Prime for K-5 ll

Mimik · 01-04-2014, 07:48 AM

Hi folks,

I will soon get my first Pentax, ever. The K-5 ll with 18-55 WR. Great deal on them now so I couldn't resist...

Anyway, would the 35 SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F:2.8 Limited Macro be a good place to start? Both as walk around and close up.

And is the new version much better? Seems so regarding price difference.

http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/HD35mm_6187.jpg http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/SMC35macro_3711.jpg

Thanks.

**jatrax** · 01-04-2014, 09:57 AM

About as good as it gets.

No idea on the new HD version, should be the same optically just new coatings.

waterfall · 01-04-2014, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by Mimik

Hi folks,

I will soon get my first Pentax, ever. The K-5 ll with 18-55 WR. Great deal on them now so I couldn't resist...

Anyway, would the 35 SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F:2.8 Limited Macro be a good place to start? Both as walk around and close up.

And is the new version much better? Seems so regarding price difference.

http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/HD35mm_6187.jpg http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/SMC35macro_3711.jpg

Thanks.

The 35 Ltd is my favored walk-about lens. But the 15mm Limited haunts my dreams and makes me use it more. My photo style is wide angle architecture and landscape. Your style may differ. the color and sharpness of these two lenses are phenomenal.

I also have the 70mm Limited and a Sigma f1.4 50 mm prime. None of these lenses go a week in the bag without exercise. My long zooms get ignored these days. The 70 is my people lens and the 50 is my low light lens.

I recommend the 35mm Macro Limited for your first prime. Imagine sharpness and color contrast seen in HDR photo shopped images. The 35 can do the same with a single image, IMHO, and the print will not look like a cartoon book's cover.

**Wingincamera** · 01-05-2014, 01:14 PM

For primes I have the 35 Ltd macro, along with a 50 macro, 70 Ltd and now the 15mm Limited. Unless I am inside a building for events, the 35 is my most used prime. Depending on the weather, the 18-135mm gets a lot of use because it's so versatile and with WR. For your question I say the 35 SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F:2.8 Limited Macro is good.

SpecialK · 01-05-2014, 01:48 PM

A prime is not really the definition of a walk-around lens unless you want all your shots to have the same perspective. 35 is about the normal view, but it's a bit short for macros as there is not a lot of working room.

waterfall · 01-05-2014, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

A prime is not really the definition of a walk-around lens unless you want all your shots to have the same perspective. 35 is about the normal view, but it's a bit short for macros as there is not a lot of working room.

So define "walk around lens." seems to me that a focal length approximating the human eye's perspective would be that definition. A 35 mm lens on an APS sensor has a full frame equivalent FOV of about 50mm, which was the film era sta dard normal lens.

Perspective varies with where you stand. And the 35 Ltd is not a dedicated Macro. Just a very sharp normal lens with macro capabilities of close focus.

SpecialK · 01-05-2014, 02:17 PM

Walk-around is a single lens that can be used to capture most images you might come across in a a casual catch-as-catch-can outing.

Of course it is a matter of personal style and preference which makes this question somewhat meaningless.

waterfall · 01-05-2014, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

Walk-around is a single lens that can be used to capture most images you might come across in a a casual catch-as-catch-can outing.

Of course it is a matter of personal style and preference which makes this question somewhat meaningless.

Good definition. I like it. So if I am walking through urban canyons, the 15mm Ltd might fit the definition. If strolling through open meadows with wooded fringes, the 35mm or the 50mm might be the choice. At ten thousand feet of altitude on a clear day on Going to the Sun Road in Glacier, I might choose my 55-300 mm. In a restaurant or at a party, the 70mm would fit the definition.

**savoche** · 01-06-2014, 08:55 AM

For me 35 is a good focal length for a walkaround. But I would suggest you use your kit lens for a while and see what focal lengths you typically use the most and let that guide you in what prime(s) to get.

As for the difference between the SMC and HD versions, it doesn't look to be a whole lot: HD vs. SMC Pentax Limited Primes - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

FWIW, I bought the "old" versions of both the 21 and the 70 after the HD arrived.

robgo2 · 01-06-2014, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by SpecialK

A prime is not really the definition of a walk-around lens unless you want all your shots to have the same perspective. 35 is about the normal view, but it's a bit short for macros as there is not a lot of working room.

And here we have the ancient "prime vs zoom" debate. There is no way to resolve this, as each type of lens has advantages and disadvantages. Use whatever you like.

