40mm DA vs 43mm FA

andi · 09-15-2009, 10:29 AM

I know, the subject has been beaten to death, but I'm new so please forgive me

A lot of info is buried in many different threads... Anyway, what's the latest
about those two and K-7? I've seen many conflicting tests.
I feel like 40 DA is more consistent on K-7, but because it's quite slow
for a portrait lens, I should be getting both... But then 43 is apparently not
so great wide open? How quickly it's becoming decent? f2.2?
How about the OOF background, 43 supposed to be beautiful, but then again
some tests say it's quite harsh wide open where I'd be using it the most...

netuser · 09-15-2009, 10:49 AM

In fact I could also use a test with both lens and k-7

kathyk · 09-15-2009, 10:53 AM

Maybe I'm just lucky but my 43mm seems very sharp, even wide open. Maybe it's a center vs. edges thing, and it's not edge-to-edge sharp @ 1.9. For portraits, that's not really a problem though. If you wanted edge to edge sharp, I'd say somewhere between 2.8 and 4.0 would do it.

I don't have the 40mm, but what would appeal to me about that lens is how very small and non-instrusive it is, that little shade & lens cap, takes up almost no room at all.

**Rondec** · 09-15-2009, 01:42 PM

I don't know about the FA 43, but the DA 40 is a great lens. So small that you can shoot one handed easily, but very sharp. Very fast focusing. The only negative I can really think of is that it only opens up to f2.8. Not really a problem with portraits, unless you like the kind where only someone's left eye is in focus...

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Marc Sabatella · 09-15-2009, 07:11 PM

Originally posted by andi

I feel like 40 DA is more consistent on K-7, but because it's quite slow
for a portrait lens, I should be getting both...

Portrait lens? I wouldn't be getting either of these for portraits specifically - not even close to long enough. I mean, sure, they won't stop working just because a person enters the frame. But if you're working on a formal portrait where you want shallower DOF than you get at f/2.8, you'd normally want a more closeup view than a 40 or 43 gives (unless you shot form what is normally considered an unflattering and uncomfortably close distance).

Quote:

How about the OOF background, 43 supposed to be beautiful, but then again
some tests say it's quite harsh wide open where I'd be using it the most...

That's because this is extremely subjective. Some tests say Pepsi is better than Coke, too...

redpigeons · 09-15-2009, 07:19 PM

I am the biggest fan of the FA ltd's
and you cant really go wrong with any of the FA LTD's is a huge understatement.

these three is the reason to have a Pentax camera

BUT

in the case of the DA 40 , I would say get it. its the coolest prime available today from any brand. and it's very cheap. the IQ is fantastic as well.

if you can get both

as mark said thou both will be "normal" lenses and not ideal for portrait.

andi · 09-15-2009, 08:09 PM

Thank you guys! Well I really like the 70mm lens on FF for portraits and people.
I've been shooting with a long side of Canon 24-70L and prefer it to 85mm...
I'm getting a K-7 and a set of pancakes, my only concern was they were too slow.
70mm f2.8 on FF is shallower than 40mm f2.8 on a crop.
So for that reason only I consider getting a 43mm f1.9 too to replicate 70mm f2.8 on FF.
I will be getting a 70mm pancake also, so for the tighter frames I will be covered.
My main thing though is to stay small, I'm getting a Pentax system
to have a compact set instead of my Canon system when I don't want to drag
a heavy bag with me. I tried K-7 in a store a few days ago and really liked it.
But what brought me to Pentax were those sweet small pancakes...

Marc Sabatella · 09-15-2009, 10:21 PM

OK, but do keep in mind that 43mm on APS-C is close, but still short of 70mm on FF, and 40mm is really quite short of it. A 50mm lens should probably be on the list for consideration, too.

netuser · 09-16-2009, 04:22 AM

Can someone post an example same image taken with FA43 and DA40 ?

audiobomber · 09-16-2009, 06:08 AM

Originally posted by andi

Thank you guys! Well I really like the 70mm lens on FF for portraits and people.
I've been shooting with a long side of Canon 24-70L and prefer it to 85mm...
I'm getting a K-7 and a set of pancakes, my only concern was they were too slow.
70mm f2.8 on FF is shallower than 40mm f2.8 on a crop.
So for that reason only I consider getting a 43mm f1.9 too to replicate 70mm f2.8 on FF.

