Is FA 31mm necessary when you have FA 43mm?


Status
Not open for further replies.

snapx3

New Member
Mar 29, 2006
280
0
0
#1
Hi all,

I’ve a DA 21mm, but would prefer a much faster wide-angle lens.

I’m thinking of saving up for the FA 31mm. As I already have the FA 43mm, would the difference be very obvious if I shoot with FA 31mm?

Have also looked at FA 24mm F2.0 – but it looks huge. Also, I read that it doesn’t work as well on DSLR bodies, as compared to film bodies.

So what do you guys think?

Thanks
 

fengwei

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 25, 2004
14,462
12
0
Queenstown
www.pbase.com
#2
FA31 has a 70 degree FOV, while FA43 has a 53 degree FOV, that's on film camera. On digital they'd have 46.9 and 35.5 degree equivalent FOV respectively, the difference is pretty big and obvious. But if you can live w/ slightly tight crop, FA43 will be fine, and on digital it works better when comboed w/ DA21 (than w/ FA31).

I don't know why you want a much faster wide-angle lens 'cause most time we don't need a wide angle lens to be super fast. But on digital FA31 isn't really a wide angle lens any more, not to say the FA43. If you really want it fast, try the FA*24/2 or Sigma 24/1.8.

If you think FA*24/2 is huge, you haven't tried the FA*28-70 or FA*80-200 yet ;) Actually it's much smaller than the Sigma 24/1.8.

I've tried the FA*24/2 on both K10D and K20D, it does have some focus problem on my K10D (as w/ some other fast lenses), but it works great on K20D camera.
 

Last edited:

billitone

New Member
Oct 17, 2004
604
0
0
bt batok
www.billitone.net
#3
I'd say it's necessary...esp when LBA has struck :)

Since you have FA 43mm, you should know how it performs already. FA 31mm is better than FA 43mm.:devil:

FA 31mm is a great performer even at the widest aperture with good contract, sharpness, resolution, well-controlled CA, smooth bokeh.

To sum up, the 12mm difference is more than just few steps behind.:angel:
 

Equatorer

New Member
Aug 25, 2007
616
0
0
31
nus
#4
Well I once thought about this question for a long time...
To keep 43, or sell 43 n buy 31, even sell 43 n get FA35 2 to hit the mid-point..
Anyway, now have both 43 and 31 now.. lol

moral of the story: don't try to resist what you eventually gonna do:cool:
 

snapx3

New Member
Mar 29, 2006
280
0
0
#5
I don't know why you want a much faster wide-angle lens 'cause most time we don't need a wide angle lens to be super fast. But on digital FA31 isn't really a wide angle lens any more, not to say the FA43. If you really want it fast, try the FA*24/2 or Sigma 24/1.8.

Fengwei, to be honest, I kinda fallen in love with the beautiful bokeh produced by the FA 43mm. So I'm hoping to create the same effect when i'm taking wider shots.

The Sigma lens looks as big as the FA*24mm. I like Pentax for its collection of small lenses.. although the F31mm is not that small. Something like the Vivitar 24mm f2 will be ideal. Not sure if it's good though.

To sum up, the 12mm difference is more than just few steps behind.

billitone, that's what I need to know. Thanks for summing it up so concisely.

Well I once thought about this question for a long time...
To keep 43, or sell 43 n buy 31, even sell 43 n get FA35 2 to hit the mid-point..
Anyway, now have both 43 and 31 now.. lol


Equatorer, that's where i'm at the moment. haha been looking for the next best alternative to the 31mm. I guess you are right.. somehow or another, we'll end up with the best lens there is.

Thanks guys for your inputs. I guess I'll start saving up now.
 

scorpioh

New Member
Jul 17, 2007
1,973
0
0
Woodlands
#6
Actually the 31 and 43 produce rather different bokeh. the 31's bokeh is more akin to the 77, creamy type while the 43's rather edgy and "donut" type. Every true Pentaxian should own the FA trio imho.
 

