new 40mm digital-only Limited?

[h.d._shin]

Anyone have the new digital-only 40mm Limited pancake lens? Apparently

it sticks out an amazing 0.6" past the flange and weights some 3 or 4

ounces. Mated with a DS, it'd rival many of the higher-end digicams

for pocketability.

 

I had the 43 f/1.9 ltd for a film body at one point and loved it.

[eric friedemann]

You know, this 40mm DX pancake lens seems to be one of those feats of engineering in which manufacturers occasionally engage without regard to whether they should. I'm simply at a loss to think of anyone who would pay $400 for a 60mm equivalent lens that doesn't fall in the "normal" focal length range, isn't a telephoto, isn't a macro, but is rather slow for a prime lens at f/2.8:

 

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=366728&is=REG

[h.d._shin]

Its size and because it's cool-looking. Because it can be hand-held at a stop slower than a 50mm f/2 lens.

 

I'd buy it if its performance is comparable to the 43mm.

[eric friedemann]

So ... if you're into hand-held shooting, why wouldn't you just buy the 43mm f/1.9 for $80 more? At about 150 grams, the 43mm weighs only 60 grams more than the 40mm and is a bit more than a full stop faster.

[tijean]

From what I have seen, the 43 (and everything else) sticks out a good bit compared to the 40 pancake. Why would they make it? Because it is small and that is, aparently, what they have decided their niche will be. I bought the DS for a varety of reasons (none of which involved size, oddly enough), but have heard from plenty of people who were entralled by the *istDS' size when compared to, say, a Nikon D70. So yes, when size and weight are deciding factors for many of the people buying your newest camera, considering size when designing a lens does make sense.

 

Two things keep if from my wishlist though. The focal length would actually suit my shooting well - on a film camera. Since I mostly use the DS though, that doesn't really matter. 60mm is just arkward. The other is the "digital only" distinction. I have heard rumors that it also works on a film body, but I'm not in a position to take a rumor into account when spending $400.

[h.d._shin]

I'm also considering the 43mm, but it's closer to the 50mm 1.4 - which I already have - in both size and focal length, and the 50 beats the 43 for low light. Not that I'm doing anything here but justifiying what's mostly a whimsy.

 

I *am* curious how the 40 performs, though.

[eric friedemann]

Pentax does make the SMCP-FA 35mm f/2.0 AL lens for $300. It weighs less than half a pound, more closely approximates a 50mm lens on a DSLR and is a stop faster than the 40mm.

[roland_larson]

I came across some test photos posted in <a href="http://www.photosharp.com.tw/FORUM/ArticleList.aspx?ForumId=4&TopicId=100180&ParentLink=http%3a%2f%2fwww.photosharp.com.tw%2fFORUM%2fSearchList.aspx%3fEquipment%3dT%26Brand_Select%3d6%26Type_Select%3d-1%26Product_Select%3d-1%26Page%3d4&ParentTitle=%e5%99%a8%e6%9d%90%e7%89%88+-+%e5%93%81%e7%89%8c%3a+Pentax">photosharp.com</a>

in Taiwan. The one who made this post stated that they were taken at full aperture on an istDs, at ISO800, and no post-processing is done except resizing. Judging from these few shots, it is a very good lens.

[roland_larson]

... and I read further to see that those three shots are taken in Hong Kong.

[pentax_istds]

Just by chance come across this thread. You know what? I am the one who takes those 3 samples mentioned above! I posted them here for your reference:

 

<img src="http://www.dcfever.com/photosharing/photos/20050201/l1139491107971912.jpg">

<img src="http://www.dcfever.com/photosharing/photos/20050201/l1139491107972475.jpg">

<img src="http://www.dcfever.com/photosharing/photos/20050201/l1139491107972518.jpg">

 

And yes, it can be used on film body also; usable but having severe vignetting. Should you buy this lens? It depends... Its cool look is the main reason attracting me to buy it. Being designed exclusively for digital body, I have believed that its performance won't be disappointed on *istDs. And indeed, I am very pleased with the results. While it can be able to produce some "3-dimensional" effect just like the LE 43/1.9 can do, it have much better sharpness wide open compared to the 43/1.9 (of course, it is f2.8 compared to f1.9). Anyhow, if you could be comfortable shooting with a 60mm lens, I would recommend it.