenses... And no, i'm not a macro geek...

Lately I was shooting in almost total darkness... with flashes... but I still had to focus somehow before firing the flashes... After a few trials with a lot of buzzing and swearing i just went MF....

Is the FA 31mm f/1.8 Ltd not an option? I have that, and the DA 40mm Ltd f/2.8. I love the size of the 40 but the faster 31mm seems to win out despite being larger.

Problem is... for the current price of the 31lim, one can get three or even four DA35-s... go figure...

[snaaark]

@alex
im not that much convinced about the superiority of the 16-45 vs the 18-55 kit. sure the 16-45 is has better quality and a nicer build quality but it is still f4 and im not sure if its worth upgrading (exept for the extra wideangle). what do you think?

anyway would it be wiser to get a superior zoom instead/before getting a standard prime or the other way round?

i was looking at the tamron 17-50 f2.8 before i thought about investing the money in a prime. it is said to compeet with the pentax glasses @f4 but still has the extra stop for lowlight. but then thought it would be a much more interesting experience to limit myself to a standard prime. not sure about that anymore but i dont think i have the money for both of them.