[nandystam]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I'm not sure if I should do this or not.. I know the DA40 is excellent but having used a 25mm pancake on an Oly E-620 for a while (50mm equiv) I'm finding that the DA40 is a little bit too tight when it comes to general purpose/walk-around shooting?

Everything I read about the DA35 f2.4 sounds good. It's cheap but produces good results, and is a little bit closer to 50mm and a bit faster than the DA40. Does 7.5mm really make a lot of difference?

Help convince me one way or the other!!

Thanks

[SpecialK]

Why not switch? It's wider (slightly) and faster (slightly) but huge (in comparison :-)

[wlachan]

If 40mm is too tight, I will just go 21mm instead of 35mm. But believe me, you don't fish for the "perfect" focal length when you shoot prime. Just pick one and work around it. Otherwise, you might be better served by a zoom.

[wed7]

If 40mm is too tight, I will just go 21mm instead of 35mm. But believe me, you don't fish for the "perfect" focal length when you shoot prime. Just pick one and work around it. Otherwise, you might be better served by a zoom.

A noob here, before I bought the 40mm, the 21mm pancake was running in my mind, but then again decided to get the former lens so I can work around take time and enjoy this newfound hobby. (Though the 21mm is still in my wishlist )

[gp1806]

I'm not sure if I should do this or not.. I know the DA40 is excellent but having used a 25mm pancake on an Oly E-620 for a while (50mm equiv) I'm finding that the DA40 is a little bit too tight when it comes to general purpose/walk-around shooting?

Everything I read about the DA35 f2.4 sounds good. It's cheap but produces good results, and is a little bit closer to 50mm and a bit faster than the DA40. Does 7.5mm really make a lot of difference?

Help convince me one way or the other!!

Thanks

Don't switch, just get the 35mm. Both are good. I have an FA 35mm. My next lens is going to be the DA 40mm.

[Hypocorism]

Everything I read about the DA35 f2.4 sounds good. It's cheap but produces good results, and is a little bit closer to 50mm and a bit faster than the DA40. Does 7.5mm really make a lot of difference?

7.5 mm difference? Presumably you refer to focal length, and are also applying crop factor there, which can make waters murky.

Can I suggest using A.o.V (Angle of View) instead. That tends to give a more realistic, and accurate concept of the variance to be experienced between lenses in real world usage. Focal length never seems to translate to WYSIWYG comfortably.
A.o.V is included in the specs of each lens here;
Camera Lens - Official PENTAX Imaging Web Site

And perceptions are always a subjective thing, dependant on opinions and preferences; so for the visual graphic test with the only eyes that matter, yours, I find comparators can be fun to play with, try these:
Tamron Europe: Focal length comparison
NIKKOR Lenses Simulator | Nikon

Help convince me one way or the other!!

You're going to buy it anyway. Just go ahead and lash out. You're a grown up now.

.R. -- Who intends to get 2.4/35 soon too, just because it's plastic.

[ramseybuckeye]

If you can swing it, get the 35 and have them both at the same time. Then if you find you are not using one of them, sell it.

I have the 35 and I love it, I don't have the 40 but I debated buying it because I've read so much good about it. I did choose the 35 because it is just that much wider. But not having the 40, it's hard to say how much real world difference there is.

[Ash]

Nothing wrong with going for a lens you will use more, regardless of its cost, size or shape.
The 35 is a good lens period. The 40 is also very good, but if it's not suitable, it's not suitable...

[littledrawe]

Nothing wrong with going for a lens you will use more, regardless of its cost, size or shape.

I am going to put this statement on the top of a petition and get other people on the forum to sign it so I can show it to my wife when I am about ready to buy a 500mm f2.8!

seems to be a common mistake but the 40mm is not a " * " lens it is a limited. Since everyone thinks so highly of it perhaps it deserves an upgrade!

[Wombat]

If 40mm is too tight, I will just go 21mm instead of 35mm. But believe me, you don't fish for the "perfect" focal length when you shoot prime. Just pick one and work around it. Otherwise, you might be better served by a zoom.

What he said. You're looking at 35mm equivalents of 52.5mm vs 60mm. Nothing in it - just move your feet a bit and save your money for something completely different. (A waterproofing kit might be the go, the way things are in your State at the moment!).

[kangeroo82]

I would agree with ramsey. If you are trying to compare lenses, it's best to buy both and see which one you are satisfied with before selling. The marketplace is full of sellers.

Also, how long have you been shooting with the DA40mm? It's an excellent lens and so maybe give it a little bit more time.

If you can swing it, get the 35 and have them both at the same time. Then if you find you are not using one of them, sell it.

I have the 35 and I love it, I don't have the 40 but I debated buying it because I've read so much good about it. I did choose the 35 because it is just that much wider. But not having the 40, it's hard to say how much real world difference there is.

[sterretje]

seems to be a common mistake but the 40mm is not a " * " lens it is a limited. Since everyone thinks so highly of it perhaps it deserves an upgrade!

Ah, you want a limited * lens; see this 50mm limited *

[Rondec]

I don't think I would switch lenses -- the angle of view isn't really that different. The DA 35 f2.4 has a cheaper construction, but is half stop faster.

I do own both the DA 35 limited and the DA 40 limited, but the DA 35 limited is a very different lens from the 40 since it can to do macro photography as well.