EF 40mm 2.8 pancake

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by Hovig, Jun 27, 2012.

  1. Hovig

    Hovig Member

    Messages:
    27
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi all,

    I'm wondering if some of you already got the new Canon EF 40mm pancake. Any feedback? How does the STM work on film EOS cameras? I made a search in APUG posts and did not find any posting regarding this new lens.

    Thanks,

    Hovig
     
  2. segedi

    segedi Member

    Messages:
    356
    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Location:
    Calgary, Alb
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I'm curious too as it would compliment the Élan 7E that I have to make a very light setup.
     
  3. F/1.4

    F/1.4 Member

    Messages:
    235
    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I checked it out yesterday, it's really small, focus is SUPER quiet, tried it on a 5D3 and Élan 7, vignettes like theres no tomorrow wide open, overall personally I think I'd go with the 50mm f/1.8. The 50 is faster, seemed sharper at 2.8, cheaper, and weighs about the same. However with a small camera like a rebel...it can fit into a messenger bag easy peaty.
     
  4. Colin Corneau

    Colin Corneau Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,859
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Location:
    Brandon, MB
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  5. CGW

    CGW Restricted Access

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  6. Hovig

    Hovig Member

    Messages:
    27
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thank you for your feedback, but everything out there is on digital cameras, I wanted to know how it behaves on film cameras. I find the 40mm focal length interesting, I've been using my 28-105 zoom at that focal length very often. It's my normal focal length. This may be my perfect all around carry on lens.
     
  7. CGW

    CGW Restricted Access

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Most film shooters have 50/1.8s and probably wouldn't bother. It was optimized for digital stills and video on APS-C sensors--not 35mm film cameras. Can you sample one in Montreal?
     
  8. F/1.4

    F/1.4 Member

    Messages:
    235
    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Shooter:
    Multi Format


    Exactly. If you want the size advantage, than you've already justified it. Otherwise a 50mm f/1.8 (or two) is a smarter option.

    As far as testing it on film, give yourself a break. It's 2012, and regular Joe Six-Pak doesn't shoot film anymore. IMO it wouldn't really make sense to test lenses out on 35mm anyway when you've got 22 and 36MP FF DSLR's that will give you far more consistent lab results than scanning slides or negs. From what I experienced with the 40mm the other day, shooting wide open, you'll have some pretty muddy corners if you're shooting color neg. The vignetting is pretty insane. I dunno...If you want the size advantage, than you've already justified it. Otherwise a 50mm f/1.8 (or two) is a smarter option.

    Also, why not go with the voightlander 40mm f/2?
     
  9. Oren Grad

    Oren Grad Subscriber

    Messages:
    952
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    The sensel/microlens units in digital sensors interact with the projected image in sometimes unpredictable ways. Corner performance is often worse and vignetting often more prominent on digital sensors. We will know how the lens behaves with film when someone tries it... with film.
     
  10. CGW

    CGW Restricted Access

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Just a wild guess but would Canon develop a lens that vignettes on its DSLRs--whether APS-C or FF? Just asking.

    Many Nikon DX lenses vignette badly on film bodies because they were made to cover APS-C sensors--not film.
     
  11. Oren Grad

    Oren Grad Subscriber

    Messages:
    952
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Yes, they would and they do, as do the other manufacturers. Especially with lenses at wide to normal focal lengths it can't be helped, not without making the lenses much bigger, heavier, more complex and more expensive than the market will bear.
     
  12. CGW

    CGW Restricted Access

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Funny but the reviews so far haven't found this to be an issue.
     
  13. Hovig

    Hovig Member

    Messages:
    27
    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  14. trojancast

    trojancast Member

    Messages:
    32
    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Sorry, what forum are we on again?
     
  15. F/1.4

    F/1.4 Member

    Messages:
    235
    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    For christ's sake..
     
  16. munz6869

    munz6869 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,157
    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Location:
    Hawthorn, Vi
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Seriously, if the OP asks how it performs with a film camera, on a film forum, then that's fair enough! I am curious too - I'm also curious how it suits digital Canons, but there are other useful spots on the internet for that. Singularity is APUG's strength & usefulness.

    Marc!
     
  17. Michel Hardy-Vallée

    Michel Hardy-Vallée Membership Council

    Messages:
    4,351
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Location:
    Montréal (QC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Easy, guys; the thought police hasn't heard you yet...
     
  18. jakeblues

    jakeblues Member

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2012
    Location:
    los angeles
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Yes, Canon develops lenses that vignette worse on a FF DSLR than a film body (crop DSLR's crop much of the vignetting from FF lenses). Film does a better job with light hitting the film plane at odd angles. In some cases, this means a noticeable reduction in vignetting.

    Nikon DX lenses vignette badly on film bodies because they're designed for crop sensors, not FF. Many lenses designed for FF DSLR's perform better on film for the reasons mentioned above.

    Exactly.

    I'm curious about this, too. I'm planning to buy the 40mm pancake, but only after I get back from a trip in a month or so. In the mean time, if anyone has purchased this lens and shot it on film, I'd love to see samples.

    The voigtlander is over twice the price and not AF. I'd love to have the Voigtlander, but I'm attracted to the Canon as an inexpensive compact lens with a lot of character to shoot at bar-b-ques and tailgates. The nifty fifty is too long for my taste (plus I have dozens of 50's), and I've always had a thing for pancake lenses.
     
  19. CGW

    CGW Restricted Access

    Messages:
    2,797
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Yes, Canon develops lenses that vignette worse on a FF DSLR than a film body (crop DSLR's crop much of the vignetting from FF lenses).

    Gee, there must be some really cheesed off EOS FF owners...
     
  20. Vanishing Point Ent.

    Vanishing Point Ent. Member

    Messages:
    228
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Location:
    Los Angeles,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    JUST ANNOUNCED ! Canon’s New EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake Lens Doesn’t Waffle on Quality.

    Also see;
    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/97805-why-canon-never-had-pancake-lenses.html

    HOWEVER;

    B&H: Canon’s New EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake Lens Doesn’t Waffle on Quality.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth...f-40mm-f28-pancake-lens-doesnt-waffle-quality
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 8, 2012