P3ntx

New Member
Apr 14, 2007
1,176
0
0
44
West Coast Road
www.pentaxphotogallery.com
#8
These three lens, if you gave yourself a chance to each of them a day with respect ... you would want the three of them ...rather than alternative ....

My last of near final wish list is something that can tatamount to FA *80-200 f2.8
Is the 50-135 2.8 is a bit short I find. or something like 380-400 F2.8
 

Apr 5, 2007
533
0
0
West of Singapore
#9
Hi all,

I’ve a DA 21mm, but would prefer a much faster wide-angle lens.

I’m thinking of saving up for the FA 31mm. As I already have the FA 43mm, would the difference be very obvious if I shoot with FA 31mm?

Have also looked at FA 24mm F2.0 – but it looks huge. Also, I read that it doesn’t work as well on DSLR bodies, as compared to film bodies.

So what do you guys think?

Thanks

You're right in that the 43 mm produces wonderful bokeh, compared to the FA 31 - not to say that the FA 31 doesn't, its just that the bokeh of the 43 is different from the other FA limiteds.

The FA 31 is altogether different lens, and it doesn't replicate what the 43 does - its certainly wider, and it has a favour on its own that I can't describe. Anyway, for events photography with a prime, the 31 tops it for me - 43's FOV is a tad too narrow. Off the side, the FA 31 performs very differently on film and on digital - go shoot with the 31 wide open on film, and contrast the difference with digital - I find that the 3D effect of images by the 31 is better on film.

Lastly, the 24 mm has impressed me with its sharpness wide open, despite how its reviewed in Photozone. Its definitely a lens worth having in my current line-up, which is very lacking in wide angle lenses. Though a strong competitor here is the sigma 24/2.8 (i haven't tried the newer 1.8 version) which excels in 2 aspects - the close focusing and the sharpness, both of which makes for very versatile photography.
 

Zenten

Deregistered
Jun 13, 2004
9,845
8
38
#10
Yes, it is necessary, unless you have the 21mm. But then again, maybe just get all three lenses ............ ;p
 

#12
on digital (APC), no 31mm is not necessary, 43mm is more useful...
on film/FF, then 31mm is a must...

31mm is more for the future...just imagine ur 21mm but much faster and much much better...too bad now the price is up...should have got it b4 the price when up...
 

fengwei

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 25, 2004
14,462
12
0
Queenstown
www.pbase.com
#13
on digital (APC), no 31mm is not necessary, 43mm is more useful...
on film/FF, then 31mm is a must...

31mm is more for the future...just imagine ur 21mm but much faster and much much better...too bad now the price is up...should have got it b4 the price when up...
Hmm, I don't know. I've been using the FA43 mostly on film cameras nowadays ;) Most time it's the only lens I bring w/ me when I'm shooting film.

But everyone has his/her one preferred focal range, it all depends your personal needs. If you think 31mm is useful to you, just buy it. It's one of the best AF lenses that money can buy :cool:
 

scorpioh

New Member
Jul 17, 2007
1,973
0
0
Woodlands
#14
Hmm, I don't know. I've been using the FA43 mostly on film cameras nowadays ;) Most time it's the only lens I bring w/ me when I'm shooting film.

But everyone has his/her one preferred focal range, it all depends your personal needs. If you think 31mm is useful to you, just buy it. It's one of the best AF lenses that money can buy :cool:
And it's price isn't anywhere near extorbitant.
 

hjbyeo

Senior Member
May 5, 2006
5,165
30
48
East
#15
on digital (APC), no 31mm is not necessary, 43mm is more useful...
on film/FF, then 31mm is a must...

31mm is more for the future...just imagine ur 21mm but much faster and much much better...too bad now the price is up...should have got it b4 the price when up...
I actually used the 31mm more often than the 43mm, surprised surprised surprised... But when you are just bring 1 lens for snapshots on the streets, you tend to bring the 43mm out (slim, small, unobstrusive) instead of the 31mm.

When I have all 3 in my bag, I tend to use the 31mm and the 77mm.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom