# Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Information.



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 7, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href=""></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href=""></a></div>
<p><strong>Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM

</strong>Just discovered the new pancake is also part of the new “STM” family of lenses from Canon.  The lens is also extremely small with a thickness of 22.8mm and weighing in at 130 grams.</p>
<p>Below are a few more images of the lens in comparison to the EF 50 f/1.8 II.</p>
<p><strong>Specifications</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Focal length / Aperture: 40mm / 1:2.8</li>
<li>Lens Construction: 4 group 6 pieces</li>
<li>Closest focusing distance: 0.3m</li>
<li>The maximum magnification ratio: 0.18-fold</li>
<li>Filter diameter: 52mm</li>
<li>The maximum diameter: 68.2mm</li>
<li>Length: 22.8mm</li>
<li>Weight: About 130g</li>
<li>Lens Hood: ES-52 (Not Included)</li>
</ul>
<p> </p>
<div id="attachment_10174" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pancake.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-10174" title="pancake" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pancake-575x253.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="253" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM</p></div>
<div id="attachment_10175" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 531px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pancakecompare.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10175" title="pancakecompare" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pancakecompare.jpg" alt="" width="521" height="328" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Canon EF 50 f/1.8 II compared to the Canon EF 40 f/2.8 STM</p></div>
<div id="attachment_10176" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pancakeelements.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-10176" title="pancakeelements" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/pancakeelements-575x370.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="370" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Lens Design of the Canon 40mm f/2.8 STM</p></div>
```


----------



## Etienne (Jun 7, 2012)

If it's sharp and contrasty at 2.8, then I'm in.


----------



## trulandphoto (Jun 7, 2012)

I have never pre-ordered photo equipment. This lens will be my first.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jun 7, 2012)

+1 WAAAAAAAANT. Been wanting for years!


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 7, 2012)

Forgive my ignorance, but what's special about this? It's only 10mm wider than the 50 and a stop slower. :-\


----------



## mememe (Jun 7, 2012)

Harry Muff said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but what's special about this? It's only 10mm wider than the 50 and a stop slower. :-\



Its small!


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Jun 7, 2012)

If you want a really good feel for what this will be like, lock together a body cap and a rear lens cap and hold them flush against the lens mount of your camera.

Indeed, if it's really under $200, I can easily see it becoming a popular choice for a replacement body cap! think about it...you can either cap the body with a bulky lens (even the Plastic Fantastic is awkward as a body cap), a functionless piece of plastic, or an actual lens that's right about at the textbook "normal" focal length for full frame.

I'll personally wait for some lens reviews...but if the IQ wide open doesn't suck, I can easily see getting at least one per body.

b&


----------



## phemark (Jun 7, 2012)

I need a physics lesson:

Why cant they put bigger glass in it, and make it pancake size 40mm F0.5 or similar?


----------



## mememe (Jun 7, 2012)

phemark said:


> I need a physics lesson:
> 
> Why cant they put bigger glass in it, and make it pancake size 40mm F0.5 or similar?



I guess bigger glass means longer Lens


----------



## dswatson83 (Jun 7, 2012)

Please canon, stop with these lenses that don't make sense. How many people called Canon to complain that the 50mm f/1.8 or 35mm f/2 were too big and heavy. Seriously, how about addressing the ACTUAL problems. In 22 years, you can't make an improved 35mm f/2 with better focusing and a sharper image? Instead you shrink the 50mm f/1.8 for $100 more & make it 1 stop slower? Who is approving these lenses. Canon, you tell me you can't fit IS in a 24-70mm f/2.8 and then Tamron does it. Rather than improving the 2+ decade old fast primes like the 50mm f/1.4, 28mm f/1.8 & 35mm f/2 that almost every photographer who doesn't have the L versions use (and all of those lenses could be better), you put IS in f/2.8 primes?????. The primes we all love are all 2-3 decades old! Please Canon, improve them and stop wasting your time on stupid designs of lenses no one asked for.


----------



## Harry Muff (Jun 7, 2012)

$200 to replace the plastic caps? No thanks.


----------



## preppyak (Jun 7, 2012)

Harry Muff said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but what's special about this? It's only 10mm wider than the 50 and a stop slower. :-\


The STM would, presumably, make the auto-focus during video very quiet. NOW this lens makes sense. The 18-135 covers your general video use, but for someone who wants lower-light handling while shooting video (but still AF), they could use this. Whereas the AF for the 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.8 are loud and will destroy your audio.

Still makes it a silly lens, but, at least it makes sense


----------



## phemark (Jun 7, 2012)

mememe said:


> phemark said:
> 
> 
> > I need a physics lesson:
> ...



But why it has to be longer? Cant they bend light sharply enough to use big glass in a very short lens? What are physics restrictions to this? (Just curious , an article regarding this would be an interesting read)


----------



## Stevo2008 (Jun 7, 2012)

Harry Muff said:


> Forgive my ignorance, but what's special about this? It's only 10mm wider than the 50 and a stop slower. :-\



Three things better than 50mm 1.8:
- Full time manual focus
- Quiet autofocus 
- 7 circular blades = great bokeh!

This will be my first pre-order of any canon (2nd of all electronics - 1st was iPad).


----------



## dswatson83 (Jun 7, 2012)

mememe said:


> Harry Muff said:
> 
> 
> > Forgive my ignorance, but what's special about this? It's only 10mm wider than the 50 and a stop slower. :-\
> ...


The 50mm f/1.8 & 35mm f/2 are super light and hardly stick out past the grip, are smaller in diameter than the camera, and are a stop faster. What is the point of making it smaller than the grip? Is there really a Canon DSLR owner out there that is pissed because the 50mm f/1.8 & 35mm f/2 are just too large and heavy?


----------



## preppyak (Jun 7, 2012)

Stevo2008 said:


> Three things better than 50mm 1.8:
> - Full time manual focus
> - 7 circular blades = great bokeh!


Can you source either of those details? I don't see it in any of the previous rumors on the lens that it would have FTM or any details regarding blades, etc.


----------



## hmmm (Jun 7, 2012)

I've got a bad feeling about the price of these new STM lenses....

I sure hope this pancake comes in at about $200. We could start a pricing pool -- unfortunately my guess would be $400.

Sure hope $200 wins the pool!


----------



## Stevo2008 (Jun 7, 2012)

preppyak said:


> Stevo2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Three things better than 50mm 1.8:
> ...


Here:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A//digicame-info.com/2012/06/ef40mm-f28-stmef-s18-135mm-f35.html%0A


----------



## preppyak (Jun 7, 2012)

Stevo2008 said:


> Here:
> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A//digicame-info.com/2012/06/ef40mm-f28-stmef-s18-135mm-f35.html%0A


Impressive. Wouldn't have expected FTM from this lens. 



hmmm said:


> Sure hope $200 wins the pool!


