Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

[dswatson83]

i still cant see the point of all these f2.8 primes coming out

Seriously. I don't get what Canon is doing with the lenses. We have had multiple lens announcements this year and all of them have been disappointing for multiple reasons. The 35mm f/2 is already very small and light. I would have definitely preferred that they just improve that...maybe make it an f/1.8. I have yet EVER to hear someone with a DSLR complain that the 35mm f/2 was too big/heavy. You would think in 22 years (the 35 f/2 came out in 1990!!!) they could have just improved the 35 f/2 and made it sharper, with faster focusing, and maybe a pinch smaller though I doubt anyone cares about that. Who the crap is approving these Canon lens choices.

 

[mb66energy]

Interesting, the more I think about this lens to more I believe that canons mirror less system will be EF mount.

Does anyone believe so also?

Yes, I do - after thinking they will release a low profile lens mount. It doesn't make sense to cripple a lens mount down to incompatibility with the rest of 50+ lenses to achieve a flatter body and - use a zoom lens with 40 or 50 mm length.

I would appreciate an EF mount ...

• because it avoids the hassle to fiddle around with an adaptor which will cost around 200 Euro
• if Canon builts camera components in the "wasted" space between sensor plane and lens mount flange to keep other dimensions small.
• if they go full frame including EF-S compatibility - EF-S will use the APS-C area of the sensor

And I am shure that canon will release a FF mirrorless soon - the 40mm is THE LENS for walkaround purposes and classical photography.

I always dreamed of a mirrorless which has compact size - compact doesn't mean pocketable but compact in terms that you can carry around a tertiary body in your photo bag which has the size and shape of a thicker lens. If the camera is - let's say - 100mm x 70mm and 50mm thick it is COMPACT and the the 40mm will add another 20mm or so. - For me: I like extreme wide angle or extreme telephoto, but sometimes I need the "boring focal length" of 40mm or 60mm equiv - the 40mm with a compact body would be a welcome thingy to fill the gap I see now in my lenses focal lengths.

EDIT:
I made a rough sketch of my vision of an artists compact mirrorless camera TOOL:

Can you explain how the camera in your 'artist's' impression offer any advantages over a DSLR? It looks like a Canon version of the Pentax K-01, a camera that seems to spectacularly miss the whole point of mirrorless cameras by having all their deficiencies (poor AF, no viewfinder) without their biggest advantage -size:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,326
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,99

[Note: I think that the Canon 'Rebels' could be slimmed down in size quite a bit, which is why I included a link to the Sony A37]

Once you've made a camera that's too big to easily fit in a pocket, you might as well go the whole hog and give it a mirror for phase detect AF and a decent viewfinder.

Yes, I can ... my rough sketch depicts a camera which can be stowed into a photo back pack or bag in some lens compartment. That is not possible with a 40D and I think it might be a problem with a 6xxD.

The missing mirror box helps to to implement a ring control around the lens base.

Removing the mirror box means space for electronics/sensor heat spreaders and gives room for a large capacity battery like the one for the 5D ii+ or 7D. This helps for video applications where battery capacity is essential.

Best - Michael

 

[markd61]

.

Comparing this, with theoretical dimensions, to the 35mm f/2, at most it will save a few oz's and about a 3/4" in lens length.
[/quote]

It is a significant difference in percentage terms. Whether it makes a difference in the handling is a subjective decision. I still believe they have already achieved their aims of stirring up interest in pancakes and this discussion has already opened many to the possible advantages of a small, medium speed, modern design, prime lens.
I believe they will sell a ton and if its performance is notable it may become an iconic member of the lineup.

 

[Rocky]

Interesting, the more I think about this lens to more I believe that canons mirror less system will be EF mount.

Does anyone believe so also?

Yes, I do - after thinking they will release a low profile lens mount. It doesn't make sense to cripple a lens mount down to incompatibility with the rest of 50+ lenses to achieve a flatter body and - use a zoom lens with 40 or 50 mm length.

I would appreciate an EF mount ...

• because it avoids the hassle to fiddle around with an adaptor which will cost around 200 Euro
• if Canon builts camera components in the "wasted" space between sensor plane and lens mount flange to keep other dimensions small.
• if they go full frame including EF-S compatibility - EF-S will use the APS-C area of the sensor

And I am shure that canon will release a FF mirrorless soon - the 40mm is THE LENS for walkaround purposes and classical photography.

I always dreamed of a mirrorless which has compact size - compact doesn't mean pocketable but compact in terms that you can carry around a tertiary body in your photo bag which has the size and shape of a thicker lens. If the camera is - let's say - 100mm x 70mm and 50mm thick it is COMPACT and the the 40mm will add another 20mm or so. - For me: I like extreme wide angle or extreme telephoto, but sometimes I need the "boring focal length" of 40mm or 60mm equiv - the 40mm with a compact body would be a welcome thingy to fill the gap I see now in my lenses focal lengths.

EDIT:
I made a rough sketch of my vision of an artists compact mirrorless camera TOOL:

Can you explain how the camera in your 'artist's' impression offer any advantages over a DSLR? It looks like a Canon version of the Pentax K-01, a camera that seems to spectacularly miss the whole point of mirrorless cameras by having all their deficiencies (poor AF, no viewfinder) without their biggest advantage -size:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,326
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,99

[Note: I think that the Canon 'Rebels' could be slimmed down in size quite a bit, which is why I included a link to the Sony A37]

Once you've made a camera that's too big to easily fit in a pocket, you might as well go the whole hog and give it a mirror for phase detect AF and a decent viewfinder.

