Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-17-2009, 07:53 AM   #1
New Member
jolinjo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 15
First lens ? Input apreciated

Up until now I've just used the kit-lenses which has worked pretty well.

I got an offer for a brand new DA 40mm 2,8 for 250 US but I'm not sure that this is what I need.

A wide angle lens, a lens around 1-2,5 f and something to shoot with in low-light conditions is what Ive been missing the most so far.

What should I go with? Every lens seems to have their specific ups & downs, its like a jungle...

Thanks

09-17-2009, 08:01 AM   #2
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Stratford, CT
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 652
Only you can decide what focal length or low-light capability you need; however, I can say the quality of output of the 40 mm Limited is fantastic, and that price is very good. I just paid $329 +tax for one.
09-17-2009, 08:33 AM   #3
Junior Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 34
QuoteOriginally posted by jolinjo Quote
Up until now I've just used the kit-lenses which has worked pretty well.

I got an offer for a brand new DA 40mm 2,8 for 250 US but I'm not sure that this is what I need.

A wide angle lens, a lens around 1-2,5 f and something to shoot with in low-light conditions is what Ive been missing the most so far.

What should I go with? Every lens seems to have their specific ups & downs, its like a jungle...

Thanks
Get DA*16-50 f2.8
09-17-2009, 08:40 AM   #4
Igilligan
Guest




get it! then pick up a manual focus fast 50 like the M or A 50 1.4 or 1.7....

But that is a good price on the DA 40 and it is a great little lens that will be in your bag from here on! (cause it takes up no space)

09-17-2009, 08:41 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
Remember that with lower aperture also comes lower depth of field, so maybe what you need is a tripod instead... just throwing it out there. What is it exactly tha tyou want to photograph in low light?

Wide angle / low light you have the sigma options, 20,24,28,30 mm, all around 1.4 to 1.8 at its widest.

As to that DA 40, it's a very good price for it and if you dont like it you can always throw it back at the marketplace here
09-17-2009, 08:50 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
blackcloudbrew's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cotati, California USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,782
I'd echo DennishH on the only you can decide comment. However, you've said you want a wide angle lens. I'd suggest that you consider the DA 10-17 lens. It's a wide angle lens and fisheye lens. It's lots of fun. Shooting in low light...well for starters look at something like the FA 50mm f1.4. You could also try to find one of the older fast 50's as well. The DA 40limited lens is a very nice lens and I would suggest that too but as you only have a kit lens, the DA 40 would not give you anything extra in distance or range only sharpness and speed - for now. One other suggestion I'd make as a second lens is to consider the DA 50-200mm lens. It's not the fastest but it is a excellent lens and with your kit lens provides you a range from 18-200mm. You could cover a lot of situations with just the kit and the DA 50-200.

I understand your feeling that it's a jungle out there but really, the reason that there are so many lens choices is that there are so many different types of photographic situations that one or two lenses just can't cover. It's sort of a case of having the right tool the job. I have a lot of tools...
09-17-2009, 09:30 AM   #7
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
Once you work out where your needs are (focal length preferences - zoom/prime, max. aperture), you'll be in much better shape deciding which of all the array of lenses available would be most suited to you now.
09-17-2009, 10:26 AM   #8
New Member
jolinjo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 15
Original Poster
Thanks for all your replies !

A low-light lens was mainly meant for concert shooting and darker indoor conditions.

A wide-angle would be great cause in many situations Ive wished I had one.

I photograph just about anything I see that's interesting enough...

Already got a tripod and the other kit-lens which covers 50-200

The DA 10-17 sounds very interesting ! How can it be both a fish-eye and a Wide angle? Sigma's lenses seems like a good alternative too...

I can only afford one lens for now though... What was your first lens & were you satisfied with it?

09-17-2009, 10:48 AM   #9
Veteran Member
wasser's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: northern ca
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 427
QuoteOriginally posted by jolinjo Quote
A low-light lens was mainly meant for concert shooting and darker indoor conditions.
No. By "low-light" you mean a smaller F number. The smaller the F number the larger the aperture gets. This allows more light in, which is useful for photographing in low light, but it also means greater control over depth of field (DOF).

QuoteOriginally posted by jolinjo Quote
The DA 10-17 sounds very interesting ! How can it be both a fish-eye and a Wide angle? Sigma's lenses seems like a good alternative too...
The 10-17mm is always a fisheye and, consequently, always a wide angle. A fisheye is a type of wide angle. The fisheye effect is lessened at 17mm, however it still has tremendous distortion.

QuoteOriginally posted by jolinjo Quote
I can only afford one lens for now though... What was your first lens & were you satisfied with it?
The DA 40mm is a wonderful little lens. With it you'll gain a better DOF, and it's more useful in lower light than your kit. It's also tiny. You'll barely feel like you have a lens on. The price isn't too bad as well.