The rumors to this point have been $200 or <$200, but obviously we'll see. A <$200 lens that does FTM and has better aperture blades than the 50mm f/1,8 would have be kind of surprising...since their other lens announcements have been less affordable relative to what they offer


----------



## Bob Howland (Jun 7, 2012)

Let's see. This is full frame lens? STM is quiet during focusing, presumably so that the camera can focus while taking videos. (Then why are the 24 f/2.8 IS and 28 f/2.8 IS lenses USM, not STM? Because they're IS lenses perhaps?) The 5D3 can't focus while taking videos, but there is a firmware upgrade due for the 5D3, really soon now, with the rumor that features will be added. Dare we hope?

And while you're at it, Canon, make exposure compensation and automatic exposure bracketing functional in the 5D3 in manual mode with auto ISO. The present situation is inexcusable.


----------



## kode (Jun 7, 2012)

Just the fact that everyone seems to have an opinion on this lens makes me think Canon is 100% right in releasing it. Too bad I can't preorder it yet.


----------



## JurijTurnsek (Jun 7, 2012)

pancake form-factor and STM point to a future mirrorless system, FF perhaps?


----------



## preppyak (Jun 7, 2012)

JurijTurnsek said:


> STM point to a future mirrorless system


How does STM point to mirror-less? It points towards silent focus for video...but, that can be useful on any type of body. 

The pancake form would point to mirror-less, but, the fact it's EF mount might mean its just a marketing choice.


----------



## JurijTurnsek (Jun 7, 2012)

I've always associated EVIL cameras as better suited for full-time video AF, since there is no mirror - hence, STM would be appreciated more, since AF would be used more while filming.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 7, 2012)

phemark said:


> But why it has to be longer? Cant they bend light sharply enough to use big glass in a very short lens? What are physics restrictions to this? (Just curious , an article regarding this would be an interesting read)



Material properties restrict how much the light can be bent. To make fast aperture short lenses, you'd need new glass-like materials that have a higher index of refraction and have lower chromatic abberation properties. Diffractive optics with their gratings can bend light more than traditional optics, but the technology is not yet good enough to deliver comparable or better IQ.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 7, 2012)

Wow...a very flat, very light normal prime. Such a lens will make carrying and shooting with my forthcoming 1D X like.....carrying and shooting with a 1D X. Guess I just don't see the point. Maybe with the new Rebel...


----------



## Rocky (Jun 7, 2012)

Canon should have made it as 30mm f2.8 EF-S mount. This will make it as a cargo-pant pocketable with a Rebel or my old 20D.


----------



## llcanon (Jun 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Wow...a very flat, very light normal prime. Such a lens will make carrying and shooting with my forthcoming 1D X like.....carrying and shooting with a 1D X. Guess I just don't see the point. Maybe with the new Rebel...



LOL. Exactly. Even with the new rebel, it would look interesting. The specs are not as impressive as some of the pancake lenses by others. Hope the optical quality is good.


----------



## PCPhil (Jun 7, 2012)

Been keeping an eye out for this for a while and has stopped me spending on the Voightlander.

Looks ideal for quickly packing in a bag. Of course I would 'probably' put a different lens on for when I am specifically going out to take photos. However, there are so many of my business trips when I want to have my camera with me. I tried having a small point and shoot for a few years but was never happy with the results and I really just want the one camera (that I can love and talk to at night....er that is a joke but you know what I mean). If the optics are ok it would be great to always have my camera in my bag in the smallest possible size.

f2.8 doesn't worry me. I hardly shoot below this unless I want a particular effect, just crank the ISO up, and then I would have a different lens anyway. Can't wait.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 7, 2012)

hmmm said:


> I've got a bad feeling about the price of these new STM lenses....
> 
> I sure hope this pancake comes in at about $200. We could start a pricing pool -- unfortunately my guess would be $400.
> 
> Sure hope $200 wins the pool!


 
Cost to make depends on size and number of lens elements. with 7 small elements, it will be a cheap lens to make. If Canon is using their new radial diffractive coatinngs, it will be pretty good optically, since the CA is reduced to allow a shorter lens.


----------



## bvukich (Jun 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Wow...a very flat, very light normal prime. Such a lens will make carrying and shooting with my forthcoming 1D X like.....carrying and shooting with a 1D X. Guess I just don't see the point. Maybe with the new Rebel...



Don't think of it as a cheap lens, think of it as an expensive body cap that you can take pictures through.


----------



## dstppy (Jun 7, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Wow...a very flat, very light normal prime. Such a lens will make carrying and shooting with my forthcoming 1D X like.....carrying and shooting with a 1D X. Guess I just don't see the point. Maybe with the new Rebel...



Maybe you can wear it around as a monocle? 

Besides, this will be out a full year before the 1Dx hits the street


----------



## bornshooter (Jun 7, 2012)

would love to see an L series version


----------



## azizjhn (Jun 7, 2012)

I guess it will make more sense with mirror less camera any way for me will get it.


----------



## hammar (Jun 7, 2012)

I guess if you are shooting with tele lenses (like 400/5.6) 99% of the time, this might be a nice lens to just have in your pocket for those 1% shoots you would like wide/normal perspective.


----------



## Axilrod (Jun 7, 2012)

For $200 no one should be complaining, this seems like it's definitely geared towards entry-level users (which most people on here are not). I can't believe it's so tiny though.

So has anyone figured out what STM means?


----------



## Positron (Jun 7, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> phemark said:
> 
> 
> > But why it has to be longer? Cant they bend light sharply enough to use big glass in a very short lens? What are physics restrictions to this? (Just curious , an article regarding this would be an interesting read)
> ...



Due to my poor eyesight I have very high index of refraction lenses in my glasses to avoid having to wear ridiculously thick lenses on my face, and there's a slight lateral shift at certain wavelengths; bright red and deep blue objects appear to be in a different physical location than they actually are when I look through my glasses at them. The worst part is, the index of refraction is only slightly higher than "traditional" high index lenses. The diminishing returns are pretty dramatic.

Physically there's nothing actually stopping you from almost perfectly correcting such an image, but as the index of refraction goes up it gets more and more complicated, and you'd have to have a large number of very, very thin lenses to make it work, and the cost involved would be crazy.


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 7, 2012)

bvukich said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Wow...a very flat, very light normal prime. Such a lens will make carrying and shooting with my forthcoming 1D X like.....carrying and shooting with a 1D X. Guess I just don't see the point. Maybe with the new Rebel...
> ...



Good remark!

What's missing: A tiny mirrorless. Think of it as an expensive lens cap that you can take pictures with. 

Both would make a great combo.


----------



## jonmlee (Jun 7, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> For $200 no one should be complaining, this seems like it's definitely geared towards entry-level users (which most people on here are not). I can't believe it's so tiny though.
> 
> So has anyone figured out what STM means?



STM (Stepping Motor) AF operation of the motor is equipped with dramatically reduced noise and smooth movement of the AF drive control is possible.


