Why should I buy this lens and not the Pentax DA 35mm f/2.4 which is almost 3x cheaper?
2024377
The other responders have covered the most important attributes of this lens and I agree with their assessments. If you don't plan on doing macro photography then this is not the lens for you.
2024378
Well, money may not be everything in this case. The physical integrity and optical quality of this lens is second to none. In addition, the macro feature is very nice, and renders superior images. This lens has sold me on pursuing primary lenses from now on, over zooms.
2024379
35mm macro is a macro lens, in other words optimized for extremely close up shooting; is made of metal and great build quality. The other lens is a general purpose lens, mostly plastic type material. The macro lens can hunt for focus if you switch from focusing on something close to something further away so its not good for shooting on the fly. Both will take great pictures, the macro is sharper but unless you want it for macro shooting, its not necessary.
2024380
You get the added benefit of macro capability and an aluminum lens body with integrated shield. Apart from that, the optical quality will be much sharper on the Limited series macro lens. If you want natural ratios (35mm) and stunning clarity on close up photos, get the macro limited. If you need a 35mm lens for general scenes & casual snapshots, get the 2.4 DA.I haven't used the regular 2.4DA, so I can't say I how much better or worse it is. But I am not interested in trying a cheaper alternative to give the level of clarity and detail I am used to now. I've tried those before on other pentax / Nikon bodies, and they are underwhelming for my purposes. Consider yours well. You get the added benefit of macro capability and an aluminum lens body with integrated shield. Apart from that, the optical quality will be much sharper on the Limited series macro lens. If you want natural ratios (35mm) and stunning clarity on close up photos, get the macro limited. If you need a 35mm lens for general scenes & casual snapshots, get the 2.4 DA.I haven't used the regular 2.4DA, so I can't say I how much better or worse it is. But I am not interested in trying a cheaper alternative to give the level of clarity and detail I am used to now. I've tried those before... » Read More You get the added benefit of macro capability and an aluminum lens body with integrated shield. Apart from that, the optical quality will be much sharper on the Limited series macro lens. If you want natural ratios (35mm) and stunning clarity on close up photos, get the macro limited. If you need a 35mm lens for general scenes & casual snapshots, get the 2.4 DA.I haven't used the regular 2.4DA, so I can't say I how much better or worse it is. But I am not interested in trying a cheaper alternative to give the level of clarity and detail I am used to now. I've tried those before on other pentax / Nikon bodies, and they are underwhelming for my purposes. Consider yours well. « Show Less
2024381
I don't have both for a one on one comparison of the image quality, but the 35mm f2.8 macro generally has slightly better ratings. Check out the reviews on the Pentax Forums web site. The main reason I purchased it was for the macro capability. It also has metal vs plastic housing which may or may not be an issue depending on how you use it.
2024382
This is a Limited lens, meaning it's made of metal. It's a macro lens, extremely sharp and contrasty with a flat field. It will do everything the other lens will do, AND be a macro lens. Pentax Limited lenses hold their value better than the non-ltd glass, as well.
2024383
This is a Macro Lens, if you have no need for Macro photography, then the 35mm f/2.4 is a better deal. This lens can shoot both regular and macro distant objects.
84381
For a travel lens, the 16-35mm f/4 might be a better lens. It is lighter and sharper. For travel photography, rarely are you at 2.8. Most times you are stopping down to f/11 to get more things in focus. If I had to buy this lens again, I may have gone for the 14-24mm f/2.8. The only time I had to go down to 2.8 was when I was doing night time star photography.
1856383
It is a hell of a great lens for its price. If you have extra money you can consider other lenses such as: Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras (http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-17-35mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEOS) again, if you have extra money. I have used both but I was happier with this 18-35mm lens because it's so light weight. Unless you have an old camera with not-so-great ISO performance or you like to do astrophotography, I think this lens can make many people happy.
1199008
I would not recommend. You will lose quality and also autofocus speed. I have it and I use it with a Sigma 300 2.8. In comparison the very old pentax 300 4.5, that I wanted replace, works much better.....It is not cheap..and adding few money you can buy a 300 4.5, 5.6 that will certainly work better, maybe adjusting ASA. Regards
1850113
Yes, is it worth it. My opinion is no. I actually returned my lens and purchased 3 primes for around the same price range. I had the lens for about 2 weeks and returned it for a 50mm1.8, 85mm 1.8 and 28mm 1.8 and do not regret it at all. Total for all 3 lens 1410.85. And I love them.
1326271
It's not really necessary because the D3 has AF Tune, you can adjust the focusing directly on the body btw you will love the 35mm 1.4 it is one of my favorite lenses
1773175
I think this is the best option without going nuts on budget, not cheap not so expensive. Distortion for Architectural is acceptable, obviously the more closer you are you will notice some, its not the 24mm or the zoom but believe me is sharp as hell, even more at f2.5 and f8 ... careful with a lil shift focus at night mostly at f4, other than that im super happy with this lens and i take it to travel a lot
678610
I had the f4 version, and sold it to a friend to buy the F2.8II. Frankly, the increase in IQ is there but very slight. I would have no qualms about going back to the F4 version, it's a stunning lens. So unless you have a specific need for F2.8 (weddings for example as others mention), the added weight of the 2.8 to me is hard to justify. These are both exceptional lenses, the difference is like comparing a Bentley and a Rolls-Royce.
1838719
Yea, the 35 1.4 is very sharp and also a "cannot love without it" lens. Definitely worth it.