Also, a prime lens may give you a fixed angle of view, but that is not the same as perspective, which depends on how close the camera is to the subject. In that regard, the two most important decisions that a photographer makes is where to stand and when to release the shutter.

Rob

MadMathMind · 01-06-2014, 02:17 PM

It really depends on where you are walking around. If you're wandering around parks and landscapes, then you can very often always get far enough away to capture what you want with a 35mm. (You'll run into more trouble not being able to get close enough.) If you're going to be indoors, at museums and such, you may find 35mm to be too narrow, as rooms are only so large, and they don't always let you stand in the corner. Or sometimes, there's just too many people in the place, so even when you can get far enough away, you'll never get a clear shot.

If you want to be versatile, you may consider a 35 and a 21 together as your walk arounds. That would probably work well.

SpecialK · 01-06-2014, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by robgo2

Also, a prime lens may give you a fixed angle of view, but that is not the same as perspective, which depends on how close the camera is to the subject.

That is true. I was a bit sloppy with the wording.

canonguy · 01-09-2014, 08:04 PM

OR .... go retro like me - an old $50.00, 28mm f2.8 Takumar-A manual focus is my normal lens (42mm converted to FF) . Small......slightly wide......fast.....cheap.....decent macro.....pleasure of manual focus

canonguy · 01-09-2014, 08:13 PM

Actually though - if I had more money - the 24mm f2.0 would be IT! I do mean IT! That is a normal perspective if you ask me and if you want to "ZOOM" - walk closer to the subject!!

kh1234567890 · 01-10-2014, 05:30 PM

The only annoying feature of the DA35 Macro is that if the AF misses at long distance it can hunt all the way to the close-up end stop before trying again. And that 35mm is a bit short for a macro - anything alive will crawl or fly away as you try to get within a few cm of its nose

01-04-2014, 07:48 AM	#1
Mimik New Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 15	Prime for K-5 ll Hi folks, I will soon get my first Pentax, ever. The K-5 ll with 18-55 WR. Great deal on them now so I couldn't resist... Anyway, would the 35 SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F:2.8 Limited Macro be a good place to start? Both as walk around and close up. And is the new version much better? Seems so regarding price difference. http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/HD35mm_6187.jpg http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/SMC35macro_3711.jpg Thanks.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Standard prime recommendation for K-5	c3p0	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	02-28-2014 04:33 PM
New Firmware for K-500, K-50, K-5 II, K-5 IIs, K-5, K-30, K-01, K-r, and 645D is out	Adam	Pentax News and Rumors	60	09-16-2013 05:46 AM
Hi I'm looking to buy prime lens for k-5	henry8	Welcomes and Introductions	3	01-14-2013 07:37 PM
Im a glutton for punishment, I guess. I'll be in line for the K-5 IIs	Isnwm	Pentax DSLR Discussion	25	09-21-2012 12:09 PM

01-04-2014, 09:57 AM	#2
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	About as good as it gets. No idea on the new HD version, should be the same optically just new coatings.

01-04-2014, 12:50 PM	#3
waterfall Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Northern Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by Mimik Hi folks, I will soon get my first Pentax, ever. The K-5 ll with 18-55 WR. Great deal on them now so I couldn't resist... Anyway, would the 35 SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F:2.8 Limited Macro be a good place to start? Both as walk around and close up. And is the new version much better? Seems so regarding price difference. http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/HD35mm_6187.jpg http://www.fotokungen.com/pub_images/original/SMC35macro_3711.jpg Thanks. The 35 Ltd is my favored walk-about lens. But the 15mm Limited haunts my dreams and makes me use it more. My photo style is wide angle architecture and landscape. Your style may differ. the color and sharpness of these two lenses are phenomenal. I also have the 70mm Limited and a Sigma f1.4 50 mm prime. None of these lenses go a week in the bag without exercise. My long zooms get ignored these days. The 70 is my people lens and the 50 is my low light lens. I recommend the 35mm Macro Limited for your first prime. Imagine sharpness and color contrast seen in HDR photo shopped images. The 35 can do the same with a single image, IMHO, and the print will not look like a cartoon book's cover.

01-05-2014, 01:14 PM	#4
Wingincamera Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Pine Haven, Wyoming Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,182	For primes I have the 35 Ltd macro, along with a 50 macro, 70 Ltd and now the 15mm Limited. Unless I am inside a building for events, the 35 is my most used prime. Depending on the weather, the 18-135mm gets a lot of use because it's so versatile and with WR. For your question I say the 35 SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F:2.8 Limited Macro is good.

