Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "Pancake"

Re: EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake Gallery

7583914148_bf065e28e2_c.jpg
 
Upvote 0
Re: EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake Gallery

Picked this little guy up yesterday - i love the focal length, and it's so fantastically sharp wide open! I did do the autofocus adjustment, it was a tad back-focused, but now it's just perfect and the only problems left are my own :)

Here are some images from today.
 

Attachments

  • FK2A1970.jpg
    FK2A1970.jpg
    638.1 KB · Views: 4,861
  • FK2A1999.jpg
    FK2A1999.jpg
    907.2 KB · Views: 4,868
  • FK2A1967.jpg
    FK2A1967.jpg
    621.2 KB · Views: 4,815
  • FK2A1973.jpg
    FK2A1973.jpg
    954.8 KB · Views: 4,823
Upvote 0
While this lens is F2.8 and not F1.4, the out of focus quality could be similar since all the canon 50's are min 1.5 ft to subject, whereas this lens is min 1ft. Dof for closer objects or subjects makes it similar to the larger aperture non L 50's. Anyway I haven't gone around for fun or used it in a professional setting yet but let me say, this is one impressive little piece of glass! I can't believe it was only $150! The only time I plan to go for a smaller than F2.8 aperture would be with macro shots. I think i will like the artsy vignetting at F2.8. Focus is so incredibly accurate too! I'm not used to hearing the lens too much on my L's so it was weird to hear this lens but it is much quieter than the 50 F1.8, but then most lenses are. :D
 
Upvote 0
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wellfedcanuck/8175099932#
I bought the shorty-40 last night. After owning a Rebel XT for 7 years, this is my first "real" lens and my question will betray my complete lack of photographic ability, but what the heck...

I'm seeing a lot more moire than I ever noticed with the kit lens. This shot above at f2.8 is actually the best of the lot, the worst seems to be at f10. Is this poor technique on my part or is it a limitation of the camera?
 
Upvote 0
wellfedCanuck said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wellfedcanuck/8175099932#
I bought the shorty-40 last night. After owning a Rebel XT for 7 years, this is my first "real" lens and my question will betray my complete lack of photographic ability, but what the heck...

I'm seeing a lot more moire than I ever noticed with the kit lens. This shot above at f2.8 is actually the best of the lot, the worst seems to be at f10. Is this poor technique on my part or is it a limitation of the camera?

its more to do with the camera sensor, since the lens is sharper though moire will show up more easily whereas with softer lenses the softness masks it a bit
LR has a great brush option for cleaning up moire which is a godsend for runway and fashion festivals where fabrics can occassionally cause havock with moire
 
Upvote 0
wickidwombat said:
wellfedCanuck said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wellfedcanuck/8175099932#
I bought the shorty-40 last night. After owning a Rebel XT for 7 years, this is my first "real" lens and my question will betray my complete lack of photographic ability, but what the heck...

I'm seeing a lot more moire than I ever noticed with the kit lens. This shot above at f2.8 is actually the best of the lot, the worst seems to be at f10. Is this poor technique on my part or is it a limitation of the camera?

its more to do with the camera sensor, since the lens is sharper though moire will show up more easily whereas with softer lenses the softness masks it a bit
LR has a great brush option for cleaning up moire which is a godsend for runway and fashion festivals where fabrics can occassionally cause havock with moire

Thanks very much for the answer, WW. Shooting photos of the siding on my house didn't help. ;D I'm planning on purchasing the 6D, so this will provide (I hope) a huge improvement. The 40mm was on sale for $180, so I wanted to see how much of a difference it would make with my XT. Now I'm seeing things in a way I never did before.

BTW, I know most of you guys use LR. I own a copy of PSElements, which, as far as I know- should do everything LR can do, right?
 
Upvote 0
wellfedCanuck said:
wickidwombat said:
wellfedCanuck said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wellfedcanuck/8175099932#
I bought the shorty-40 last night. After owning a Rebel XT for 7 years, this is my first "real" lens and my question will betray my complete lack of photographic ability, but what the heck...

I'm seeing a lot more moire than I ever noticed with the kit lens. This shot above at f2.8 is actually the best of the lot, the worst seems to be at f10. Is this poor technique on my part or is it a limitation of the camera?

its more to do with the camera sensor, since the lens is sharper though moire will show up more easily whereas with softer lenses the softness masks it a bit
LR has a great brush option for cleaning up moire which is a godsend for runway and fashion festivals where fabrics can occassionally cause havock with moire

Thanks very much for the answer, WW. Shooting photos of the siding on my house didn't help. ;D I'm planning on purchasing the 6D, so this will provide (I hope) a huge improvement. The 40mm was on sale for $180, so I wanted to see how much of a difference it would make with my XT. Now I'm seeing things in a way I never did before.

BTW, I know most of you guys use LR. I own a copy of PSElements, which, as far as I know- should do everything LR can do, right?
not sure if elements has that brush option i would think there is something its probably just not as easy and fast to use, you could look into the student version of LR they are pretty cheap if you know any students that wanna help you out
 
Upvote 0
wickidwombat said:
not sure if elements has that brush option i would think there is something its probably just not as easy and fast to use, you could look into the student version of LR they are pretty cheap if you know any students that wanna help you out
As a matter of fact- I know 3 whose need for braces, piano lessons and ski equipment has had a seriously negative effect on my camera budget.
 
Upvote 0