Which two primes to replace a da* 16-50?

Hi guys,

Looking to get into the world of prime lenses. The most important aspect for me is excellent portraiture, but also want the option of taking landscapes / wider photos as well.

Would you say a combo of a da 21mm ltd and fa 43mm ltd would be a good choice? These appear to represent the best value for money in these ranges? I would like to add to these two over the coming months and years as and when finances allow - I would love the 31mm - or 77mm ltd lenses but they are just too much for me at the moment.

Thanks, James

You could always go for "Old lenses!"......the "A" 50mm 1.7 is a superb lens,it can be picked up for £40/60....well worth having........Ken

Or if you must have autofocus the FA 50mm f1.4 has got to be the best value for money.
You've got the range at the moment so why not check which focal lens is best for you, 50mm should be good for portraits but can be slightly too long when space is at a premium.
As for the wider end I couldn't comment on the 21mm but I've recently bought a 2nd hand DA 14mm, I haven't had chance to really put it through its paces but initial impressions are very good.

I already have the "A" 50mm 1.7, but a wriggly baby makes it difficult to have time to compose shots and focus manually. This is being sold on eBay at the minute.

Is the FA 50mm f1.4 sharper than the 43mm ltd wider open?

James

According to Photozone tests the 50mm at f2 is a bit sharper than the 43 at f1.9, but stopped down to f4 the 43 is the clear winner.

For portraits of your baby either would be great, remember pin-sharp is not neccesarily the best for portrait. I dont have the 50mm but the 43 stays on my camera as a normal lens all the time.

I am intrigued why you would ditch the DA* 16-50 ? Dont get me wrong I love using primes, but the specs of the DA* should make it a perfect general high quality zoom. Do you have issues with it as others have reported ?

Hi Peter,

No, I don't (think!) I have any issues. It is very heavy and as it is so long can leave a shadow when using the built in flash and I think it is a little soft wide open, but apart from that most photos I take are very good! Nothing is ever perfect and I get the odd soft / out of focus shot, but this could be operator error. It performs well on focus chart tests and only needs a little tweaking on the AF menu on my K20. Obviously the low f-number is a big plus as well as the silent focussing and weather sealing.

What are the issues others have had, I know that some have had problems, but I am not aware of teh specifics?

To be honest, I have been re-thinking my options, and I have come to the same conclusion as you - it really is a great all purpose lens, so I have decided to keep it and just get the nifty 50 for low level / indoor portrait work.

Perhaps when I have more money, I will add some ltds to the collection, but for now the 16-50 will be my standard lens of choice.

James

Issues I have read about here and elsewhere are FF/BB and decentring. CA is also reported, but that is a design issue and not a sign of poor manufacturing. I can still get CA with my FA31mm in the right circumstances !

I am still debating over this lens. I love using primes, and if I go to shoot a specific subject (on my own) I will always prefer a couple or three primes. But if I visit a National Trust property for example, with my partner, and there are lots of people around, it can be frustrating having to change lenses or not getting the framing I want. My recent trips have seen me use the DA 18-55 again and for convenience a zoom has huge advantages. But the 18-55 is slow and needs to be stopped down for the best results, which is why I am considering the 16-50

Got both the 50mm 1.4 af and 1.7 mf when you get it right the 1.7 can be pin sharp and as said you can pick them up dirt cheep I paid a ten pounds for mine. However Im a bit hitty missy with it mainly due to my poor focusing skills and eye sight. This was the reason I got the 1.4 auto wwhich is a great lens but Im keeping the 1.7 and hope to have somemore good days.
Ian

RR is correct, "the FA 50mm f1.4 has got to be the best value for money". However the FA43 is in another class of workmanship. Quite simply, it is a little jewel that is a wonder to use. If you wanted pure sharpness you'd get the FA50 macro, but then you'd be gaining no speed over the zoom you are giving up. There's a lot more to pictures than sharpness, and the FA43 delivers an astounding image that I have not seen from any other lens. (But yes, you can come close.)

That said I like my K50/1.2 an awful lot as well. It is better for wide-open bokeh pulling power. The FA43 is better for 3D imaging and is an excellent portrait lens for that reason.