423677
If you are going to stick with a DX sensor Nikon for a while, then I think the 18-300mm is your best value. The image quality is going to be very comparable to the 28-300mm, plus the 18-300 has these advantages for the DX shooter: - It starts at 18mm, so you have much wider coverage for landscape shots or tight spaces - It's smaller and lighter. Since this is going to be an all-purpose travel lens, this will be very helpful - It's about $150 less - If you ever go up to FX / full-frame, you can always sell this lens down the road and recoup about 65-75% of the original cost Enjoy!
1430891
I've had opportunity to acquire or try out most of the lenses (sans the 43mm ltd, unfortunately) since last posting. Here's my list for a newbie weighing performance, price, and availability:1. DA 40mm - Excellent all around and compact, compact, compact! 2. DA 70mm - Great color saturation, sharpness if not as fast as the FA 77mm3. FA 31mm LTD. Expensive! But might as well be welded to my K-7 right now. Amazing all around.4. My FA 50mm 1.4 has been bumped down to 4 or 5, given softness at f1.4 and lack of contrast. the 55mm 1.4 is a sleeper though, although I haven't had opportunity to try it. I've had opportunity to acquire or try out most of the lenses (sans the 43mm ltd, unfortunately) since last posting. Here's my list for a newbie weighing performance, price, and availability:1. DA 40mm - Excellent all around and compact, compact, compact! 2. DA 70mm - Great color saturation, sharpness if not as fast as the FA 77mm3. FA 31mm LTD. Expensive! But might as well be welded to my K-7 right now. Amazing all around.4. My FA 50mm 1.4 has been bumped down to 4 or 5, given softness at f1.4 and lack of contrast. the 55mm 1.4 is a sleeper though, although I... » Read More I've had opportunity to acquire or try out most of the lenses (sans the 43mm ltd, unfortunately) since last posting. Here's my list for a newbie weighing performance, price, and availability:1. DA 40mm - Excellent all around and compact, compact, compact! 2. DA 70mm - Great color saturation, sharpness if not as fast as the FA 77mm3. FA 31mm LTD. Expensive! But might as well be welded to my K-7 right now. Amazing all around.4. My FA 50mm 1.4 has been bumped down to 4 or 5, given softness at f1.4 and lack of contrast. the 55mm 1.4 is a sleeper though, although I haven't had opportunity to try it. « Show Less
105768
If you just want close-ups and not Macro shots get the DA*16-50 by Pentax. If you want Macro get the Sigma 70mm Macro
1298995
The K-3 is an upgrade from a K-x, which I'd had for three years. I've been very happy with it. I had considered the K-5IIs, but the improved features of the K-3 swayed me. I'm using the kit lenses that came with my K-x, plus a 50mm 1.4 FA that I already had, though I recently purchased an 18-55mm DA WR so I could gift my K-x with the kit short zoom to my son. I have no immediate plans to purchase more lenses. In fact, having purchased LightRoom at the same time I got the K-3, the quality of images I'm getting from my budget lenses is amazing. The K-3 has wonderful shadow detail which LightRoom pulls out very well. The K-3 is an upgrade from a K-x, which I'd had for three years. I've been very happy with it. I had considered the K-5IIs, but the improved features of the K-3 swayed me. I'm using the kit lenses that came with my K-x, plus a 50mm 1.4 FA that I already had, though I recently purchased an 18-55mm DA WR so I could gift my K-x with the kit short zoom to my son. I have no immediate plans to purchase more lenses. In fact, having purchased LightRoom at the same time I got the K-3, the quality of images I'm getting from my budget lenses is amazing. The K-3 has wonderful shadow detail which... » Read More The K-3 is an upgrade from a K-x, which I'd had for three years. I've been very happy with it. I had considered the K-5IIs, but the improved features of the K-3 swayed me. I'm using the kit lenses that came with my K-x, plus a 50mm 1.4 FA that I already had, though I recently purchased an 18-55mm DA WR so I could gift my K-x with the kit short zoom to my son. I have no immediate plans to purchase more lenses. In fact, having purchased LightRoom at the same time I got the K-3, the quality of images I'm getting from my budget lenses is amazing. The K-3 has wonderful shadow detail which LightRoom pulls out very well. « Show Less
1974652
I haven't used the 35mm but i can assure you the image quality is better than the 50 f1.8 or the kit lens. This sigma will serve you well as a starter lens and actually shouldn't be something you immediately feel like upgrading. Primes are well and good if you are ready for them but zooms are better for starting out. if you test out different focal lengths you can find out what prime lenses will work best for you. you don't want to buy a 35mm just to find out you'd rather have a 24, etc.
1244269
Dear friends. I am biased Pentax because I really love this camera. I bought the kit from Pentax K30 with a 18-55 and a 70-200. The set is sensational. I have taken many pictures in my trips to Portugal. Obviously there are better lenses and more optical resources, however this 70-200 mm in the kit fulfills its role.
1787792
35mm f2.4 does not need an adapter for K30 and doesn't doesn't come with a lens cap.I recommend the metal leens hood that costs about $8.00. I use that to protect the lens and I also have a uv filter screwed onto the lens cap but probably not necessary. I absolutely love this lens. This lens and the DA55-300 are superb matches to the K30. You will be blessed with a great photo setup with these three items. The 35mm works for me as a wide angle so it is great to shoot photos in your living room or even landscapes. I got some really nice fall foliage shots with the 35mm. Freddy
2102761
Go with the Pentax DA 50mm f1.8. On the cropped pentax sensor, its equivalent to a ~85mm. If you are looking for a "normal" lens get something between 30mm and 35mm.