----------



## distant.star (Jun 7, 2012)

bvukich said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Wow...a very flat, very light normal prime. Such a lens will make carrying and shooting with my forthcoming 1D X like.....carrying and shooting with a 1D X. Guess I just don't see the point. Maybe with the new Rebel...
> ...




I see. So this is the real solution to the 5D3 "light leak." A see-through body cap! That's Canon for you; always thinking.


----------



## chadders (Jun 7, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> So has anyone figured out what STM means?



Slow to materialise?


----------



## ideaworx (Jun 7, 2012)

TrumpetPower! said:


> If you want a really good feel for what this will be like, lock together a body cap and a rear lens cap and hold them flush against the lens mount of your camera.
> 
> Indeed, if it's really under $200, I can easily see it becoming a popular choice for a replacement body cap! think about it...you can either cap the body with a bulky lens (even the Plastic Fantastic is awkward as a body cap), a functionless piece of plastic, or an actual lens that's right about at the textbook "normal" focal length for full frame.
> 
> ...



I love this idea, and very functional too!


----------



## ideaworx (Jun 7, 2012)

bornshooter said:


> would love to see an L series version



Agreed


----------



## Rocky (Jun 7, 2012)

hmmm said:


> I've got a bad feeling about the price of these new STM lenses....
> 
> I sure hope this pancake comes in at about $200. We could start a pricing pool -- unfortunately my guess would be $400.
> 
> Sure hope $200 wins the pool!


If Canon can sell the 50mm f1.8 II at $100. The 40mm f2.8 can be sold for $100 also if the sales volume is large enough. Canon price it at $200 to make sure it can get the R &D and tooling cost back fast enough. Also canon does not expect the 40MM f2.8 will be sold as much as the 50mm f 1.8 II.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 7, 2012)

hmmm said:


> If Canon can sell the 50mm f1.8 II at $100. The 40mm f2.8 can be sold for $100 also if the sales volume is large enough.



I'd rather buy it for $200 with a usable f2.8 - unlike the 50/1.8 which is extreme mediocre at open aperture.


----------



## allanc (Jun 7, 2012)

bornshooter said:


> would love to see an L series version


That wouldn't be technically feasible.

There's not enough room for the red stripe.


----------



## markd61 (Jun 7, 2012)

dswatson83 said:


> Is there really a Canon DSLR owner out there that is pissed because the 50mm f/1.8 & 35mm f/2 are just too large and heavy?



If you look at posts on various boards there is a lot of comment whining about size. I agree the lenses you mention are not bulky but they are not new and do not seem in any danger of being upgraded.

A key aspect of the pancake is that it adds a uniqueness that Canon knows will attract attention and sales.

History is full of interesting lenses that achieve cult status for whatever reason. In some cases it is just being different that attracts a cadre of loyal followers. The 45 GN Nikkor of the 60's was one such lens. A pancake design with the inspired feature of coupling the aperture to the focus via setting the guide number of your flash. Thus you could always have perfectly exposed flash pictures. The bonus was its shorter FL was ideal for event photography in tighter spaces.

It did not sell in great numbers in its day as the average snap shooter would not spend the money. It is now a a highly desired collectable lens.


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 7, 2012)

phemark said:


> I need a physics lesson:
> 
> Why cant they put bigger glass in it, and make it pancake size 40mm F0.5 or similar?




A 40mm 0.5 would have a diameter of 80mm and the lens thickness might be in the range of 30 or 40 mm ...

The other point is: A large lens diameter for short focal lenghs means a lot of spherical aberration. Lenses with spherical surfaces do not bend the light of each ray passing through it to one point. Now you have two options: Use aspherical surfaces or a set of other lenses to correct spherical aberration.

Another point: Correcting CAs means you need TWO lenses with different disperion functions to compensate for different focal lengths for different wavelengths (=colors).

These corrections need a lot of space for additional lenses and ... you need a retrofocus design to circumvent using space in the mirror box. Retrofocus designs can be seen as a design that "shifts virtual lenses" behind the last real element. Necessary for a 24 mm full frame lens and a lot others.


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 7, 2012)

Rocky said:


> hmmm said:
> 
> 
> > I've got a bad feeling about the price of these new STM lenses....
> ...



I think "hmmm" is right

if the lens is FTM capable and
if the rear element is aspherical
because it has 6 lens elements (element number counts more then sheer size if compared to 1.8/50
because miniaturization of components makes things more complicated/drives price

Why do I think of aspherical rear element? - If the color code of the lenses is according to that of the canon.jp web site, the last element IS aspherical. And that makes sens if you want a very well corrected lens.

If usability and IQ of this lens are a lot better compared to the 50mm/1.8 this one will sell well.


----------



## FunPhotons (Jun 7, 2012)

Looking forward to it. On any DSLR body, such as my non gripped 5DMKII, it should make for a super light package. My 5D body doesn't weight anything, it's in all that glass. 

I think pancake lenses are a brilliant solution to those needing a small and light package. This way I can go on vacation with one body, and just pick the lens based on how much weight I can carry. Lots='L' lenses, Puny=Pancake


----------



## Rocky (Jun 7, 2012)

mb66energy said:


> Rocky said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm said:
> ...


50mm f1.8 II is also 6 element. I know the last element of the 40mm f2.8 is a "molded" aspherical element. It should not be more expensive than a polished element. As for size of the elements, both lenses are comparable. I think the real difference of the price is from the R & D and tooling cost per lens. Obviously, the 40mm f 2.8 will have a much lower volume than the 50mm f1.8 II.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2012)

PCPhil said:


> Looks ideal for quickly packing in a bag. Of course I would 'probably' put a different lens on for when I am specifically going out to take photos. However, there are so many of my business trips when I want to have my camera with me. I tried having a small point and shoot...



Thanks!! This is actually the first personally-relevant point in a 40mm pancake. I have a Lowepro S&F Utility Bag 100AW that was initially intended for a camcorder and accessories, but it exactly the right size for a gripped or 1-series body without lens - it would also fit a 1D X with this pancake lens. That setup would fit in a pocket of the Brenthaven computer satchel that holds my 17" MacBook Pro and serves as an overnight bag for short trips. I'd be likely to bring the dSLR in that case, whereas now I'm just bringing my S100. It's an even more attractive solution given that most of my free time on those short trips is at night, and the ISO capabilities of the 1D X with an f/2.8 lens should do fine. 

I'm going to reserve judgement until reviews with IQ testing are available (which, the way things are going, will still be before my preordered 1D X is in my hands  ), but I'd the IQ is good, I'd consider this lens.


----------



## rcha101 (Jun 8, 2012)

I want a 35mm F2 version of this. Can't wait to see what else is in store for the STM range.


----------



## 7enderbender (Jun 8, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> phemark said:
> 
> 
> > But why it has to be longer? Cant they bend light sharply enough to use big glass in a very short lens? What are physics restrictions to this? (Just curious , an article regarding this would be an interesting read)
> ...




