Changing Thoughts on Lenses

Thinking here in particular about lenses around the 40mm mark. Originally I thought that a lens of around 60mm would have been odd on film, so what was the purpose of a 40mm lens on APS-C?

I started off with a 43mm Limited, sold it on. Then I had a 40mm Limited, and sold it on. Then I ended up with another 43mm in a job lot of lenses and now, finally, it's the one that's stuck.

I suppose it's not too far adrift from the 55mm lens I started out with on my SP1000, just making things a bit tighter on the composition. It's just curious how the mood changes over time and how sometimes we come full circle.

Perhaps the moral is don't sell that seldom used lens, you might grow to love it.

I suspect there's a reason why 40mm sits well with 'pancake' lens design and that the DA40 was probably the focal length they could make thinnest. As you say, my M 40/2.8 works well on film and although I find the Super-Tak 55/1.8 useful on film, I suspect a 40mm on APS-C would be a little too long for me.

I've recently bought a DA35 to sit on my K200.

My DA40 sits on the K110.

Images taken with both lenses on the same camera have few major differences. The 35 being less saturated in colour than the 40. The 40 having a narrower field than the 35 (obviously).

The 40, because of it's size has been a favoured walk around town lens, I need to try the 35 for this and see how it compares.

I'm interested in the new 50 just announced for iminent launch, mainly tosee whether it would be worth adding to the bag as a portrait lens. I currently use a SMCA 50mm f1.7 when I'm playing in this area and need an autofocus lens(failing eyes etc.). I've tried the 40 but it just doesn't do it for me in this mode.

On a wider view, I tend to fit the Tammy18-250 when I go on holiday, and although the 40 goes with me it sees little use,so little that this year it may stay at home.

Over the years the range of subjets I like to shoot have changed a little, so it stands to reason that my lens requirements may also change a little. Perhaps this is one reason I tend to go for zooms!

That said I do have 8 primes! 3 are 50mm, 4 are M's, one is a macro!

Just when I'd decided to sell some of my Ltd primes because of my minimal use of them, you make a post like this that makes me doubt that decision.

Thanks John.

Glad to help Peter!

I sold my 10-17mm as well, and I regret that from time to time.

I was going to post something the other day but didn't. It strikes me as odd that we are using 135 format focal lengths on APSC. Last weeks comp made me think why have Pentax announced a new 50mm lens when actually 57mm might be more useful?

The 40mm was a modest wide angle on 35mm film but now its a tight standard on digital. Is it that marketing people think we cant deal with odd-ball focal lengths (although Pentax LTDs are) or is it that there are plenty tried and proven legacy designs in a drawer?

Having said that, I do like 40mm on both formats.

I sold my original FA100mm 1:2.8 macro and regretted it almost immediately, so I got another at the first opportunity, even though I already had a D-FA version. I use both, the FA simply because I love using it. I use the D-FA when I also need the ring flash.

The one lens I seriously regret selling, and now can't afford to replace it, was my FA135mm. At least it found a good home with a forum member.

It may seem a little odd but I really like using my 28mm on the K10 it's neither wide nor long being enquivalent of a 42mm on 35mm but I like it.

I have a 135 f2.8 lens and keep meaning to sell it as I can't get on with it - no particular issues other than myself not liking it - this post has made me wonder once more whether to keep it or sell it - confusion reigns (it's not worth much so finances don't come into it)

I used the M40mm/2.8 pancake for years as my standard lens on film. 50mm always seemed a little bit too long, and 35mm always seemed a little bit too wide. I'm using the M28mm/2.8 on digital for the same reason. But just last weekend I was wishing that I had something a little bit shorter than the 50mm for digital. Never should have sold that pancake when I gave up film.

I used the M40 on my MX which was a great combination, I sold it when I bought the DA40, I just cant be bothered with M lenses on digital I'm afraid.

Because all they had to do was dust off their FA50/1.7 design, rather than come up with something new! The 50mm will almost certainly be suitable for dual use on APSC and 135mm format, as the FA35 derived DA35mm is.

Anyway the 75mm EFL on APSC can't be that useless... or else why do we have the 77mm ltd

It's because it's a Lucky Number in Japan and also partly because the Chinese character for "delight" looks like "77"

My DA40 is hardly ever on the camera, and then only as it brings AF to the party. The more recently arrived DA21 is hardly off it.
Not sure why
Pete

I'd never sell mine. Charisma personality lens!! Love it!