To 50 or not to 50?

[MAJPLO]

Everyone recommends a 50mm but I haven't been all that interested until I saw a sale yesterday. I thought something around a 30 or 35 would be a better length which are, of course more expensive or not as fast. Then I noticed a 35mm on sale also. Now I'm really debating. So.... 50mm 1.8 or 35mm 2.4? They are DA and DA L respectively. For a Pentax K30 (and THANK YOU to the DIS boards for all the help in making that decision! I LOVE it. Both lenses are the same price on sale. Please advise!

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

First of all, my first question is what do you want to do with the lens. Then second, I would not recommend the Pentax DA L series. Optical-wise, they are the same as their more expensive siblings, but construction-wise not so much. They have a plastic mount, no quick shift (AF to Manual) and no lens hood. Other than maybe portraits, it has been my experience (Pentax experience) that the 50mm is not as useful on a crop sensor camera. On film and FF cameras, it is more useful and was the lens I had on my film SLR most of the time. I don't know what your lens lineup looks like, but I am saving my sheckles for the new Sigma 18-35 f1.8. I currently have the Sigma 30 f1.4 for the dark rides at Disney. I don't use it often away from Disney since I primarily shoot motorsports and use intermediate to long zooms.

Now, I have a question about the K30. I am thinking about buying one for my DGD. How do you like the K30 and if given a choice would you buy it again? Thanks for any help.

Terry

 

[havoc315]

Depends what you already own and what you want to gain.
50mm/1.8 is a great lens for portraits.

Both lenses are very good for low light. But if you already own a 2.8 lens, then the 35 isn't giving you much of a gain. If you don't already own a 2.8...
The 50 is good for very very low light, including candlelight. The downside of the 50, it can be tight indoors when you don't have room to back up.
The 35-2.4 is good for fairly low light-- indoor flashless, and gives you a wider angle of view.

So both lenses are useful, but a bit different. I love primes, I own a 35-1.8, 50-1.7, 50-2.8 macro, 85-2.8, 135-2.8. Optical quality of primes is so great, it's often worth giving up the convenience of zoom.

 

[amie416]

I can't comment on the specifics of those lenses, but on my Nikon D80 (which is also a crop-frame camera) I find that a 50mm lens feels kind of awkward in most shooting situations.

My two go-to lenses tend to be 85mm and 35mm (both are 1.8). The 85mm is great when I want to capture images from the concerts I work on, candid portraits, and objects or animals at a moderate distance. The 35mm sees almost exactly the same image my eyes see through a "finger frame"; this makes subject placement and composition very easy and natural. 35mm is turning out to be a great lens for family photos and snapshots.

 

[mom2rtk]

When I wanted to add my first fast lens, I bought the Canon 50mm f/1.8. Everyone talks about what a great deal it is since it's around $100 so I just jumped in with that one. After using it for about a week, I then plopped down $400 on the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

Here's my message. The most expensive lens is the one you buy twice. Yes, the Sigma was a 4X the cost of the Canon 50. But if it's not the right one, and you have to go through the less expensive one to get there, it's even more expensive.

I can't tell you how many times I have used and loved that Sigma through the years. I can count on one hand the number of times I have used the Canon 50. (Only when I want to smuggle my DSLR into Disney on Ice and need my DSLR to impersonate a bridge camera. )

That said, it is quite possible that's just my shooting style. It feels to me on a crop body that 50mm is too short to be a long lens and too long to be a short lens. You might love the 50mm length, as many others do. My suggestion is that you set your kit lens to 50mm and walk around for a day shooting that length. If you like, it...... awesome. If not, then you just saved yourself some money.

 

[lhermiston]

I LOVE my Nikkor 50mm 1.8. Tack sharp photos, beautiful bokeh, super fast.

But, to echo another poster, it's a portrait lens, so I don't find myself shooting with it a ton.

I can't speak to a 35mm, but those are my two cents on a 50.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

The DA L lenses are lacking in sharpness, the positive ratings on them are geared toward "At the Price Point" they are a great value. They do what you need them to but they lack in a lot of areas.

I'm a Pentaxian as well, however I haven't tried either of those lenses but I do own the DA* 55 f1.4, and it is tack sharp. I'd love to get the new Sigma and probably will next year when the demand lessens and sales start...

 

[havoc315]

Comes down to this--
For portraits, 50mm is more useful.
For general multi purpose walk around, 35 mm is more useful.
And for low light, 1.8 is more useful than 2.4.

 

[MAJPLO]

Thanks for all the info and advice.

GiannasPapa, I really love the K30. I bought it without having the chance to see it beforehand and it fits me well. Not too heavy, not too big for my small hands, feels sturdy without being bulky. Two of my decision makers were in-body stabilization and weather proofing. Two things I'm struggling a little bit with are finding people who are familiar with Pentax and finding a variety of lenses readily available. Your granddaughter will have you for help, advice, and borrowing so she will be very well off!

Regarding your Sigma 30mm, is this an older lens no longer made for Pentax mounts? I haven't been able to find it for the K mount.

 

[photo_chick]

Comes down to this--
For portraits, 50mm is more useful.
For general multi purpose walk around, 35 mm is more useful.
And for low light, 1.8 is more useful than 2.4.

I'm going to disagree here at least as far as the focal lengths are concerned. It really comes down to how you shoot as to which is more useful for what.

OP one way to figure out which focal length might serve you best is to go back and look at your EXIF data. See what focal lengths you tend to use a lot and if they coincide with any primes. Or do what mom2rtk staid and keep your lens at a given focal length.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Thanks for all the info and advice.

GiannasPapa, I really love the K30. I bought it without having the chance to see it beforehand and it fits me well. Not too heavy, not too big for my small hands, feels sturdy without being bulky. Two of my decision makers were in-body stabilization and weather proofing. Two things I'm struggling a little bit with are finding people who are familiar with Pentax and finding a variety of lenses readily available. Your granddaughter will have you for help, advice, and borrowing so she will be very well off!

Regarding your Sigma 30mm, is this an older lens no longer made for Pentax mounts? I haven't been able to find it for the K mount.

Thanks for the info on the K30. And yes my 30 is the older model. I'm fortunate in that I live in the Chicago suburbs and have all the factory repair facilities within 20 minutes from my house. When I upgraded to the K5 from the K10D, I had all my Sigma lenses recalibrated. I am very happy with them. I wouldn't say I'm an expert with Pentax, but I have been shooting with them for over 30 years. If you have any questions about the system, I'll try to answer them. The strength of the Pentax lens system is the abundance of older legacy and small prime lenses. In my opinion, the weakness is the lowlight zoom lenses. That's why I went with Sigma lenses for my motorsports work. IMHO, I think they are making the best ergonomically, weather resistant and strong bodies. So far they have concentrated their efforts in the APS-C format with forays into mirrorless. Full Frame is being rumored, but I'm not holding my breath. For right now the K5 series is meeting my needs.