[klkitchens]

Torn between the 35MM FA, the 50MM FA Macro, and/or possibly the DA*55.

Want to keep it casual and really want to use a prime for this, but seems I always panic and fall back on a short telephoto for this kind of thing, lol.

On the old APC 35 was essentially a 50 anyway, but now it's wider. The DA*55 I never ever seem to find a use for since it's not even macro and the focus is slowish.

Have a simple belt clip to keep thing unobtrusive as we roam.

Thoughts?

[AfterPentax Mark II]

Torn between the 35MM FA, the 50MM FA Macro, and/or possibly the DA*55.

Want to keep it casual and really want to use a prime for this, but seems I always panic and fall back on a short telephoto for this kind of thing, lol.

On the old APC 35 was essentially a 50 anyway, but now it's wider. The DA*55 I never ever seem to find a use for since it's not even macro and the focus is slowish.

Have a simple belt clip to keep thing unobtrusive as we roam.

Thoughts?

If you own all three of them already I would go for the 35mm. The 55mm is a brilliant lens, but a bit heavy. If you do not owe the 35mm already, there is also the option of the much lighter DA 35mm F2.4, which is, for the money, a very good lens and light. So more chance of keeping things unobtrusive. You can not do that with the DA*55mm.
The DA 35mm F2.4 is an APS-C lens, which is usable on FF, forgot to mention that.

[klkitchens]

If you own all three of them already I would go for the 35mm. The 55mm is a brilliant lens, but a bit heavy. If you do not owe the 35mm already, there is also the option of the much lighter DA 35mm F2.4, which is, for the money, a very good lens and light. So more chance of keeping things unobtrusive. You can not do that with the DA*55mm.

Thanks for the insight. I do own them all already.

[pres589]

On crop, a 24 or a 28.
On full frame, a 28, 35, or 40. 35 being my least favorite of the three but they definitely have their place.

[klkitchens]

On crop, a 24 or a 28.
On full frame, a 28, 35, or 40. 35 being my least favorite of the three but they definitely have their place.

I'm on K-1 FF of course, but only own the 35 of those three. I do have a Sigma 24mm SuperWide that's going with me, but was not planning to carry it around in town.

[pres589]

See what you think of the 35 and after a time or two out you should have an idea of how well it fits your tastes and what you like to shoot.

The Super Wide always seemed cool to me and a really useful focal length.

[Jeff]

43mm f/1.9 on the K-1 or K-1ii without a doubt. Wide, small, fast...

[DeadJohn]

... keep it casual and really want to use a prime for this, but seems I always panic and fall back on a short telephoto for this kind of thing ... Have a simple belt clip to keep thing unobtrusive as we roam ...

Your thread title says walkaround but some of the things you said make we wonder about what type of photos you have in mind. Do you want to take photos of whatever you happen to come across, or closeup photos of strangers, or slightly wider streetscapes of buildings plus people?

The K-1 body is fairly large so the choice of lens may be secondary to how "unobtrusive" you are. Anticipate that photo subjects, ignorant security guards, and potential camera thieves will sometimes notice your camera.

When I'm doing general "walkaround" photos I like the 28-105 for its versatile zoom range and it's fairly small size (for a zoom).

28mm is still a good focal length for stealthy street photography "shooting from the hip". I pre-focus around 2 meters away, set the aperture to f/8 or f/11 for good depth of field, relatively high shutter speed to freeze motion, use TAv mode to let ISP drift as needed. This can be done with the K-1 but IMO works even better with the tiny Ricoh GR. Going as wide as 28mm often gets clutter within the frame so I crop for composition later.

[robgski]

For great images in a very small combo, the DA 40 XS does very well on the K-1.

[yucatanPentax]

I think that, of the lenses you already own, the FA 35mm might have good potential. Why not try some walk-arounds in your neighborhood or downtown of wherever you are now (Atlanta?) and see how the results strike you.

If suitable, then you can try it on your trip to small towns. If not, maybe the Sigma SuperWide 24mm would be better? I've usually found that cities or towns were candidates for wider over longer, most of the time.

Going for architectural details or close-ups would be the only reason to bring longer or tele lenses, so I would lean toward bringing your wider two.

[Billking]

FA35mm is what you want

[Sandy Hancock]

Another vote for the FA35/2.0 here.

But why not give each of them a go, and see which suits your style best?

[savoche]

It depends on what you like to shoot. I prefer a wide lens when walking around town, like the FA28 or even my A20. So my pick would obviously be the 35 from the three in your list.

If I want to be unobtrusive, though, I always take the GR. Small, silent, and with the snap focus it's perfect for a quick shot.

[Lord Lucan]

I use an old FA 28-70. The wide end is what you often need for architecture (I found 35 is not enough) and the tele end is for capturing stangers. For casual street photography you don't want to be changing lenses or the picture will be gone (and makes you more vulnerable to a thief) - hence the zoom. You also don't want something that looks (or is) a powerful telephoto because that can create issues if you point it at people. My 28-70 is relatively inconspicuous, although perhaps no DSLR can be called inconspicuous these days, being so rare.

[jcdoss]

(and makes you more vulnerable to a thief)

I don't want to go too off-topic, but where do you guys live that has camera thieves everywhere? Have any of you actually been mugged for your camera? I've heard of gear being stolen out of parked cars, but never an actual mugging for the many years I've been on the forums.