01-05-2014, 01:48 PM	#5
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	A prime is not really the definition of a walk-around lens unless you want all your shots to have the same perspective. 35 is about the normal view, but it's a bit short for macros as there is not a lot of working room.

01-05-2014, 02:11 PM	#6
waterfall Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Northern Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by SpecialK A prime is not really the definition of a walk-around lens unless you want all your shots to have the same perspective. 35 is about the normal view, but it's a bit short for macros as there is not a lot of working room. So define "walk around lens." seems to me that a focal length approximating the human eye's perspective would be that definition. A 35 mm lens on an APS sensor has a full frame equivalent FOV of about 50mm, which was the film era sta dard normal lens. Perspective varies with where you stand. And the 35 Ltd is not a dedicated Macro. Just a very sharp normal lens with macro capabilities of close focus.

01-05-2014, 02:17 PM	#7
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	Walk-around is a single lens that can be used to capture most images you might come across in a a casual catch-as-catch-can outing. Of course it is a matter of personal style and preference which makes this question somewhat meaningless.

01-05-2014, 02:30 PM	#8
waterfall Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Northern Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by SpecialK Walk-around is a single lens that can be used to capture most images you might come across in a a casual catch-as-catch-can outing. Of course it is a matter of personal style and preference which makes this question somewhat meaningless. Good definition. I like it. So if I am walking through urban canyons, the 15mm Ltd might fit the definition. If strolling through open meadows with wooded fringes, the 35mm or the 50mm might be the choice. At ten thousand feet of altitude on a clear day on Going to the Sun Road in Glacier, I might choose my 55-300 mm. In a restaurant or at a party, the 70mm would fit the definition.

01-06-2014, 08:55 AM	#9
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	For me 35 is a good focal length for a walkaround. But I would suggest you use your kit lens for a while and see what focal lengths you typically use the most and let that guide you in what prime(s) to get. As for the difference between the SMC and HD versions, it doesn't look to be a whole lot: HD vs. SMC Pentax Limited Primes - Introduction - PentaxForums.com FWIW, I bought the "old" versions of both the 21 and the 70 after the HD arrived.

01-06-2014, 10:41 AM	#10
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	Originally posted by SpecialK A prime is not really the definition of a walk-around lens unless you want all your shots to have the same perspective. 35 is about the normal view, but it's a bit short for macros as there is not a lot of working room. And here we have the ancient "prime vs zoom" debate. There is no way to resolve this, as each type of lens has advantages and disadvantages. Use whatever you like. Also, a prime lens may give you a fixed angle of view, but that is not the same as perspective, which depends on how close the camera is to the subject. In that regard, the two most important decisions that a photographer makes is where to stand and when to release the shutter. Rob

01-06-2014, 02:17 PM	#11
MadMathMind Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Houston, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,717	It really depends on where you are walking around. If you're wandering around parks and landscapes, then you can very often always get far enough away to capture what you want with a 35mm. (You'll run into more trouble not being able to get close enough.) If you're going to be indoors, at museums and such, you may find 35mm to be too narrow, as rooms are only so large, and they don't always let you stand in the corner. Or sometimes, there's just too many people in the place, so even when you can get far enough away, you'll never get a clear shot. If you want to be versatile, you may consider a 35 and a 21 together as your walk arounds. That would probably work well.

01-06-2014, 05:46 PM	#12
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	Originally posted by robgo2 Also, a prime lens may give you a fixed angle of view, but that is not the same as perspective, which depends on how close the camera is to the subject. That is true. I was a bit sloppy with the wording.

01-09-2014, 08:04 PM	#13
canonguy Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 25	OR .... go retro like me - an old $50.00, 28mm f2.8 Takumar-A manual focus is my normal lens (42mm converted to FF) . Small......slightly wide......fast.....cheap.....decent macro.....pleasure of manual focus

01-09-2014, 08:13 PM	#14
canonguy Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 25	Actually though - if I had more money - the 24mm f2.0 would be IT! I do mean IT! That is a normal perspective if you ask me and if you want to "ZOOM" - walk closer to the subject!!

01-10-2014, 05:30 PM	#15
kh1234567890 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,653	The only annoying feature of the DA35 Macro is that if the AF misses at long distance it can hunt all the way to the close-up end stop before trying again. And that 35mm is a bit short for a macro - anything alive will crawl or fly away as you try to get within a few cm of its nose