Really? And why can Voigtlander do this, for example? Their Nokton 35mm F/1.4 doesn't look that much bigger. I'm sure there are plenty of others that are fast, in that same focal range and pretty small and flat - and "full frame"...


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 8, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > phemark said:
> ...



Isn't the Nokton you cite for a range finder camera, without a mirror box? What example can you find of a small profile lens that is f/1.4 for a full frame sensor DSLR that also has autofocus?


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 8, 2012)

i would be keen on seeing someone who gets one early do some shots with an IR filter to see if it suffers hot spotting as that would most likely be one of the main reasons i might pick one up, I kow reviews arent going to test that since its extremely specific


----------



## Lee Jay (Jun 8, 2012)

Wait - a full-frame lens with a backfocus distance of 38.4mm? Doesn't the EF spec set that at 44mm?


----------



## Rocky (Jun 8, 2012)

Lee Jay said:


> Wait - a full-frame lens with a backfocus distance of 38.4mm? Doesn't the EF spec set that at 44mm?


44mm is the fringe distance. The lens mount goes inside the fringe. that is why the back focus is 38.5mm to push the lens as close to the sensor as possible to do the 'Pancake".


----------



## hmmm (Jun 8, 2012)

hmmm said:


> I've got a bad feeling about the price of these new STM lenses....
> 
> I sure hope this pancake comes in at about $200. We could start a pricing pool -- unfortunately my guess would be $400.
> 
> Sure hope $200 wins the pool!



okay...okay... $200 wins the pool and I'm very glad to say:* I WAS WRONG!* ;D

I'm planning on picking up one of these myself, and kudos to Canon for not price-gouging on this lens. And kudos to CR for some great on-target rumors!


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 8, 2012)

Rocky said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > Rocky said:
> ...



40mm is FTM -> much higher usability for many photographers, more complicated built
rear element is aspherical -> plan 20-30EUR more production cost
6-element -> I know that 50/1.8 is 6 element, 40mm is not cheaper in production
small outline -> small systems are - often - more complicated to built

Additionally we have a rounded 7 blade diaphragm compared to the 5 blades of 50/1.8 ...
We have a metal mount compared to the plastic mount of 50/1.8 ...
We have STM (hopefully it fulfills expectations) as a silent, video capable AF (if someone wants to use it) ...

IMHO pricing of the new lens can be understood without any tooling or R&D costs ... 200 vs 125 $ is a fair difference ... if general IQ of the new lens is great.

Best Michael


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Jun 8, 2012)

Stevo2008 said:


> Harry Muff said:
> 
> 
> > Forgive my ignorance, but what's special about this? It's only 10mm wider than the 50 and a stop slower. :-\
> ...



If Canon upgraded the 35mm f/2 to include those three things, it would have been my first pre-order as well.


----------



## psolberg (Jun 8, 2012)

it is a neat advance but one has to wonder why canon did not include such technology on more popular lenses like the 70-200 and 24-70. or in the big telephoto refresh. having to wait for the revision III of such lenses to include this technology is quite bad. one also has to wonder if the technology even scales up that well which is why it is appearing in cheaper consumer lenses first.

without doubt other OEMs will adopt it, sigma, nikon, sony etc, just as with USM. But it will be decades before the entire lens lineup of these companies takes full advantage.


----------



## charleswagoner (Jun 8, 2012)

Some of you people really need to look at this lens as a whole and stop focusing on the fact that it's "only f/2.8." Sure, the 50 1.8 II is a whole 1 1/3 stop faster. Awesome. But how practical is it really to be shooting with such a shallow DoF all the time? My one and only lens is a 50mm 1.4, and I almost never shoot below f/2, not because the image quality is bad, but because I have a hard time nailing focus in a pleasing way. At any rate, when I'm shooting portraits of a single person, I'm almost always at f/2.8. If this lens manages to get good image quality wide open, it will be great. I see myself using it as a walkaround lens, meaning that I will be outside most of the time and will probably never drop below f/4 without a good reason.

Also, when people quote prices on the 50mm 1.8 II, I feel like they're being awfully loose with their figures. In the past three years I've never once seen this lens at $100 on Amazon. It's always been around $120 - $130. A roughly $75 difference between it an the 40mm 2.8 is perfectly justified by a few things: STM, FTM, rounded aperture blades, a metal mount (the 50 1.8 II is plastic), and what appears on the surface to be higher quality plastic (it's got that rough finish instead of the smooth finish of the 50mm 1.8 II).

I'd really love to see a successor to the 20mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, and 85mm f/1.8. I'm holding off on upgrading my camera until I see what Canon does with these lenses. If they disappoint (which I'm starting to think they will), then I'll just go to Nikon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2012)

charleswagoner said:


> Also, when people quote prices on the 50mm 1.8 II, I feel like they're being awfully loose with their figures. In the *past three years* I've never once seen this lens at $100 on Amazon. *It's always been around $120 - $130.*



Look again. It cost $100 for pretty much all of 2010, and is $110-$112 on Amazon currently, and $109 from Adorama with US warranty. 







Also, given that many of the lenses commonly discussed here cost hundreds or thousands of dollars, rounding even $120 down to $100 is not unreasonable.


----------



## preppyak (Jun 8, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Look again. It cost $100 for pretty much all of 2010, and is $110-$112 on Amazon currently, and $109 from Adorama with US warranty.


Yep, and Amazon has run it on Lightning Deals for <$100. Thing is, demand is probably still high right now, since its the cheapest upgrade over the kit lens, and a ton of people bought Rebels within the last 6-8 months. Prior to Canon's huge discounts before Xmas, I saw the 50mm on multiple deals in the $80 range.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2012)

Rocky said:


> 50mm f1.8 II is also 6 element. I know the last element of the 40mm f2.8 is a "molded" aspherical element. *It should not be more expensive than a polished element.*



A gorund and polished aspherical element is _certainly_ more expensive to produce than a molded one.

In decending order of cost and quality, the four types of aspherical elements are:

1. a ground and polished glass aspherical lens element.
2. a molded glass aspherical lens element.
3. a molded plastic aspherical lens element produced by a high-precision molding technology.
4. a replica aspherical lens element, ultraviolet-light-hardening resin layer on a spherical glass lens element.

So, what material is the molded element in the 40/2.8 pancake? Ground/polished elements deliver the best IQ, and that's why they're used in L-series lenses. The new 24mm and 28mm IS primes have glass molded (GMo) aspherical elements. The aspherical element in the new 18-135 STM lens is a 'Precision Molded Optics (PMo) element' which I take to mean molded plastic based on the description (P for 'precision' is better marketing-speak than P for 'plastic').


----------



## chadders (Jun 8, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> charleswagoner said:
> 
> 
> > Also, when people quote prices on the 50mm 1.8 II, I feel like they're being awfully loose with their figures. In the *past three years* I've never once seen this lens at $100 on Amazon. *It's always been around $120 - $130.*
> ...




