swapping the 43mm f1.9?!

I have a FA 43mm, and yes, on the rules of you shouldn't sell a limited, I'm tempted to trade it in for a 35mm macro or a 15mm f4, simply because I hardly shoot portraits and also at that focal length, and I have a 24-60mm ex dg sigma, and I do enjoy a bit of random macro.
And the reason for getting a 15mm is simply for the versatality during climbing occassions.
Rather than wasting the mechanics of the 43mm I'd probably get something I use, as I'm nothing like a collector.
Not sure about the trading prices though so just wondering if anyone could shed some light on how much I should be asking for (in a swap?)
or if anyone would come to tell me I shouldn't do it, please do so! =D

i'd go for it, if i were you. i'm not a fan of the 43/1.9 images i see (the bokeh is a bit jangly wide-open), but i suppose this must be expected of such a small and fast lens—there have to be some trade offs.

the 35/2.8 that you're thinking of has a similar rendering, imo, to the 43/1.9. sharp, contrasty, but the bokeh is a bit rough around the edges wide open. do you think it's worth the effort in changing? you go 8mm wider, gain macro abilities, but lose a stop of speed. i'm not sure it's worth the swap, since if you are disappointed with the 43mm, i think you might be disappointed with the 35/2.8, since they render similarly to me.

the 15mm is a completely different lens. i like the colours, the contrast, the sharpness stopped down, the flare resistance, the lack (well, subtle) distortion, and the size. it's a really unique lens to pentax, and one of the reasons i bought into pentax. i think a 15mm is a good idea for anyone.

but, first and foremost, you should decide what it is that you want this lens to do. you are considering two quite different lenses which would serve quite different purposes in my eyes.

Check recent eBay prices for its 'value'.

If you manual focus then there's some difference between using an f4 lens and an f1.9 !!

Depends what you want by macro? Close up, or 1:1? Good quality diopter filter rings on the front of the lens are very useful, +3 say, or +4.

And a reversing ring works brilliantly with the 43mm ...

Just saying, you know.

The main attraction for the 35mm would be the 1:1 macro (especially little bugs/flora i see when I'm climbing) and when I'm out and about I'd be using AF mostly. I wasn't dissapointed by the colours etc of the 43mm, but I just don't really use that focal length, it's sort of right in the middle of what I don't tend to shoot.
the 15mm isn't as much of a priority, and I was thinking I should be able to get a little bit of money back if I swap the 43mm for the 35mm, and then save it up and slowly work my way towards a 15mm.
Or any other recommendations that are fairly small and light that might fit my bill?

DA 35mm f2.4? Weighs next to nothing, very sharp, cheap too by Pentax standards.

Sell the Sigma and get the 21mm Ltd !

I was in the same boat as you ... thinking about selling the 43 Ltd. However last year, after getting it out again for a few shoots to see if I right, I decided I couldn't be more wrong. Instead I've just had my daughter take my F 50/1.4 (that's right, no 'A') - the Bokeh Master, over to London, that's going on the market next week.

Now the 43 goes with me everywhere. If you are going to get the 35 then I really would sell the Sigma. The resolving power of the 43 (this has been MTF tested as Pentax's sharpest lense) means you can easily crop away anything you don't need and it's a great low light lense - especially with the K5, I was shooting just this evening with the 43 @ f2.2 and 3,200 instead of using a flash. The Tamron 17-50/2.8 wasn't doing it for me.

You could of course just add a Raynox 150 or 250 to your kit for macro. Those are little wonders with fantastic IQ.

if you want macro abilities, then the 35mm DA Ltd is your only option, really.

other af options incude the 35/2 FA (second hand) or the 31/1.8 (expensive, but people swear by it).

might you get by with only a 21mm DA Limited? it's really teensy and easy to carry around while climbing, gives you the wide angle (to some degree) that you might want eventually with the 15mm, and it focuses pretty close (although nowhere near as close as the 35mm).

The FA35 is still available new apparently.

sounds like selling the sigma for the 15mm and keeping the 43mm would be the most suggested then!
I just had an analyse of my pictures taken with DSLRs, and suddenly realised I've been talking rubbish, I do end up at around 40mm quite often but just never realise it!
unfortunately the macro will have to wait then...
what's a raynox by the wyay??

A Raynox is a close up adapter. It's a lens that screws on the front of your lens like a filter but the quality is staggeringly good. (do a raynox search on flickr.)

Yep, as Mark said. Although it doesn't screw on - it has it's own clip-on adaptor which makes it simple to add to virtually any lense within the range of the adaptor. If you want to get real macro then get the 250 (go to my website below and check out the yellow 1cm long caterpillars - these were taken with a Raynox 250 on top of a Tamron 90 Di. Great sharpness and IQ).

Take your pick from here : http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/digital/d_slr/index.html

These lenses are well under a US$100 and superb value for money. Easy to carry around too. I would suggest you start with the 150.

Thanks for the info guys, I think the 43mm with the raynox should be sufficient for me then!
Only problem is to try to fit it to the lens, which has a 49mm filter thread =S

You can get a 49>52 step up adapter ring.

many thanks indeed, I shall look into that.

Not wanting to start a new thread and clog up the forum and hope someone will see this, as now I've managed to gather some funds I'll be getting a 15mm or 21mm (pancake prime) fairly soon.
I'd be primarily using it for landscapes during climbing, but would also like to use it as a walkabout lens.
In a vast mountain environment sometimes I don't find having an extra mm helps a lot since everything is already so wide, but on occasions I have been proven wrong.
I could possibly get a good offer on either lens, so it'd be useful to hear more about them, best if someone who owns them both can talk about them.

I am glad you have decided to keep the FA43 which is simply one of the three best lenses Pentax make. (No prizes for guessing the other two!)

Sometimes I think the focal length is a bit odd but then realise with that incredible rendering I hardly care. FWIW I think 35mm is even more difficult on APS-C and sold my DA35 macro, though it is an excellent lens no doubt!

I have done fun work with a screw-on macro adapter but prefer to use it on the FA77.