Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

[mb66energy]

Why is everyone complaining about this lens?  It's as if every product Canon makes has to be made just for you, and if you don't like it then it's a complete piece of crap.  When I heard the rumors about this lens I ignored them, because it's just not something I'm interested in and from the response it seems like not many you are interested either.  So why not just say "well this isn't for me" and let it go instead of questioning every aspect of it?   

It's obviously an entry-level lens, and it's $200 for crying out loud, what do you expect?  And just because it's an odd focal length to you doesn't mean that others won't find it useful, a good photographer can produce good images with any focal length.

Thanks for your lines - some participants of this forum do not understand (IMHO) that many companies produce many tools for the vast crowd of photographers.

Nobody NEEDS a 40mm FF EF lens as a pancake. 

Many of us are mad at Canon, because they are WASTING research & manufacturing capacity on  "nice to have" products rather than on delivering the essentials: "fully competitive, bleeding edge" cameras and lenses and true INNOVATION.  A FF pancake would make a lot of sense  with a killer FF-mirrorless Canon camera as compact as a mMinolta CLE. THAT would be innovative and welcome. An EF 40mm -f/2.8 pancake is ... YAWN.
[...]

You have made the decision that nobody needs a 40mm pancake?

No one of us has seen that lens, knows about it's capabilities, has used it.

I see a very good lens in terms of IQ (IMO last lens element is aspherical), i see an advantage in a pancake as a space saver - sometimes 20mm or 30mm count if you want to have your camera with you.

You don't buy that lens, I probably buy it. No reasoning about "who needs what" is necessary.

Best - Michael

[DavidRiesenberg]

In the end one can trace back almost all the recent drama in these forums to the little, quite insignificant detail that the 5D3 is more expensive than the D800.

[Rocky]

40mm f2.8 was the universal lens for the FF point and shoot cameras in the OLD film days. It must be the right lens, otherwise why every body is using it??? All I see is mostly complain on this forum. Not fast enough: bump up the ISO PLEASE. Not wide enough: get another wide angle lens. It is just another lens in your collection. If you do not like it, don't buy it. My only complain is that Canon should have made a 30mm f2.8 for the APS-C sensor before this lens. It will be a lot more useful.

[Lee Jay]

I don't like small lenses - they give you no place to hold the camera.  I like holding my camera with my left hand under the lens.  My 35/2, 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 were too small.  My 35/1.4L is borderline but okay.

Now this is a real reason to dislike this lens.

Glad you agree.

Ergonomics are as important to me as optical quality or AF performance.  If it hurts to shoot with it hour after hour, then it's as useless as a lump of coal.

[Lee Jay]

When did f2.8 become slow?

When you could get f/2.8 zooms.

Most zooms never have the image quality of a prime.

This era has long-since passed.  I never, ever, choose a prime over a zoom because of optical performance.  I choose them for speed or for having a focal length in which no zoom is available - like my 1900mm telescope and my 15mm fisheye (yes, I know about the 8-15 but that thing zooms in the wrong direction and it way, way overpriced, plus it's only f/4).

[philbob10]

I'll probably get it because it's cheap, it's going to perform well, and my 5D MKII will fit in the same space in my bag as the body alone.  Throw it in my laptop bag, and I'll always have a good camera with me without it taking up twice as much space as it would with any other lens.

[philbob10]

Always good to have options, but, it's not like this pancake is solving a problem Canon had. A DSLR in general is not "pocketable" like a mirrorless with pancake could be; and no lens will make it that way. And few, if any, of Canon's cheap primes way more than 1/2lb, so weight was never an issue either. Not for a 2+lb DSLR at least

You forget that the 50mm f/1.8 is really noisy and horribly slow when it comes to AF.  The 40mm is silent, more durable and will definitely focus better than the 50mm.  The metal mount and body alone make the $70-90 difference worth it, if you don't need the extra stop.

[briansquibb]

Starting to look like f2.8 is going to be the standard minimum for non L primes.... 