All very well for you boys across the pond. At the moment one online store here in the UK has it at £229. That's approx $353 at the current exchange rate of $1.5415 = £1.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2012)

chadders said:


> All very well for you boys across the pond. At the moment one online store here in the UK has it at £229. That's approx $353 at the current exchange rate of $1.5415 = £1.



Right, but if I looked hard enough I bet I could find price-gouging online sellers here, too. Amazon.co.uk has it in the £90-£105 range, which is a far cry from your £229 figure.


----------



## chadders (Jun 8, 2012)

chadders said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > charleswagoner said:
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2012)

chadders said:


> The point is that the "official" recommended price is $200 in the US. The "official" price in the UK is £229($353). That's the price quoted by mainstream photographic equipment retailers.



Sorry, but from which orifice did you pull those 'official' numbers?!? Can you provide a source? Let me help with some links, where Canon USA lists the estimated retail price as $125.99, and Canon UK lists the Suggested Retail Price as £130 including VAT. 

In addition to shipping and import duty (and not VAT since that's included by Canon in the SRP), you left out what is a major factor in relative pricing - the strength of the ¥ relative to the £ vs. the $.


----------



## chadders (Jun 8, 2012)

@neuroanatomist

Let me apologise for wasting your extremely valuable time. I mistakenly quoted the wrong post in my original post. 

I was of course referring to the new 40mm f2.8 lens, not to the 50mm f1.8. (Actually, my daughter purchased that particular lens recently for significantly less than the price Amazon UK are offering it, but thanks for the heads up anyway). 

I have just received an email which states that UK availabilty (for the 40mm f2.8) is expected from 15 June and the RRP is £229.99 (approx $355), and this appears to be the price the specialist photographic suppliers here in the UK are offering it. I would add that usually these specialist outlets seem to offer the best (i.e. lowest) prices for official imports. 


*"EF 40mm f2.8 STM
This lens is slim and light, measuring only 22.8mm in length and weighing in at 130g. This pancake-style lens is the thinnest and lightest lens in the EF range and is ideal for portraits.

The EF 40mm f2.8 STM is expected to be available from 15 June for £229.99 RRP."*

However, as it appears the price quoted for this lens in the US appears to be $199 (perhaps that could be confirmed), my original whinge about the price disparity between the US and the UK remains.

Also the new 650D has a rrp of £699 ($1078). How does that compare with US prices?


----------



## llcanon (Jun 8, 2012)

FYI. Techradar.com has a quick review on the new pancake. It gives you better perspective of how the lens/camera looks like. Very small front element.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/camera-lenses/canon-ef-40mm-f-2-8-stm-1083886/review


----------



## DZY (Jun 9, 2012)

I found the STM focus a little slower than USM, but a little quieter. I believe that is why it is better for video.


----------



## Rocky (Jun 9, 2012)

DZY said:


> I found the STM focus a little slower than USM, but a little quieter. I believe that is why it is better for video.


Did you actually use it?? on what camera???


----------



## ScottyP (Jun 9, 2012)

chadders said:


> @neuroanatomist
> 
> Let me apologise for wasting your extremely valuable time. I mistakenly quoted the wrong post in my original post.
> 
> ...



Good god. I'd like to announce that I (resident of the US) am embarking on a new second career; camera and lens shipper to the UK. I'll purchase items and sell same to UK purchasers for cost + 20%, with shipping free. Your items will be in original box, but the box may be enclosed within a sack labeled "coffee", and the all-natural packing material (coffee beans) are included free in the bargain. God save the Queen.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Jun 9, 2012)

charleswagoner said:


> Some of you people really need to look at this lens as a whole and stop focusing on the fact that it's "only f/2.8." Sure, the 50 1.8 II is a whole 1 1/3 stop faster. Awesome. But how practical is it really to be shooting with such a shallow DoF all the time?



Wide aperture isn't all about shallow DoF, it's also about low light.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 9, 2012)

Ellen Schmidtee said:


> charleswagoner said:
> 
> 
> > Some of you people really need to look at this lens as a whole and stop focusing on the fact that it's "only f/2.8." Sure, the 50 1.8 II is a whole 1 1/3 stop faster. Awesome. But how practical is it really to be shooting with such a shallow DoF all the time?
> ...



I understood the comment to mean

'shooting in low light, wide open means that you have the downside of a shallow DOF'


----------



## kdsand (Jun 9, 2012)

Supply & demand :'(
Supply & demand :'(


Your going to be charged as much as your market will bear _ yes at times a ridiculously high amount_.

Me thinks some people would be utterly shocked and perhaps some would even pass out _ieeyaa (thunk)_ opon learning how much the materials in lenses even L cost. 
The Cost of a metal mount - shezz we may not be talking nickels - perhaps a quarter but no more than that.

I'm thinking this lens is possibly a good value at this price for me here and now. ;D


What I'm wondering about is why the 24 and 28 don't seem to have STM? 
*or will they* there's no actual production units yet.......... ???


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 9, 2012)

kdsand said:


> What I'm wondering about is why the 24 and 28 don't seem to have STM?
> *or will they* there's no actual production units yet.......... ???



Interest comment - might also explain the f/2.8 as well.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Jun 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Ellen Schmidtee said:
> 
> 
> > charleswagoner said:
> ...



Well, shallow DOF isn't necessarily a downside, and if one stands sufficiently far, hyperfocal distance can give a very big depth of field.

I was in a band show the day before yesterday, and there was a raised platform at the back of the hall about 3-4m high. Standing there with a 24mm f/1.4 L at f/2 (hyperfocal distance 9.62m), I could get a wide shot of the band & audience dancing all in focus. Maybe I could even get the shot standing on one of the chairs next to the bar at the back.

Not making money from my photography equipment, and not being rich enough to buy all L, I buy primes elsewhere. So far I bought 4 primes by Sigma & Samyang, the one relevant to this discussion being the 35mm f/1.4. If the Samyang 24mm f/1.4 was as good, it would be my next lens.


----------



## kdsand (Jun 9, 2012)

Ellen Schmidtee said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Ellen Schmidtee said:
> ...


 
I'm in the same boat cash wise. There seems to be some deep pockets around here though! 
I've just bought sigma 17-50 . 
Part of my problem is there's alot more_ toys_ photography equipment I need _want_ so i can't tie up all my cash in just one lens.


What are the odds of the 40 shorty hood ES-52 being included? *come on Canon! *


----------



## sandymandy (Jun 9, 2012)

Only L Lenses come with hoods.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 9, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> Only L Lenses come with hoods.



I don't know if Canon is doing themselves a favor by skipping tripod mounts on $1400 tele lenses (70-300L) and hoods on all non-L lenses, inc. $800 parts. They could include the luxury gold-plated hoods with the L lenses, but a standard hood costs a few cents in production - they're just building up a "customer rip-off" image with this.


----------



## ScottyP (Jun 9, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> sandymandy said:
> 
> 
> > Only L Lenses come with hoods.
> ...



SHHHHHH! You mustn't anger Canon! If you make them mad they might shut down the "free lens cap" gravy train...


----------



## DB (Jun 9, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> kdsand said:
> 
> 
> > What I'm wondering about is why the 24 and 28 don't seem to have STM?
> ...



First and foremost the new 40mm pancake lens is a Video Lens, so given the maximum recommended aperture for shooting HD video is f2.8, there is no need to produce a faster video prime. This new pancake is intended for continuous AF in video mode thanks to the addition of STM.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 9, 2012)

DB said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > kdsand said:
> ...



I appreciate that the 40mm has attributes that video users will appreciate - and as pointed out so do the new 24 and 28mm. Perhaps before the 24 and 28 hit the streets they will get the STM motor?


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 9, 2012)

FunPhotons said:


> Looking forward to it. On any DSLR body, such as my non gripped 5DMKII, it should make for a super light package.



It's interesting to see how many full-fledged dslr users suddenly speak out their desire to have a more compact, lighter camera system for some occasions. Imho this points towards the future - once mirrorless, more compact systems get a premium image, competitive af & lens selection, the old-school dlsr line will be less attractive.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 9, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> FunPhotons said:
> 
> 
> > Looking forward to it. On any DSLR body, such as my non gripped 5DMKII, it should make for a super light package.
> ...



I have a G12 and a A550 - dont try to manipulate non facts into an earth shattering revelation - you have absolutely no idea what kit people have. You will have spotted no doubt that I am looking to move from a P&S to an entry level DSLR - so that it your theory blown out of the water.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 10, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I have a G12 and a A550 - dont try to manipulate non facts into an earth shattering revelation - you have absolutely no idea what kit people have.



Of course I have no idea what kits people have, so it is rather strange you're using this fact as an argument and with the added edgy tone. And with your gear collection, you seem to be very last person to qualify as a standard example.

But I can read posts, no manipulation there, and these turned from "who would want a pancake lens?" to "I want one for my dslr, too!". This is certainly not earth-shattering as you suspect, but simply interesting - and to me it shows there will be a large market for technologically competitive mirrorless systems instead of people getting many camera bodies at once.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 10, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I have a G12 and a A550 - dont try to manipulate non facts into an earth shattering revelation - you have absolutely no idea what kit people have.
> ...



.... and then you came to the conclusion that 



> It's interesting to see how many full-fledged dslr users suddenly speak out their desire to have a more compact, lighter camera system for some occasions. Imho this points towards the future - once mirrorless, more compact systems get a premium image, competitive af & lens selection, the old-school dlsr line will be less attractive



without knowing what kit they have. So you cannot possibly state that they have a desire to have a more compact lighter camera system - because you dont know what they are migrating from .

I am happy to debate issues with people but not from the basis that views are being stated as facts


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 10, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> It's interesting to see
> 
> 
> marsu42 said:
> ...



In this case, I'm sorry to say that my grasp of the English language is not sufficient to communicate with you in an appropriate form, maybe it's even for the best. To my understanding, "It's interesting to see" expresses that *I* see it, making the statement my *view*, not a fact. A fact is more like "most dlsr users want a more compact system".


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 10, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > It's interesting to see
> ...



Yes you are correct. Your English is not up to the subtleties and I should have made allowances for it.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 10, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Yes you are correct. Your English is not up to the subtleties and I should have made allowances for it.



 Thanks, it's good to hear that, please keep it in mind in the future before jumping to conclusions or getting edgy - I'm not the only non-native speaker around here, and am certainly not participating in a forum to get into flame posting.


----------



## Rocky (Jun 10, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> FunPhotons said:
> 
> 
> > Looking forward to it. On any DSLR body, such as my non gripped 5DMKII, it should make for a super light package.
> ...


"Com[act, Light Weight, SYSTEM" that is a contradiction of terms. Most people have at least 3 lenses in their bag as a system. The size and weight of the body becomes secondary.The weight and the size of the bag will not be light or small. I would put is in a different way."We need a smaller lighter weight single lens combo" As a DSLR user, once awhile I do "travel light" with only a 18-55 IS kid lens on my 40D. I probably will get the 40mm f 2.8 to make it even lighter and smaller. As for mirrorless body, they are too small and a little bit too light for my shooting habit. Even the Rebel is too small in my hand.


----------



## FunPhotons (Jun 10, 2012)

Rocky said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > FunPhotons said:
> ...



No it's not. My present DSLR minimal system weighs a ton and threatens people when I take a shot. People look at my 24-105 on a non-gripped 5DMKII and I often get comments like 'that is a real camera'. Compare to my Fuji X100 with flash, batteries, hood and cards which all goes into a Black Rapid case over the shoulder. I never notice the weight or size, and people never notice when I'm shooting. Two systems, two purposes. But I have twice as much trouble to manage, batteries, cards to upload, dates and time settings to keep in sync, systems to learn ...

I'm now looking at the possibility of a system consisting of a 5DMKII and a couple of pancakes. If I'm feeling ambitious maybe a flash. The whole thing can fit in a small bag at a pound or two. And I've got nearly the IQ of the full system, and all the speed and convenience of one core component. 

I don't know why this concept is so difficult.


----------



## Rocky (Jun 10, 2012)

FunPhotons said:


> Rocky said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...


You have just echo what I said. You are also going to do what I have done for a long time. You are going to get rid of the big lens and get a pancake lens. That is what I call a "one lens combo". Also you Fujifilm X100 is also another "one lens combo".The other pancake lens (if it exist), you can put it in your pocket. You do not even need a bag. I personally will not call it a system. By the way, the weight of the bag with your 5D II, 2 lenses and the flash, batteries, etc will be over 3 lbs easily.


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Jun 10, 2012)

Actually, what this lens does is turn a 5D into somethng not unlike the Leica X2 or Fujifilm X100. A bit bigger, a real viewfinder, more ergonomic, much better image quality, admittedly a bit more complex to operate, way better specs across the board, and capable of mounting any EF lens ever made.

What's not to love?

Cheers,

b&


----------



## Hillsilly (Jun 10, 2012)

Can't wait to read a few more reviews. If the autofocus speed isn't too bad in non-video mode, I'll definitely add one to the shopping list. Like most people, I shoot DSLRs because they offer the best combination of image quality and feature set. I didn't set out thinking "I need a big camera and heavy lenses". If Canon chooses to produce something different, I think that's great. Even more so if the lenses are affordable. And yes, I'm also waiting excitedly for next week's mirrorless announcement!!

BTW, its interesting to hear poms complain about local prices. Guys, you really need to start looking overseas for good prices. Its only when your local stores start seeing their sales go elsewhere that they'll drop their prices to be competitive (or pressure their supplier accordingly). Prices in Australia used to be high, but now we're largely on par with the US. I suspect that this is largely due to Australian's being big online shoppers.


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 10, 2012)

Hillsilly said:


> BTW, its interesting to hear poms complain about local prices. Guys, you really need to start looking overseas for good prices.



Those in the know do go 'grey' for some items. However there is the issue of the warantee....


----------



## kdsand (Jun 10, 2012)

ScottyP said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > sandymandy said:
> ...



"Snickering " :-\ cling wrap/ plastic wrapped instead of caps - never say never, expect the unexpected. 

Its just a tiny little thing. I think it was shown as an accessory. 
Perhaps I'll do a DIY with a plastic container from my recycling bin. :


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 10, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Yes you are correct. Your English is not up to the subtleties and I should have made allowances for it.
> ...



Perhaps it is your interpretation which is assuming that I am being 'edgy' - whatever that means. Reading emotion and hidden meaning into emails is a risky business even for native speakers.


----------



## kdsand (Jun 10, 2012)

Hillsilly said:


> Can't wait to read a few more reviews. If the autofocus speed isn't too bad in non-video mode, I'll definitely add one to the shopping list. Like most people, I shoot DSLRs because they offer the best combination of image quality and feature set. I didn't set out thinking "I need a big camera and heavy lenses". If Canon chooses to produce something different, I think that's great. Even more so if the lenses are affordable. And yes, I'm also waiting excitedly for next week's mirrorless announcement!!
> 
> BTW, its interesting to hear poms complain about local prices. Guys, you really need to start looking overseas for good prices. Its only when your local stores start seeing their sales go elsewhere that they'll drop their prices to be competitive (or pressure their supplier accordingly). Prices in Australia used to be high, but now we're largely on par with the US. I suspect that this is largely due to Australian's being big onl
> ine shoppers.



Ahh the wonders of a global market. Love it or hate it - its here to stay.

I get a bit twitchy when i see prices jumping up directly from the source. Its fine for merchants to make a profit - up to a point and then it becomes abusive. Its nice to meet you but my name is not Ben Over. 
This site is great because we get a global perspective and as they say knowledge is power.


----------



## kdsand (Jun 10, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Thus far every one here is darn cool. 
Some times its difficult to see the difference between passionate and aggressive expressions. 

I've even had bad days (not here) where I came across wrong. Thus I said sorry I was half asleep and miss read the situation.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 10, 2012)

kdsand said:


> Some times its difficult to see the difference between passionate and aggressive expressions.



You're right, I have to keep this in mind, too. And when reading other forums, I have to say the communication style around here is quite civil - elsewhere tech geeks tend to flame each other on every possible occasion :-o


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 11, 2012)

BozillaNZ said:


> I've just heard from sources stating that those two STM lenses use electronic manual focus like the 85L. It's a blow to static image users, making it much less appealing to us.



Could you expand on why it is a problem please?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 11, 2012)

BozillaNZ said:


> I've just heard from sources stating that those two STM lenses use electronic manual focus like the 85L. *It's a blow to static image users, making it much less appealing to us.*



Speak for yourself... Why is it a 'blow'? Personally, the only 'problem' I have with the EMF on the 85L II is that I needed to get into the habit of focusing to infinity to retract the front element before unmounting the lens, due to the front focusing design. Given that both the new STM lenses are inner focusing, I don't see any issue at all. I frequently manually focus my 85L II, focus is smooth and easy to use.


----------



## AprilForever (Jun 11, 2012)

This lens looks great!


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Jun 11, 2012)

I used to have a Pentax 40mm pancake lens that I bought to use with my old Pentax ME Super. That was a fairly small 35mm camera, about the size of a modern Canon Rebel without the grip. I made my own very thin case so that I could carry the camera in a coat pocket. I thought that was so cool!

Unfortunately, shortly after that, I discovered a small zoom lens that was pretty sharp and that quickly became my favorite lens for the ME Super. The pancake lens stayed on the shelf for many years before I sold all my film camera gear. I got a good price for it on Ebay.

I am drawn to the new Canon pancake lens for the coolness factor, but realistically, I can't see a use for it in my system. Putting it on one of my full sized bodies seems pointless, since I would still have a large camera to lug around.

I could put it on my T2i, but the 18-50 kit lens is really light, sharp and has IS. I've been very happy using this combo as my vacation camera. I'd miss the zoom capability.

I have an S90 that fits in my pocket for times when I need that.

I just can't think of any use for a pancake lens other than to look cool in the cabinet where I keep my lens collection.

Mike


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 11, 2012)

drmikeinpdx said:


> I just can't think of any use for a pancake lens other than to look cool in the cabinet where I keep my lens collection.



Admittedly, that was my first impression as well. But a camera with lens is essentially a large cube when it comes to transport, and this pancake lens changes the form factor to something almost flat (like a thick book). A 1-series or gripped body with only the body cap will fit in the outer pocket of my computer satchel, whereas even a non-gripped body with a kit lens attached will not. The 40mm f/2.8 Pancake is not much thicker than a body cap, and when mounted will not stick out much beyond the lower grip and pentaprism bulge. So...I could take a dSLR on an overnight business trip where I use my computer satchel as an overnight bag, and otherwise would be bringing just the S100 (in fact, I could still bring that, too). Plus, the lens only costs about half of what I paid for the S100...


----------



## briansquibb (Jun 11, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> drmikeinpdx said:
> 
> 
> > I just can't think of any use for a pancake lens other than to look cool in the cabinet where I keep my lens collection.
> ...



I fancy sticking it on the 1D4/1Ds3 as it will make them innocuous


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 11, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> I fancy sticking it on the 1D4/1Ds3 as it will make them innocuous



Until someone mods it to make it white, like they did to the 50/1.8 II:


----------



## dukeofprunes (Jun 11, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> drmikeinpdx said:
> 
> 
> > I just can't think of any use for a pancake lens other than to look cool in the cabinet where I keep my lens collection.
> ...



Completely agree. With this lens I can easily fit my 5D2 in a camel back for shorter bicycle trips in the woods. It might seem strange, but I am actually getting this instead of the 50L! Although the 50L is bulky, it does not build outwards too much compared to e.g. 35L, and therefore can be more portable in some situations. The 28 f/1.8, 35 f/2, and 50 f/1.4 all have their quirks with respect to build quality, focus noise/performance, bokeh quality and/or sharpness while the shorty-forty seems to be quite good in all these areas (looking forward to reviews). Yes, it is 1-2 stops slower, but it is also up to half the size and price!

I would wish for a compact 35 f/2 L that is sharp wide open though.. 35L and the 40 pancake will have to do.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 11, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I fancy sticking it on the 1D4/1Ds3 as it will make them innocuous
> ...



LOL I want to see pics of that persons car....


----------



## kdsand (Jun 12, 2012)

DB said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I fancy sticking it on the 1D4/1Ds3 as it will make them innocuous
> ...



Ooh Poo!
So completely retarded. 
Banning all cameras - even on cell phones would perhaps be somewhat affective. Darn feeble minded politicians & bureaucrats so stupid!

The wording is even screwy. High quality sensor & high resolution making it sound twice as threatening, and due to those----- OK why due to those?


