Anybody got the new Canon 40mm f/2.8 STM?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by NZed, Jul 29, 2012.

  1. NZed, Jul 29, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2012

    NZed macrumors 65816

    NZed

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Location:
    Canada, Eh?
    #1
    I tried it at the store and I love it. And at its price point, it seems more worth it than the 50mm 1.8.

    Anybody here got it yet? Pros cons?
     
  2. NZed thread starter macrumors 65816

    NZed

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Location:
    Canada, Eh?
    #2
    I just got it yesterday!

    Its Canon's first pancake lens, and I have to say, its incredibly thin!
     
  3. Sideonecincy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2003
    #3
    Supposed to be great for video. I looked at it and already own the 24-70, so don't see any reason to buy one.
     
  4. Pompiliu macrumors 6502a

    Pompiliu

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    #4
    24-70 weighs ~1kg. You can't carry with you everywhere, it's just too heavy and big. Here's your reason. :)
     
  5. NZed thread starter macrumors 65816

    NZed

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Location:
    Canada, Eh?
    #5
    Haha, but from your signature(your signature! holy ****!) you wouldnt be buying a non L lens!
     
  6. Prodo123 macrumors 68020

    Prodo123

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    #6
    I carry a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on my camera. It's been practically glued on since I got it. And I keep my 24-70 in my bag. It's not heavy at all.

    (but I think I could use one of your 5D mk IIIs though ;))

    The 40mm STM is supposed to be great for using autofocus while shooting video. And as we all know, autofocusing while shooting video SUCKS, even on the T4i. So my verdict is that with a pancake lens with an abysmal focus ring without IS, this is a horrible lens for video.

    If you're gonna shoot video, go with the 24-105.

    If you want an ok-good prime, then the 40mm is a certainly worthwhile choice. But when there's the half-as-expensive-and-4/3-stop-faster 50mm f/1.8 and the optically superior 50mm f/1.4, I see no reason to get this as an alternative for a nifty fifty.

    I do see potential for it replacing the 35mm f/2; although being a full stop slower, the 40mm does have a much better bokeh, thanks to its 7-rounded-blade aperture.
     
  7. TheReef, Jul 30, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2012

    TheReef macrumors 68000

    TheReef

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    #7
    As an owner of both a (Pentax) 40mm f/2.8 pancake and 50mm f/1.4 I can say that much prefer the 40mm pancake.

    IMO 40mm is a much more comfortable focal length to work with on a crop body, and it has the advantage of being super light and small, the size of a body cap almost.
    With advancements in modern bodies' high ISO performance, I'm much more inclined to crank the ISO than shoot wider than f/2.8, which gives me far more keepers.

    Since getting my 40mm pancake I've hardly used the 50mm.
     
  8. brentmore macrumors 6502

    brentmore

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    ATX
    #8
    I haven't read up on the reviews yet, but do you think it's optically on par with the 50 1.4?
     
  9. TheReef macrumors 68000

    TheReef

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    #9
    I can only comment on the convenience in size and focal length - I own a Pentax 40mm f/2.8 Ltd and FA 50mm f/1.4
    *Edited original post
     
  10. NZed thread starter macrumors 65816

    NZed

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Location:
    Canada, Eh?
    #10
    THe 50 1.4 is twice the price of the 40mm. I've tried the 1.4 and its the most recommended one.

    Not quite on par but following right behind.
     
  11. zombiecakes macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    #11
    Its probably better than the 50mm for shooting things that arent people, but for people shots I cant imagine it being better. I think 50mm is pushing it for people as it is, 40mm makes people look weird and would make the non-photogenics look just plain bad.
     
  12. NZed thread starter macrumors 65816

    NZed

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Location:
    Canada, Eh?
    #12
    People look fine with 40mm. But definitely better with the 50 1.4
     
  13. ocabj macrumors 6502a

    ocabj

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    #13
  14. Kebabselector macrumors 68030

    Kebabselector

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Birmingham, UK
    #14
    Actually it doesn't look as silly as I thought it would stuck on a 5d and grip.
     
  15. Kebabselector macrumors 68030

    Kebabselector

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Birmingham, UK
  16. cocky jeremy macrumors 68040

    cocky jeremy

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    #16
    Definitely trading my 24-105 for the 24-70 once i get my 70-200.
     
  17. TheReef macrumors 68000

    TheReef

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    #17
    Yeah, I personally think pancakes look great on large gripped bodies.
     
  18. firestarter macrumors 603

    firestarter

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Location:
    Green and pleasant land
    #18
    The 50 1.4 is an awful lens which is in in desperate need of a redesign by Canon. I found it unusably soft at any aperture wider than 2.8. From the specs the 40 looks like a much better lens although not as fast of course.
     
  19. NZed thread starter macrumors 65816

    NZed

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Location:
    Canada, Eh?
    #19
    I got the chance to try all the 50mm by Canon. And by far, the 50 1.4 is the best from all. 1.2 and 1.8 has so many focus problems.
     
  20. firestarter macrumors 603

    firestarter

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Location:
    Green and pleasant land
    #20
    It might be the best, but that's because the others are worse.

    The 1.4 is fantastically sharp from f2.8 - but for me it was unusable wide open. I can't see the point of having fast lenses if they're so soft at the widest aperture. Nikon has it right with it's new 50mm 1.4G - the MTF charts are really good even at 1.4.
     

Share This Page