This could mean two things, Canon pushing people into buying top end primes for anything less, or alternatively realignment of the ranges to have f2.8 "cheap" primes, entry level L primes and moving the current top range primes up the price list.

Now we know the real story is that the 40mm is for video shooters. I think this technology, with full time AF in LiveView, with create a flurry of simillar lens. May go some way to explain why the shorter primes have not been updated recently.

So perhaps a 85mm f/2.8 is in the pipeline to replace the 85 f/1.8?

[charleswagoner]

Good lord, are you people spending all your time shooting in a closet?

Waaaaaaaaaa!! Only f/2.8. Waaaaaaaaaa!! Canon needs to base all their market research, product development, and release cycles on my every whim!  Waaaaaaaaaa!!

First, Canon announces this lens. You see no use for it in your personal contexts. Get over it and don't take it so personally. This is not the last lens that Canon will ever release. Just because they haven't updated your personal favorite, doesn't mean they never will. Seriously, STFU.

Second, by now it should be clear that anything wider than f/2.8 has to have some L-level build quality if you want great image quality. My 50mm 1.4 is great, but I only take it below f/2.8 either in extremely low light, which is rare, or if I purposely want very, very shallow DoF. Also rare. I know that not everyone's personal situation is exactly like my own, but good lord, aperture is not the be-all end-all. At $200 you're getting STM, FTM, decent build quality, AND round aperture rings.

Seriously, if you don't want it, don't f------ing buy it. It's not a difficult concept. Nobody really cares about your personal misgivings with Canon's release cycles and the direction they're taking with their products. The technology is getting better all the time, and we've no reason to believe that this lens will suck at what it does.

[Vossie]

First, Canon announces this lens. You see no use for it in your personal contexts. Get over it and don't take it so personally. This is not the last lens that Canon will ever release. Just because they haven't updated your personal favorite, doesn't mean they never will. Seriously, STFU.

  I tend to agree, nobody is obliged to buy it. So if you look for a faster lens with better IQ you may want to leave this one in the store....

[pdirestajr]

The fact that it is EF and not EF-s means that more things are coming.

Perhaps the FF mirrorless that everyone fantasizes over?

For the life of me, I still don't understand why the EOS-1c has a mirror when it is part of the "Cinema" series. What good is that mirror and prism?

[chimpmitten]

I had no interest in this lens, until I started reading all of the complaints about it. 

I am planning on getting a 5d iii once I have the money in place (kitchen remodels do not coincide well with upgrading camera equipment) and was looking for a standard ff focal length lens to go with it. 

The 50 1.2 is out of my price range, and I don't like the plastic mount of the 50 1.8.  The 50 1.4 looked to be the way to go, but this at a cheaper price and similar build might be better for me.  The tiny size means I'd be able to put a body with lens into my work bag or even the handle bar bag on my bicycle.  The 40 mm would probably work well cropped on my 50d, and I don't think I'll miss the faster lens since I already have the 28mm and 85mm 1.8 lenses. 

Also it will look ridiculous with the 40mm pancake on one body and my 70-200m ii on the another. 

Although I'd probably stick with the 28mm in that setup since the cropped 40mm would be pretty close to 70mm on the 5d.  Maybe if I end up with an extender for the 70-200 as well...

[Razor2012]

In the end one can trace back almost all the recent drama in these forums to the little, quite insignificant detail that the 5D3 is more expensive than the D800.

Lol or the DxO numbers.

[crasher8]

I'll trade anyone here my 35 f/2 for one.

[AvTvM]

after the good review on lensrentals.com the shorty 40 tests very well on german review site http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/752-canon_40_28_ff

MTF: center outstanding, corners very good - even wide open at f/2.8
distortions and loCAs negligible
light falloff: 1.7EV @ f/2.8, 0.6Ev @ f/4
Bokeh very good, but not excellent
Price / value: very good
highly recommended