Yes, I can ... my rough sketch depicts a camera which can be stowed into a photo back pack or bag in some lens compartment. That is not possible with a 40D and I think it might be a problem with a 6xxD.

The missing mirror box helps to to implement a ring control around the lens base.

Removing the mirror box means space for electronics/sensor heat spreaders and gives room for a large capacity battery like the one for the 5D ii+ or 7D. This helps for video applications where battery capacity is essential.

Best - Michael

Your sketch shows the mirror box sticks out even more than the handle Which is not the case for ALL Canon DSLR. All you have done is just remove the penta prism in the expense of a good eye level view finder and fast AF that we are enjoying now on the DSLR. I can fit 2 DSLR bodies (40D and 20D)and 3 lenses in a Nova 4 bag.

 

[mb66energy]

Interesting, the more I think about this lens to more I believe that canons mirror less system will be EF mount.

Does anyone believe so also?

Yes, I do - after thinking they will release a low profile lens mount. It doesn't make sense to cripple a lens mount down to incompatibility with the rest of 50+ lenses to achieve a flatter body and - use a zoom lens with 40 or 50 mm length.

I would appreciate an EF mount ...

• because it avoids the hassle to fiddle around with an adaptor which will cost around 200 Euro
• if Canon builts camera components in the "wasted" space between sensor plane and lens mount flange to keep other dimensions small.
• if they go full frame including EF-S compatibility - EF-S will use the APS-C area of the sensor

And I am shure that canon will release a FF mirrorless soon - the 40mm is THE LENS for walkaround purposes and classical photography.

I always dreamed of a mirrorless which has compact size - compact doesn't mean pocketable but compact in terms that you can carry around a tertiary body in your photo bag which has the size and shape of a thicker lens. If the camera is - let's say - 100mm x 70mm and 50mm thick it is COMPACT and the the 40mm will add another 20mm or so. - For me: I like extreme wide angle or extreme telephoto, but sometimes I need the "boring focal length" of 40mm or 60mm equiv - the 40mm with a compact body would be a welcome thingy to fill the gap I see now in my lenses focal lengths.

EDIT:
I made a rough sketch of my vision of an artists compact mirrorless camera TOOL:

Can you explain how the camera in your 'artist's' impression offer any advantages over a DSLR? It looks like a Canon version of the Pentax K-01, a camera that seems to spectacularly miss the whole point of mirrorless cameras by having all their deficiencies (poor AF, no viewfinder) without their biggest advantage -size:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,326
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,99

[Note: I think that the Canon 'Rebels' could be slimmed down in size quite a bit, which is why I included a link to the Sony A37]

Once you've made a camera that's too big to easily fit in a pocket, you might as well go the whole hog and give it a mirror for phase detect AF and a decent viewfinder.

Yes, I can ... my rough sketch depicts a camera which can be stowed into a photo back pack or bag in some lens compartment. That is not possible with a 40D and I think it might be a problem with a 6xxD.

The missing mirror box helps to to implement a ring control around the lens base.

Removing the mirror box means space for electronics/sensor heat spreaders and gives room for a large capacity battery like the one for the 5D ii+ or 7D. This helps for video applications where battery capacity is essential.

Best - Michael

Your sketch shows the mirror box sticks out even more than the handle Which is not the case for ALL Canon DSLR. All you have done is just remove the penta prism in the expense of a good eye level view finder and fast AF that we are enjoying now on the DSLR. I can fit 2 DSLR bodies (40D and 20D)and 3 lenses in a Nova 4 bag.

It is meant as a rough sketch (perhaps my last one if it disturbs so much) - and thanks for the hint: The camera can be even smaller.

I cannot put 2 bodies (40D with 400mm and 100mm macro) into a mini trekker with lenses attached and access both cameras without hassles. Additionally I was speaking about a tertiary body.

Besides that: Perhaps I am satisfied with a TFT and don't need an eye level view finder for each camera ... please respect my dreams and my potential applications of such a camera ... - Michael

 

[Axilrod]

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.

 

[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.

Besides: 40mm is not too odd - it is THE standard focal length for FF!

 

[AvTvM]

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.

And if Canon's geriatric management squelches any true innovation, than at least develop any of the following ASAP:
* 50/1.4 Mk. II - with improved optical performance matching if not surpassing the Nikon AF-S 50/1.4 and Sigma ... and most importantly with Hi-grade RING USM AF
* 35/2 Mk. II - with massively improved optical performance and Ring-USM AF
* 28/1.8 Mk. II - with massively improved optical performance
* 24-70 Mk. III with f*cking 4-EV IS
And all of us want lens shades included with every Canon lens, not only with L's.

 

[crasher8]

Canon, making products no one wants but everyone buys. lol.

 

[pdirestajr]

We already know it is cheap, compact, has a metal mount, updated focusing motor.... and if it happens to have great optics & nice and sharp at f/2.8... what is the problem?

I'm always looking for an excuse to buy a new lens to play around with, and at this price, it's play.

 

[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]

Re: Canon EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake

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....