Is there some reason you aren't considering the FA 50mm f1.4? Pentax's 50mm 1.4 is usually considered the best of any of the manufacturers. On a 1.5 crop it's slightly closer to 70mm equivalent than the 43mm (75 vs 64.5) and is in the traditional portrait range, whereas the 43mm is a bit short. The 50 is faster than the others obviously, and with comparable sharpness according to Photozone (sharper than 40mm at F2.8, not as sharp as 43). Construction is a step below, but it's still a solid little chunk. I kind of like the retro look of the 50mm, especially with a rectangular hood.

Have a look at this thread for some discussion and samples.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/24545-why-i-lo...mm-f1-4-a.html

andi · 09-16-2009, 07:31 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

Is there some reason you aren't considering the FA 50mm f1.4?

I just want to stay with the smallest lenses available. If I decide to start buying
larger Pentax lenses, then I can as easily just take my Canon setup with me
and I have some really good lenses there

The combination of 15, 21, 40 and 70 DA limited fits me well, again one concern
I had they were too slow, specifically for portraits... 70 being longer seems OK,
wider ones don't need to be that fast, it's just 40 I guess. And because there is
another pancake option, I consider it.
Luckily also they are all 49mm filter size lenses, just one polarizer and I'm all set.

axl · 09-16-2009, 07:38 AM

I don'thave 43 but on APSC 40 is actually quite nnice lens for portraits. Especcialy if you like being closer to your "objecccts" and have contact with them. Sure, 50 is better for head shots, but for upper body/all body DA40 is great. It gave me some really nice results. And as general purpose lens it's absolutely fantastic IMHO.

BR
Peter

audiobomber · 09-16-2009, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by andi

I just want to stay with the smallest lenses available.

All three lenses are 49mm filter size. The FA 50mm is not a pancake, but it's tiny compared to the Canon 50mm f1.4. Still, a set of Limited pancakes is a pretty cool lens plan.
FA 50

FA 43 Ltd

FA 40mm

netuser · 09-16-2009, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by netuser

Can someone post an example same image taken with FA43 and DA40 ?

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about image from the lens itself

audiobomber · 09-16-2009, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by netuser

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about image from the lens itself

LOL! I knew that.

09-15-2009, 10:29 AM	#1
andi Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 200	40mm DA vs 43mm FA I know, the subject has been beaten to death, but I'm new so please forgive me A lot of info is buried in many different threads... Anyway, what's the latest about those two and K-7? I've seen many conflicting tests. I feel like 40 DA is more consistent on K-7, but because it's quite slow for a portrait lens, I should be getting both... But then 43 is apparently not so great wide open? How quickly it's becoming decent? f2.2? How about the OOF background, 43 supposed to be beautiful, but then again some tests say it's quite harsh wide open where I'd be using it the most...

09-16-2009, 07:56 AM	#13
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by andi I just want to stay with the smallest lenses available. All three lenses are 49mm filter size. The FA 50mm is not a pancake, but it's tiny compared to the Canon 50mm f1.4. Still, a set of Limited pancakes is a pretty cool lens plan. FA 50 FA 43 Ltd FA 40mm Last edited by audiobomber; 09-16-2009 at 10:08 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Has anyone compared Voigtländer 40mm and 43mm ltd?	Ketsuppi11	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	05-20-2010 11:45 PM
For Sale - Sold: FT: FA 43mm LTD Black, mint, for DA 40mm	plympton	Sold Items	1	06-13-2007 10:38 AM
Anyone own the 40mm and 43mm	loganross	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	05-27-2007 10:50 PM

09-15-2009, 10:49 AM	#2
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	In fact I could also use a test with both lens and k-7

09-15-2009, 10:53 AM	#3
kathyk Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Michigan/USA Posts: 173	Maybe I'm just lucky but my 43mm seems very sharp, even wide open. Maybe it's a center vs. edges thing, and it's not edge-to-edge sharp @ 1.9. For portraits, that's not really a problem though. If you wanted edge to edge sharp, I'd say somewhere between 2.8 and 4.0 would do it. I don't have the 40mm, but what would appeal to me about that lens is how very small and non-instrusive it is, that little shade & lens cap, takes up almost no room at all.

