|
LBA Advice DA40/2.8 or FA50/1.4?
Jul 19, 2006
|
Hi All,
I've had my DS for a little over 3 weeks now and already, I'm getting the itch to pick up some nice primes. I'm in a bit of a quandry here since despite the fact that I shoot C*n primarily on film, I decided to go with Pentax for my DSLR.
I decided in addition to the 18-125 Sigma that came with the camera that I'd really like a wide, normal, short telephoto and mabye a macro to round out the kit (of course this won't be happening in one fell swoop). My dilema is this - do I go with the DSLR specifc DA lenses or a traditional lens designed for 35. I like the idea of having complete compatability in the event that Pentax decides to go full frame and not having to re-invest in lenses.
I'm having a hard time deciding between the DA 40/2.8 or FA 50/1.4. I'd love to have both, but am afraid that the focal lengths are too close to warrant it.
short tele is a bit of a no brainer - FA 77/1.8 ltd would be ideal, and on the wide end of things, there doesn't look to be much of a choice other than the DA 21/3.2 ltd due to the 1.5x crop factor.
One of the thoughts I did have was to get DA 40/2.8 and reserve the 50mm focal length for the macro. However, as I've had little experience with macro work, I don't know if the 50 or 100 would be more practical.
Comments and advice are appreciated. Thanks.
-
Lib
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 19, 2006 | |||
| Jul 19, 2006 | |||
| Jul 19, 2006 | |||
| Jul 19, 2006 | |||
| Jul 19, 2006 | |||
| Jul 19, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 20, 2006 | |||
| Jul 21, 2006 |