Upgrading normal lens

Started Oct 3, 2012 | Discussions thread
viking79 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,148
Re: Upgrading normal lens

Dan Beaty wrote:

Should I invest in repairing it, or is there a sharper lens I can look for in the new or used market that would be a better investment? No, I am not ready to spent the $$$ for the FA31/1.8.

The FA 35/2 is a consideration, but it is not my preferred FL. The DA 35/2.4 gets good reviews, but is it a good long term investment? I am fine with manual focus, even manual aperture, if it gets the extra IQ I am hoping for. Neither do I need super fast apertures for most of my work.

Think of the DA 35 mm f/2.4 as a 2.4 version of the 35/2. They are a similar optical design, similar resolution, etc. The DA 35/2.4 is basically a slightly slower version with a cheaper build quality. It is a good value lens, and it is sharp corner to corner.

The focal lengths I used most often in 35mm film were 28, 50 and 100 in landscape photography. Is there a zoom that would make a significant upgrade for my purposes?

A 17-70 or something would cover the range, but would probably have similar limitations at the edges as your 16-45 mm.

For the focal lengths you used on film, the DA 35 mm f/2.4 (or 2.8 limited macro), the 21 mm f/3.2 and 70 mm f/2.4 would be relatively equivalent.


-- hide signature --

I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R Samsung NX1 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow