Which prime for general use?

I am moving to Pentax from Nikon and am planning on getting a couple of zoom lenses - the 50-135 for sure and the 8-16 Sigma cause I love my wide angles but not sure what to get in between. I'd rather not get a zoom as I have primes both for better IQ but also for convenience.

I have been looking at the 40mm with lust mainly because it is very close to my 35mm AF-S and also for its size, with it on the K-5 feels no bigger or bulkier than my D40!!!. It is simply irresistibly slim and very close to the 35mm. However I find the 2.8 aperture a bit slow.

So apart from the 40 what other primes stand out? I don't want at the moment the ones that fall in the 50-135 category as if I want a 70 or 77 I will probably need 100 and 135 so no point.

However a good one in the range of 16-50 would be very useful. Should i simply forget the size and get something like the 31 1.8? Though I find uber expensive primes a bit of a bad move...

The pentax DA21mm is a corker in my view. I use it a fair bit. It is very compact. you do get some distortion with it but that can be easily sorted in PP. My other most-used prime in the range you mention is the Sigma 30mm f1.4, which I reckon is similarly a peach, and fast.

Currently lusting after a DA15mm as well

Regards

15mm prime too wide for a prime yet not wide enough for proper wide angle shots though I like the extreme wide.

I'd like though to try Pentax primes this is why I am not looking for Sigma now...

FA 35mm F2, just bought a used one myself and it's excellent

Simon

If it's a 35mm lens that's on the agenda, the SMC Pentax-DA 35mm f2.4 is both excellent and a ridiculously low price for what it is.

I used one recently for a fashion show and it was brilliant. Sharp, free from flare and snapping quickly into focus. For £135 or so you can't really go wrong with this one.

Agree with John - it's a lovely lens and a flexible focal length. It's just fast enough to be interesting. The 35mm ltd would also be good as it's very sharp and beautifully made, and will let you switch from general shooting to proper macro shots, so it's even more flexible. A lot of good lenses to choose from at around 35mm.

We haven't even mentioned the 31mm Limited yet....

Thing is, just about every Pentax lens in production is good. So one has to narrow things down more, by budget, aperture, or overall desire for prime or zoom.

If you simply want the best, get the FA Limiteds.

Was looking at the 43 limited but at 500£ it is a bit much for a prime for my tastes. The 31mm sounds great and the 35 is fine but as it is 2.8 might as well go for the 40 which i really love the looks of too 5mm wont be that much difference unless the IQ is much better.

I don't want to spend silly money on a prime to be honest, on the Nikons I had a 50mm and a 35mm but both of them costed 230£ which is less than one of the 40mm. I am happy with a prime up to 300-350 but any more it is pushing it only cause I doubt i will manage to use it enough to justify the cost. I can see me using the prime 25% of the time, the 50-135 50% and the 8-16 another 25% and this is why I am willing to pay more for the 50-135 than either the wide or the prime.

I guess what I was asking is is there any reason I shouldn't go for the 40mm other than the stop or so slower aperture than the much more expensive ones?

There's no reason to avoid the DA40 - it's a very good pancake lens, and it's siblings (the 21 and 70) make for a great set.

The 40 is by far the smallest physically, and solely due to its size it's fiddly to focus manually. That aside, very nice.

Should add that it focuses quickly, with no accuracy issues on AF.

Another vote here, excellent lens if you can find one, second only to the FA-31 at a fraction of the cost.

John

I suppose we can divide the standard primes first of all into three groups. Low cost (35mm f2.4), standard (50mm f1.4, 35mm f2) and the Limited lenses (DA and FA sub-groups).

Cost may eliminate the Limited range, if not then go for them.

The standard range is around the Nikon price level, so maybe a good choice.

The low cost range has one outstanding lens as the choice. You could try this at low risk of major loss, trading up later if you need to.

Hm.... The more I am thinking about the 21mm + 40mm the more I like the idea!

Still need to sell the rest of my Nikon stuff though before I plunge into any more. Will get the 40mm first off once the camera arrives as my mind is almost made up, have been playing with it and a K20D which in hindsight should have been a camera I should have gone for at the time.

I know the feeling, but hindsight isn't available in advance, sadly....

Yes I know,

The problem is that I would have gone for it or at least been a lot more tempted if it was not for the perceived obscurity of the Pentax brand. To be honest I didn't know what to think of Pentax at the time and I think it is the same with a lot of people. Even though K-r and K-x sound absolutely great alternatives to the lower/mid range alternatives of the likes of Nikon and Canon they just aren't get considered just as often.

A shame really because both the K-5 I played with and the K20D I've borrowed now are all around excellent pieces of kit.