I'm assuming this is a full-frame lens...just wondering what kind of advantages there are to having a 'pancake' lens...or what you think this lens will offer?
Yes it's EF, so full frame. The main advantage that I've read is that the STM motor is almost silent, which is preferable for shooting movies (which is popular these days for some reason). It's also very lightweight, and surprisingly cheap. I'm sorely tempted, if you can't already guess :)
If the optical quality is there it might well be a really fun street lens. Very unobtrusive. With the STM focus and electromagnetic diaphragm, it's clear that Canon has done some thinking about optimization of the design for video. Refreshingly, the price is actually less than I would have expected.
I will get one - just trying to decide if I will pre order or wait for some reviews. Shocking Canon released a lens < $500 so still kinda getting over that :-/ I would throw it on the old 20D and use as a point-n-shoot for when I don't want a big camera - I already have the 50f1.8 on that and I hate it.... pictures are fine but it's just a crap lens.
What is the nearest equivalent lens right now. I am seriously considering this.
Perhaps the 35/2? In focal length, it's the closest. Other than that, they are light-years apart. There's nothing else that has the key features (very small size, moderate cost).
I recently gave away my nifty 50/1.8 with thoughts of replacing it with the 50/1.4 if and when I get that new camera body. Besides the 2.8 vs.1.4, is there any other factor I should consider in choosing between the new pancake lens and the Canon 50/1.4? The new lens is about half the price of the 1.4, and I think it outperforms it as best I can tell by these charts (which I have no idea how to read other than "higher is better").
If you've still got the 5D go with the 50 1.4 in my opinion... so much more light and the difference in focal length should be ... not negligible but pretty much.
Oh this one is not going to replace the 50f1.4 (I have it and love it but I hate using the f1.8). If your plan was to get the f1.4 then I would still get that over this 40 because f2.8 is not really that special. The attraction to me is the size.
Thank you both, that's two votes for the 50 1.4. I think I'll stick with that plan.
As for camera body, no I'm in between having sold my 5D Mark II to goinskiing awhile back to raise some quick cash. I've about decided to replace that with another full frame, now it's down to which one. Hoping to be back in business by summer's end.
Thank you both, that's two votes for the 50 1.4. I think I'll stick with that plan.
As for camera body, no I'm in between having sold my 5D Mark II to goinskiing awhile back to raise some quick cash. I've about decided to replace that with another full frame, now it's down to which one. Hoping to be back in business by summer's end.
Thanks again guys.
It has served me quite well at that. Would love to see ya back in business.
Damn... I just placed the first pre-order I have ever done on anything... ever..... ever..... anything.... I think I'm having a mid life crisis or something :-)
Looking forward to a nice small lens..... now I have a hankering to rip the grip off the 7D again... it's had a grip on it 100% of the time apart from 2 weeks recently traveling in the UK.... I'm torn... As a gear head in denial, I think I will have to buy another body :-)
I'm still confused...at 40mm f2.8, and 200USD why would you not spend the extra 100USD and get 50mm 1.4? Is that 100USD to reduce the size(Which the comes at a 2.8 instead of a 1.4) or is there something else I'm missing?
I'm still confused...at 40mm f2.8, and 200USD why would you not spend the extra 100USD and get 50mm 1.4? Is that 100USD to reduce the size(Which the comes at a 2.8 instead of a 1.4) or is there something else I'm missing?
its for video. silent continuous AF is a big plus if you have ever shot video with the built in mic.
Also, the 50/1.4 is normally $400 USD (though it can be had for $369 until the end of June), so it's really an extra $200 (double the cost) and without the STM focus and electromagnetic aperture.
They are really very different animals.
I'm still confused...at 40mm f2.8, and 200USD why would you not spend the extra 100USD and get 50mm 1.4? Is that 100USD to reduce the size(Which the comes at a 2.8 instead of a 1.4) or is there something else I'm missing?
As Fritz said, it's almost double but mainly cause I already have the 50f1.4 :-) Nah your not missing anything much, it's for the size - I use my old 20D (sans grip) as a form of P&S when I don't want to carry the heavier gripped 7D. I have a 50f1.8 for the 20D and I just hate it (not the images just everything else about it), so for me this was a way to get smaller AND better focus motor. I have avoided the 35f2 for the same reason as the 50f1.8 - build quality and the damn buzzy focus motor. Would I prefer it be 5mm longer and f2 yeah but it ain't. I rarely do video and without the new bodies it's not useful for that anyway the way I understand it.
