AGeoJO wrote:
I would be more excited about this lens had the aperture been an f/2.0, similar to that of Voigtlander Ultron 40mm. But I realize that a faster aperture would increase the size/bulk by quite a bit.
If you look at the other pancakes, it's not bad. The fastest of the current ones b&h talks about is f/2.0, with some being f/2.5, and others 2.8.
Canon, in their not so subtle way, is true to form. Obviously, still photographers can use it, but this is a video lens, the only market they really care about IMO. I wish it had at least 8 blades, but at least it has a metal mount and *looks* better built than the crap 50mm f/1.8.
AGeoJO wrote:
I would be more excited about this lens had the aperture been an f/2.0, similar to that of Voigtlander Ultron 40mm. But I realize that a faster aperture would increase the size/bulk by quite a bit.
A 40mm F/2 would not have been "This lens". At every lens release, many people want another lens instead, nothing wrong with that.
2.8 may not be terribly fast, but since I'm shooting at frickin 12,800 now I guess it doesn't really matter for anything other than DOF - which will be OK on a full frame camera. it'll be a great walk around street lens.
I'd be much less excited about this on a crop.... 64 mm makes much less sense for me, but I suppose some others may be ok with it. different strokes...
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Not every prime should be fast. Canon already have fast prime lenses in nearly every focal length. When Canon have the 24/1,4--35/1,4--50/1,2 do they really need another 3 fast prime lenses with nearly the same focal lenghts
Yes they do. When primes do not have an aperture advantage over zooms their sole raison d'etre is size and weight. Is that enough? For many the answer is 'No'. Also, the above mentioned primes are indeed fast but they are also very expensive. So, f/2 for the 24-35mm and f/1.8-1.4 for the 50mm looks like the best compromise.
Yakim Peled wrote:
When primes do not have an aperture advantage over zooms their sole raison d'etre is size and weight. .
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
I can tell you for sure that neither aperture, nor size, nor weight is a reason why I own a Distagon 21/2.8 ZE and a Makro-Planar 50/2 ZE. It is about image quality.
p.6 #10 · cr3: canon to release 40mm f/2.8 pancake
goosemang wrote:
I preordered
should be a good street lens by the look of it, and you can't beat the price
Yakim Peled wrote:
Have you looked at the 50/1.8? Half the price (as new, used ones are cheaper of course) and a 1.5 stops! faster.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Hey Yakim (how are you?)…if it was ONLY about the price, then your are absolutely correct that the 50/1.8 is cheaper & faster. However, having owned 4 different copies of the 50/1.8 over the years, I am thoroughly unimpressed with that lens…I don't think it's all that good optically, the focusing is not accurate or consistent enough, & the build quality is absolutely abysmal. If we go by the Canon MTF charts that have been released, this new 40mm will be much better than the 50/1.8 (granted it'll still be a stop & a half slower but) coupled with the promise of the new AF drive (which hopefully should be more consistent & accurate), better build quality (because it can't possibly be worse), a super compact design, and a VERY surprising price of just $200 makes the new pancake VERY attractive to some of us. I love the idea of putting this pancake on my T2i and getting the most compact form factor I've EVER used in a 1.6 crop DSLR….the bonus is that it's also full-frame compatible so I can do the same with my 5D! The pancake is definitely not for everyone and I suspect that some of current enthusiasm for the lens will wane once it's released but if the actual IQ matches the MTF charts, the AF is accurate, the build quality improved then (along with it's super compact size) it'll be a welcomed addition to my bag!
BTW, in addition to all the other features I mentioned above, the new 7 bladed circular aperture promises to deliver nice bokeh too…we shall see what the real-world samples look like but I'm excited to get my hands on one!
p.6 #11 · cr3: canon to release 40mm f/2.8 pancake
alundeb wrote:
I can tell you for sure that neither aperture, nor size, nor weight is a reason why I own a Distagon 21/2.8 ZE and a Makro-Planar 50/2 ZE. It is about image quality.
Well, the 21/2.8, 50/2 and 100/2 are indeed hall-marked forever as prime quality (pun intended of course ) but I was referring to Canon lenses. I should have been clearer.
BTW, if I wasn't so lousy at MF I'd own all three and live happily ever after.
p.6 #13 · cr3: canon to release 40mm f/2.8 pancake
omarlyn wrote:
Hey Yakim (how are you?)…if it was ONLY about the price, then your are absolutely correct that the 50/1.8 is cheaper & faster. However, having owned 4 different copies of the 50/1.8 over the years, I am thoroughly unimpressed with that lens…I don't think it's all that good optically, the focusing is not accurate or consistent enough, & the build quality is absolutely abysmal. If we go by the Canon MTF charts that have been released, this new 40mm will be much better than the 50/1.8 (granted it'll still be a stop & a half slower but) coupled with the promise of the new AF drive (which hopefully should be more consistent & accurate), better build quality (because it can't possibly be worse), a super compact design, and a VERY surprising price of just $200 makes the new pancake VERY attractive to some of us. I love the idea of putting this pancake on my T2i and getting the most compact form factor I've EVER used in a 1.6 crop DSLR….the bonus is that it's also full-frame compatible so I can do the same with my 5D! The pancake is definitely not for everyone and I suspect that some of current enthusiasm for the lens will wane once it's released but if the actual IQ matches the MTF charts, the AF is accurate, the build quality improved then (along with it's super compact size) it'll be a welcomed addition to my bag!
BTW, in addition to all the other features I mentioned above, the new 7 bladed circular aperture promises to deliver nice bokeh too…we shall see what the real-world samples look like but I'm excited to get my hands on one!
To the point: It's much easier to build a better lens when aperture is slower. My 60/2.8 nukes the 50/1.8 (and the 50/1.4) in every possible aspect save from max aperture. IQ, BQ, AF - you name it. Thus I will not be surprised to see the shorty forty (what a lovely name BTW) beat the 50/1.8 WRT IQ. BQ and AF are also easy targets as the 50/1.8 never excelled in these areas.
I had two copies of the 50/1.8 over the years. One for 12 years and the other for 3 years. When factoring the price I can't really fault the lens. Yes, BQ has some room foe improvement , bokeh is busy and CA could be better but wide-open sharpness was very good and focusing was accurate and consistent in my copies. It represents an incredible value for money IMHO.
I guess I could be more enthusiastic if it at least had IS or f/2 but alas, to keep the price low and size small Canon avoided it. As most of the comments are favourable I guess I'll have to accept I'm the odd-ball. Oh, well, it won't be the first time.
50/1.8 or 50/1.4 with IF, rounded aperture and either STM or ring USM (I prefer the latter as I am a stills person in heart) will be much more welcomed by me, even if price is higher and size is bigger. JMHO of course.
) but I was referring to Canon lenses. I should have been clearer.