[W412ren]

I currently have a budget of zero lol. I don't "need" the 40 as I have a 35mm limited, a 35mm f2, a 20-40mm limited and a 50mm f1.8

This being the case and in no rush to reacquire, monitor the second hand stores and eBay. I wasn’t sure if I wanted the 40mm but after a couple of months an auction came up in the UK and mine cost me £85 inc postage. Practically mint too.

[UncleVanya]

I had an XS but I think the pixie dust had escaped

---------- Post added 07-06-22 at 11:41 AM ----------



Aaaand I have a bag

I am not rushing into anything. I don't need a 40mm per se, but I think I just want one in my bag. When I sic'd it I was hugely impressed and I think I would miss it. The 43mm is still on the radar but I am a bit less certain. As for doing anything in a hurry, my current financials are reminiscent of a pelican, everywhere I look I have a b***** great bill in front of me

The DA 40 I always liked. I tried the FA 43. I didn’t like it. I can’t really put my finger on why.

[Cerebum]

This being the case and in no rush to reacquire, monitor the second hand stores and eBay. I wasn’t sure if I wanted the 40mm but after a couple of months an auction came up in the UK and mine cost me £85 inc postage. Practically mint too.

That's a plan I like maybe i could get a silver one. Some people dont like the silver lenses but it would look sweet on my silver KP mine (a black one) was £160 so I don't want to spend a ton fixing it

---------- Post added 07-06-22 at 01:25 PM ----------

The DA 40 I always liked. I tried the FA 43. I didn’t like it. I can’t really put my finger on why.

I remember you getting it and your opinion was probably one of those that planted a seed of doubt its funny, you automatically think "FA, must be better!" but that's not always the case. Its a shame though as 43 fills the gap from 35-50 really nicely

[UncleVanya]

I remember you getting it and your opinion was probably one of those that planted a seed of doubt its funny, you automatically think "FA, must be better!" but that's not always the case. Its a shame though as 43 fills the gap from 35-50 really nicely

I thought it was related to MFD but the DA 40 isn't much better in that respect. It may be something more esoteric. I love the way the DA 40 renders wide open - but it does not go nearly as wide open as the FA 43. Maybe more shots at f2.8 would have woo'd me to the dark side.

[Cerebum]

I thought it was related to MFD but the DA 40 isn't much better in that respect. It may be something more esoteric. I love the way the DA 40 renders wide open - but it does not go nearly as wide open as the FA 43. Maybe more shots at f2.8 would have woo'd me to the dark side.

I guess using it on a KP would mean no distortion or softness, just the lovely sharpitude in the middle of the lens mind you, its £150 more than the 40, but is it £150 better? I could use it on my MX, but then its up against the -M 50s which are excellent. I am struggling to justify the 43, can you tell?

[pepperberry farm]

I guess using it on a KP would mean no distortion or softness, just the lovely sharpitude in the middle of the lens mind you, its £150 more than the 40, but is it £150 better? I could use it on my MX, but then its up against the -M 50s which are excellent. I am struggling to justify the 43, can you tell?

I tried the FA 43 Limited, used it in the SIC, and then promptly sold it - I like the DA40 over it.....

[UncleVanya]

I tried the FA 43 Limited, used it in the SIC, and then promptly sold it - I like the DA40 over it.....

Huh. That’s two of us. What’s wrong with us? Lol.

[Sandy Hancock]

For what it's worth, I much prefer the FA43. Especially on the K-1, but also on crop.

I like primes with character. For predictably boring shots I'll take a zoom every time.

[pepperberry farm]

Huh. That’s two of us. What’s wrong with us? Lol.

nothing..

I prefer the DA40's rendering and bokeh, it's tiny, has quick shift, and has a shorter MFD...

I don't shoot FF or film so the lens as an APS-C without an aperture ring doesn't become an issue for me...

[UncleVanya]

For what it's worth, I much prefer the FA43. Especially on the K-1, but also on crop.

I like primes with character. For predictably boring shots I'll take a zoom every time.

That’s just it, I find the DA 40 has a character I like. The FA 43 didn’t sing to me the same way. I can’t explain easily. It was disturbing as so many love the lens. I felt like I’d failed.

[Jonathan Mac]

That’s just it, I find the DA 40 has a character I like. The FA 43 didn’t sing to me the same way. I can’t explain easily. It was disturbing as so many love the lens. I felt like I’d failed.

The FA 43mm is not as good as most people suggest and I can completely understand those who prefer the DA 40mm over it. I kept the 43 and sold the 40 because of film and FF digital mirrorless compatibility but the little 40mm was a good lens and when you factor in price it's much more lens for your money than the FA 43 is.

[bdery]

My 40mm limited took a blow to the focus ring, now it is jammed. I have contacted my go to repairers but they won't fix it so I am down to Ricoh! So, as the repair may cost me £100+ do I fix the limited or save the money for an fa43mm limited. I currently have a budget of zero lol. I don't "need" the 40 as I have a 35mm limited, a 35mm f2, a 20-40mm limited and a 50mm f1.8 so, should I bang it on eBay for spares and buy some film and wait for the day when I can afford a 43, or fix the 40?

Also, does anyone know a repairer in the UK?

You need to consider this in the perspective of sunk cost. As is, you've already paid for the lens, that money is spent. Now, if you pay 100$ (sorry I don't think I have a pound sign on my keyboard, bear with me) will it let you resell the lens for more than that? You already say you don't need it and might look at the 43 as a replacement (fine reasoning I might add).

So as you don't intend to use the lens, you should only consider the price you can resell it, nothing else. By the way, 100$ to repair a lens isn't unfair I would think.

For the record, I had a similar problem with my DA21, a local repair shop opened it, replaced a few things, and it was back to being perfect. If you decide you don't want to pay for repairs, maybe you can have a go yourself, otherwise the lens has zero value, so you don't risk much.

[UncleVanya]

f you decide you don't want to pay for repairs, maybe you can have a go yourself, otherwise the lens has zero value, so you don't risk much.

People on eBay buy broken lenses all the time. The price to value ratio is all over the place. I don’t know if selling it as is or repairing and selling is the better option but I’d suspect selling as is has less risk.

[Cerebum]

I think where i am at is this. I have read about the 43 and it has distinctly mixed reviews, so spending north of £350 on it seems a bit, rash, especially when i have others on my wish list which are already out of reach.

as for the 40mm. the fact that i bought one and technically no longer have it means i am looking at that as no longer relevant or written off. so, what i now have is the chance to get a 40mm limited, a lens i know i like, for the cost of a repair, which is a bit of a bargain really. so, i will be packaging it up tomorrow and sending it off to John Pye. if it is beyond repair i have lost nothing but i will always be kicking myself if i dont try

[bdery]

I think where i am at is this. I have read about the 43

and it has distinctly mixed reviews

I disagree about the mixed reviews. I was in your shoes, with the question of switching between the two. In my case I was also switching to full frame so the corners of the 40mm were a problem. Still, regarding rendering, I never looked back.

what i now have is the chance to get a 40mm limited, a lens i know i like, for the cost of a repair, which is a bit of a bargain really

Your previous posts led me to understand that you intended to let go of the 40 anyway. If you DON'T want to do that, then by all means get it repaired!