However, if you what you really want is a wider lens then maybe it isn't for you at this time. Also, consider the impact of using a fixed focal length lens. No zooming with this lens.

The first lens I bought for my DSLR was the 10-17mm...my second was the 40mm. I love them both, but the 40 is far more useful.
09-17-2009, 12:31 PM   #10
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by jolinjo Quote
A low-light lens was mainly meant for concert shooting and darker indoor conditions.
I like the DA40 a lot for basic indoor snapshots of people (candids), as the focal length is great for this, the focus speed is as good as it gets, it's unbelievably unobtrusive, and f/2.8 is just "fast" enough to be useful in low light if you don't mind ISO (in my mind, a little noise never hurt anyone, but the shallower DOF from larger apertures such as f/2 or f/1.4 is very problematic in these situations).

But I don't find the DA40 very useful at all for concert photography. Not nearly long enough for closeups of individuals (which is what I mainly do), but not nearly wide enough to capture a whole band, either, unless you are far enough away that's you're likely to get a good chunk of audience in the shot too. Which isn't to say it's isn't occasionally useful to get certain types of groupings of people, or full body shots of individuals from the right distance. But definitely not my first choice. That would be the M100/2.8 if you're looking for just one inexpensive ($100 or less) lens.

QuoteQuote:
A wide-angle would be great cause in many situations Ive wished I had one.
So you mean, something wider than the 18-55 you already have (which is already quite wide - as wide as many photographers ever use)? Or something of better quality or smaller or faster at about the same width (eg, like the DA21)?

QuoteQuote:
The DA 10-17 sounds very interesting ! How can it be both a fish-eye and a Wide angle?
All fisheyes are wide angles. Perhaps you mean something different by wide angle?
09-17-2009, 12:38 PM   #11
Pentaxian
ivoire's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: chicago burbs
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,356
Snap up the DA40mm and try it. It is an excellent lens and so convenient to carry. It will easily sell for your purchase price in this forum if you don't like it.
09-17-2009, 01:17 PM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Salem, MA
Posts: 145
As suggested by nearly everyone, snap it up and then decide if you can live with its FOV. This lens seems to be fetching more $250 or more in the used marketplace.

As for low light application, I've been surprised by its focusing ability indoors and lock-speed in very low light, wide open, with distant subject (across the room, for instance). All it needs is a bit of a contrast to avoid focus-hunt and lock focus. Just avoid focusing on anything monochromatic, like a back shirt or white wall (probably true even with plenty of light) That f2.8 is also very forgiving DOF for low light focusing.
09-17-2009, 01:32 PM   #13
New Member
jolinjo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 15
Original Poster
Okidoki, this is pretty much settled

I'll go with the DA40 !

I think we more or less mean the same things but I'm not as of yet so experienced with different terms and expressions in the photographic world. For me a fish eye is much more extreme than a wide angle & therefore I thought of the 2 as separate things.

Thanks for helping me out !
09-17-2009, 01:36 PM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tri-Cities, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,784
That's a great price for the DA 40mm; as everyone said, grab it and resell if you don't like it later!
09-17-2009, 01:38 PM   #15
Site Supporter
pb_red's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Seattle
Posts: 196
here's my experience:

i had a k100d with the kit 18-55 lens and knew that i would want other lenses but didn't know which. so i bought a manual focus 50mm 2.0 off ebay as well as an el-cheap-o 70-200 for under $100 for both.

what i found was that the 70-200 wasn't nearly as much fun as the 50mm so i looked at the options and went with a da-40 for its very compact size and good IQ.

the point is that the $100 i spent on the crappy old lenses (actually the 50mm rocks ) was well worth the lessons i learned and not only helped me decide what lens to get next but probably saved me a bunch of money i would have otherwise spent on lenses i didn't really need.

ps, fish-eye lenses may be fun but they are expensive and used very infrequently by most. at least that's what i've read... plus you can always get a wide angle lens and use post-processing to apply the fish-eye effect if you're going for that look.

edit: pps, get some books on photography like scott kelby's digital photography books (all 3). they will really, really help you out!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for input on what to do about a new lens. jay Pentax DSLR Discussion 0 02-23-2009 10:01 PM
What do I input when using old manual focus lens? lurchlarson Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 02-23-2009 02:57 PM
Input focal length for a manual lens jpzk Photographic Technique 11 01-14-2009 08:50 PM
Pentax DA 55-300mm lens Input Requested rw2mlt Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 10-09-2008 11:32 AM
Interesting lens and photos...input please! Fireball Post Your Photos! 5 01-24-2008 06:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:03 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top