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 12, 2012)

kdsand said:


> DB said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



they sont say you cant take a medium format camera on that sign though


----------



## headingsouth (Jun 12, 2012)

Man, this lens looks so amazing. I can't wait to get one...I just wish I could see what it looks like on the older Rebels...don't want something funky looking.


----------



## kdsand (Jun 12, 2012)

DB said:


> Eh...I think that was the 2011 sign, the new 2012 London Underground signage (in preparation for the Olympics) has been revised - see below: ;D ;D ;D



I thought they got rid of all the Aussies.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 12, 2012)

kdsand said:


> DB said:
> 
> 
> > Eh...I think that was the 2011 sign, the new 2012 London Underground signage (in preparation for the Olympics) has been revised - see below: ;D ;D ;D
> ...



ROFL @ the modified sign


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Jun 12, 2012)

DB said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I fancy sticking it on the 1D4/1Ds3 as it will make them innocuous
> ...



There isn't a place in Israel I wasn't told by security guards in the entrance that photography is forbidden within the premises - train stations, central bus stations, banks, malls, book shops, supermarkets, etc. Those prohibitions are often the initiative of security people, e.g. the train spokesman was asked about the non-existing prohibition so often, a written statement was issued that photography in train stations is actually permitted.

I've found out the hard way that one Israeli movie theater has a 'no cameras within the premises' policy, enforced by two armed security guards standing in the entrance. Not 60 seconds have passed before the resident lawyer was dispatched to offer me to have the camera kept in the theater's safe until I left the building.

[All movie theaters must have security guards at the entrance due to an order issued by the British military governor, which was never cancelled. Now the guards not only protect the audience from terrorists threat, but the movie from copyright infringement threat as well.]


----------



## suburbia (Jun 18, 2012)

DB said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > I fancy sticking it on the 1D4/1Ds3 as it will make them innocuous
> ...



Aldwych station is a *museum*, it is not part of the underground transport network. It is an old but now disused station used for film shoots and organised tours.

Apparently it was considered that people with tripods would cause a safety issue and delays during the tours however the sign is clearly a misinterpretation of that, so they have apologised:

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2136431/london-underground-apologises-dslr-ban-blunder


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 11, 2012)

In case anyone was wondering, the EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake lens is in AF Group D on the 5DIII/1D X, meaning despite the f/2.8 aperture, it activates only the center (1 of 5) high-precision f/2.8 AF points, and also only activates the inner columns (10 of 20) of the f/4-sensitive crosses.


----------



## Z (Jul 11, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> In case anyone was wondering, the EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake lens is in AF Group D on the 5DIII/1D X, meaning despite the f/2.8 aperture, it activates only the center (1 of 5) high-precision f/2.8 AF points, and also only activates the inner columns (10 of 20) of the f/4-sensitive crosses.


This is interesting news and I'll admit it's curbed my enthusiasm for the shorty forty. I may not pick one up after all.


----------



## Phenix205 (Jul 11, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> In case anyone was wondering, the EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake lens is in AF Group D on the 5DIII/1D X, meaning despite the f/2.8 aperture, it activates only the center (1 of 5) high-precision f/2.8 AF points, and also only activates the inner columns (10 of 20) of the f/4-sensitive crosses.



Yes, I noticed that too. Despite this, I LOVE this lens. It makes my 5D3 much more portable and has produced sharp images. Best bang for the buck from Canon in years!


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 11, 2012)

Phenix205 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > In case anyone was wondering, the EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake lens is in AF Group D on the 5DIII/1D X, meaning despite the f/2.8 aperture, it activates only the center (1 of 5) high-precision f/2.8 AF points, and also only activates the inner columns (10 of 20) of the f/4-sensitive crosses.
> ...



It wont be an issue with the 1 series or in good light


----------



## pj1974 (Jul 12, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> kdsand said:
> 
> 
> > DB said:
> ...



As an Aussie, I find this thread (esp the modified sign) so funny! ;D

And as someone who used to live in London for several years until about 10 years ago... [yes, I eventually moved to greener pastures... Romania... then back to Australia 5 years ago....] well, I found it funny an underground station could / would state DSLRs are not allowed. Then the additional post about this being a museum (with the explanation) made sense.

About the Canon 40mm f/2.8 - pretty much all the reviews (both pro/site reviews and user reviews) I have seen and read about this lens indicate very positively. I had the Canon 50mm f/1.8 mkII but was never happy with the AF, nor the quality of the bokeh in many situations. But the AF (inaccuracy - esp in low light, sluggish speed and horrible noise) 

Probably out of frustration, and partly out of totaly 'being in love' with Canon's USM... I 'vowed' to myself that I would only get a lens that has true USM (or equivalent eg HSM) for a 50mm prime. I've seen too many reviews with problems about the Sigma's AF erratic nature (as much as I see that lens has amazing potential with it's sharpness and wonderful bokeh). I believe it can be 'hit or miss' in terms of getting a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 lens that 'gets AF right' with one's camera body. I don't want to take this risk, and I've had issues with Sigma AF before (on an ultra-wide, though I have praise in other ways for the Sigma 10-20mm EX HSM)

The Canon 50mm f/1.4 doesn't quite cut it for me with the 'micro USM'... plus most copies are not sharp enough / contrasty wide open. The 50mm f/1.2 L is overkill for me, and it also has 'speed' issues and focus-shift phenom. The STM focus mechanism seems a decent alternative to 'true USM' - and I would probably really like to use the 40mm STM and 18-135mm STM lenses for a day out in the field (variety of conditions) to 'test this new lens AF system out'.

40mm on an APS-C is just a bit too wide for my likes. 50-60mm would probably be my ideal for a 'walk around prime' for subject isolation. When I need more focal length, I use my 100mm f/2.8 non L macro (where I find the USM focus is really good and fast enough, esp when I use the 'minimal focal distance limiter' - though some ppl complain the 100mm f2.8 (non L) macro slow to AF (but I don't - especially not on my 7D!) And I can use my 70-300mm L USM IS as a 'candid portrait lens' (it has great bokeh, and awesome image quality!)

f/2.8 is also not fast enough for a prime where I really want the background blurred, the subject needs to be too close (eg distorted faces). I could see the 40mm f/2.8 being more useful as a 'a lightweight street lens' on a FF. But as I don't plan on moving to FF (at least not any time soon... and I expect I'll always keep / have a APS-C)... and really do love my Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 USM IS on my 7D for most 'street shots' that are in decent light, or don't require fast glass.

That means, I can see the 40mm having a lot of potential for some people, but for my style of shooting, I'm still looking at a 50mm - 60mm fast prime (I have ruled out the 60mm macro, because I really do want faster than f/2.8 ). If a 50mm f/1.8 with better (read "true USM" or STM, or equivalent) lens comes out, that will probably be the last lens I feel that I 'need' to complement my existing lenses, and fit into my lens arsenal.

Ok... a bit 'off track' - but I do actually like what I see Canon doing with their new 40mm pancake. Applause to them, for quality and price, and thinking 'outside' the usual square! Hopefully this will herald in more 'new lenses' - and one that is right for me. 

Paul


----------

