Review - Canon EF 40 f/2.8 STM

[RS2021]

It is just Shorty Forty...similar to Nifty Fifty...Most reference on the net is just Shorty Forty...no need to infuse a Mc here. It is like some one trying to rebrand the 50mm a "Nifty Von Fifty" or "Nifty Herr Fiftty".

I seriously hope Nifty Von Fifty sticks.

*chuckle* Yes, soon we would have every focal length assigned to some ethnic/cultural combine if we go by the "Shorty McForty in Kilt" wish.

For me, the original "Shorty Forty" works just fine.

[Daniel Flather]

The closing sentence of the review is at best —awkward.

[Hobby Shooter]

I have two lenses covering this range already, the 24-105L and the 35L. But after reading all the reviews about how good and sharp it is, the small size, the low price etc I really want one. I might just have to get myself one soon.

Yeah, I don't think you'll be disappointed by the 40mm at all with this setup.  I may be a bit jaded having recently come off of using the incredible 24-70 ƒ/2.8 L II.

I know that feeling!

I guess there's no point in arguing with myself any longer then. I'll have to face the facts  and go get one.

[kennephoto]

I really like the 40/2.8.  IQ is very good, and the size makes it very convenient.  My normal use for the lens is when I'm using a big white zoom, either the 70-200/2.8L IS II or the 100-400L.  I carry that setup with a Blackrapid strap connected to the tripod collar, and the small size of the 40/2.8 means it fits in my pocket.  When I need a wider FoV, I unmount the zoom and leave it attached to the Blackrapid strap, holding the camera with the 40/2.8 in my hand.  If I wanted to do something similar with a 35L, 24-105L, etc., I'd have to put it in a lens case on a belt strap.

+1 I do the same thing. I have a small Domke bag and I have room for the 5d2 and a 300 F4 and its stays very light weight that way. Or like when I the pankake came with my girl and I out for a night it makes for some fun self portraits at high iso and no annoying flash. I love this pankake, it makes me smile every time I mount it to my 5d2 and wow can I get some very detailed photos at f2.8!

[Gcon]

That's called a review these days? Amazing. Why not make a head line out of the other 100 reviews of that lens?

Totally agree. That's one of the weakest "reviews" I've ever read.

I have this lens and I don't find the colours as punchy as L glass.  I am reaching for the vibrancy a fair bit more. Also it has horrible bokeh. Really not nice.

Still it is wonderfully sharp and wonderfully light and wonderfully cheap. If you don't have much in the way of bokeh (it gets really schizophrenic) and you are OK to do some color work on this lens, then go for it.

The AF is not USM-fast - but definitely fast enough for portrait and candid work. More importantly the AF is accurate, which can't always be said about Canon's entire 50mm range.

[JPAZ]

OK, already! I got one just because it is so small and light and really easy to bring along.

Now, I'll just need to figure out what I'll use it for.

 

[photogjack]

I have the Shorty Forty and use it to fill the gap between my 24mm f1.4L and 50mm f1.2L. I like it a lot and it works perfectly for what I want. For $200? It's a no brainer. Almost every photographer (especially those of us on full frame bodies) can use this lens. If you use primes, it sits in a very nice spot between 24-28mm lenses and the 50s. (It might not be as attractive for peeps who have a 35). If you use zooms, it's a much smaller, lighter lens for carrying around. And then we get back to the $200 part of the equation. It is, hands down, the best $200 lens on the market.

.
From a magazine editor's standpoint, this is pretty blah with uninspiring images. Very little useful information.

Roger, at LensRentals said all that needs to be said in four sentences:

"This is really an amazing lens. Little pancakes are cute and all, but usually aren’t of very good image quality. This one has exceptional image quality and does it at an amazing price. Probably the best bargain of a prime lens that exists, anywhere, for anything."

[dolina]

Because of the 40/2.8 I have decided to not get the 35/1.4 II anymore.

[J.R.]

I got mine today, used. Bought it off a guy who is a member of our local photography club. Barely a month old, mint condition and all for the equivalent of $ 150

[JVLphoto]

The closing sentence of the review is at best —awkward.

Tell me about it: Imagine being the guy who wrote it 

[Sporgon]

Because of the 40/2.8 I have decided to not get the 35/1.4 II anymore.

At Building Panoramics we actually chose to use the 40 STM rather than the 35 f1.4L for our latest picture which is a panoramic of the beautiful interior of Beverley Minster in England.

We used the 40mm for a number of reasons. Firstly the focal length fitted what we were shooting, but also the shallow nodal point makes movement of the camera in a 5 across two up panoramic stitch easier to manage and we don't need to use the sliding panoramic head. ( JVLphoto pointed this out in his response ) . Also we always shoot at f8, and at this aperture the 40 is just as good as the 35 L. And lastly the 40 has virtually zero distortion.

Sophisticated stitching programs can tolerate a great deal of distortion, but using a lens that has virtually zero distortion to start with makes putting the picture together a lot easier. For anyone who wants to shoot panoramics but doesn't have sophisticated stitching programs - get this lens !

The "focus by wire' is growing on me. To start with I appreciated the smoothness of the ring but found the total lack of connection to anything a little off putting. However I'm getting used to it, and think in time I will prefer it to the really - well errr - crappy manual focus on the other cheaper Canon lenses - meaning 50 1.4. Canon please improve this on the new 50 IS

[JVLphoto]

I thought some of you, though not interested in the content of the review, may be interested in my how-to on pouring syrup on the lens (or how I didn't actually pour syrup on the lens) http://www.petapixel.com/2013/02/15/tutorial-creating-a-photo-of-syrup-being-poured-on-a-pancake-lens/

[TrumpetPower!]

I thought some of you, though not interested in the content of the review, may be interested in my how-to on pouring syrup on the lens (or how I didn't actually pour syrup on the lens) http://www.petapixel.com/2013/02/15/tutorial-creating-a-photo-of-syrup-being-poured-on-a-pancake-lens/

Thanks for that! Again, well done.

b&

[PerfectSavage]

Discuss the review of the Canon EF 40 f/2.8 STM here.

The review is spot on except it forgets to mention one thing; for the target audience it is intended for; the 40mm f/2.8 costs twice as much as the faster, sharper, and far more consistent 50mm f/1.8 II "Nifty Fifty".  I bought the pancake for a light street kid on a 7D or 5D body.  I returned it two days later even though I had another few weeks before the 30 day return policy expired.  I new at onset it was "ok" but that the $99 50 f/1.8 II was far more consistent and lighter.  I just don't get why you'd pay twice as much for the slower 40mm.

Video AF?  Really?  If you want AF in video buy a camcorder, they do a much better job in AF.  The STM only works with the T4i and there is a reason they didn't incorporate that into the 5D3, 6D, etc.

[PerfectSavage]

Because of the 40/2.8 I have decided to not get the 35/1.4 II anymore.

You might want to rethink that.  That's kinda like saying because of STM in the T4i, I don't need that 1Dx anymore.