09-15-2009, 07:11 PM	#5
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by andi I feel like 40 DA is more consistent on K-7, but because it's quite slow for a portrait lens, I should be getting both... Portrait lens? I wouldn't be getting either of these for portraits specifically - not even close to long enough. I mean, sure, they won't stop working just because a person enters the frame. But if you're working on a formal portrait where you want shallower DOF than you get at f/2.8, you'd normally want a more closeup view than a 40 or 43 gives (unless you shot form what is normally considered an unflattering and uncomfortably close distance). Quote: How about the OOF background, 43 supposed to be beautiful, but then again some tests say it's quite harsh wide open where I'd be using it the most... That's because this is extremely subjective. Some tests say Pepsi is better than Coke, too...

09-15-2009, 07:19 PM	#6
redpigeons Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: NYC Posts: 943	I am the biggest fan of the FA ltd's and you cant really go wrong with any of the FA LTD's is a huge understatement. these three is the reason to have a Pentax camera BUT in the case of the DA 40 , I would say get it. its the coolest prime available today from any brand. and it's very cheap. the IQ is fantastic as well. if you can get both as mark said thou both will be "normal" lenses and not ideal for portrait.

09-15-2009, 08:09 PM	#7
andi Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 200 Original Poster	Thank you guys! Well I really like the 70mm lens on FF for portraits and people. I've been shooting with a long side of Canon 24-70L and prefer it to 85mm... I'm getting a K-7 and a set of pancakes, my only concern was they were too slow. 70mm f2.8 on FF is shallower than 40mm f2.8 on a crop. So for that reason only I consider getting a 43mm f1.9 too to replicate 70mm f2.8 on FF. I will be getting a 70mm pancake also, so for the tighter frames I will be covered. My main thing though is to stay small, I'm getting a Pentax system to have a compact set instead of my Canon system when I don't want to drag a heavy bag with me. I tried K-7 in a store a few days ago and really liked it. But what brought me to Pentax were those sweet small pancakes...

09-15-2009, 10:21 PM	#8
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	OK, but do keep in mind that 43mm on APS-C is close, but still short of 70mm on FF, and 40mm is really quite short of it. A 50mm lens should probably be on the list for consideration, too.

09-16-2009, 04:22 AM	#9
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	Can someone post an example same image taken with FA43 and DA40 ?

09-16-2009, 06:08 AM	#10
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by andi Thank you guys! Well I really like the 70mm lens on FF for portraits and people. I've been shooting with a long side of Canon 24-70L and prefer it to 85mm... I'm getting a K-7 and a set of pancakes, my only concern was they were too slow. 70mm f2.8 on FF is shallower than 40mm f2.8 on a crop. So for that reason only I consider getting a 43mm f1.9 too to replicate 70mm f2.8 on FF. Is there some reason you aren't considering the FA 50mm f1.4? Pentax's 50mm 1.4 is usually considered the best of any of the manufacturers. On a 1.5 crop it's slightly closer to 70mm equivalent than the 43mm (75 vs 64.5) and is in the traditional portrait range, whereas the 43mm is a bit short. The 50 is faster than the others obviously, and with comparable sharpness according to Photozone (sharper than 40mm at F2.8, not as sharp as 43). Construction is a step below, but it's still a solid little chunk. I kind of like the retro look of the 50mm, especially with a rectangular hood. Have a look at this thread for some discussion and samples. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/24545-why-i-lo...mm-f1-4-a.html

09-16-2009, 07:31 AM	#11
andi Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 200 Original Poster	Originally posted by audiobomber Is there some reason you aren't considering the FA 50mm f1.4? I just want to stay with the smallest lenses available. If I decide to start buying larger Pentax lenses, then I can as easily just take my Canon setup with me and I have some really good lenses there The combination of 15, 21, 40 and 70 DA limited fits me well, again one concern I had they were too slow, specifically for portraits... 70 being longer seems OK, wider ones don't need to be that fast, it's just 40 I guess. And because there is another pancake option, I consider it. Luckily also they are all 49mm filter size lenses, just one polarizer and I'm all set.

09-16-2009, 07:38 AM	#12
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	I don'thave 43 but on APSC 40 is actually quite nnice lens for portraits. Especcialy if you like being closer to your "objecccts" and have contact with them. Sure, 50 is better for head shots, but for upper body/all body DA40 is great. It gave me some really nice results. And as general purpose lens it's absolutely fantastic IMHO. BR Peter

09-16-2009, 08:49 AM	#14
netuser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Azores Islands, Portugal Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,236	Originally posted by netuser Can someone post an example same image taken with FA43 and DA40 ? Just to be clear, I'm not talking about image from the lens itself

09-16-2009, 09:30 AM	#15
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by netuser Just to be clear, I'm not talking about image from the lens itself LOL! I knew that.