Pancake lens, that is.
I know I am. It's so tiny. If its optical performance is good, and it beats 200 bucks I might consider it.
Thoughts?
Printable View
Pancake lens, that is.
I know I am. It's so tiny. If its optical performance is good, and it beats 200 bucks I might consider it.
Thoughts?
Well, the 50mm f/1.8 II was pretty much *the* must-have lens, if only because it's a "my first fast-prime" and for $100, why not?
if the 40/2.8 Pancake launches at $200, it won't be more than a year before it's $150 or even lower, it could take over that position of "my first cheap-as-anything prime".
I've never seen a xxxxD/xxxD/rebel kit with a 50/1.8II (except maybe on ebay), but something like an 1100D with a 40/2.8 would make a very nice walkaround/street/discrete kit, methinks (I'm waiting for the first shots from/of a 40/2.8 pancake on a 1DX though)
The focus ring of this 40 f/2,8 looks similar to the 50 f/1,8 II and in the pancake lens it will be closer to the camera.
What does "STM" means? Something about the motor?
STM is their new type of motor, being launched tomorrow with the 40mm pancake and the new 18-135.
S is Silent, M is Motor, the T i'm not so sure, probably Transmission?
Either way, it's not a USM because that requires all the Ultrasonic bits. From what I gather, it's just a normal micromotor, just Silent (for whatever "silent" means, I can hear a USM if my ear is close enough...)
Yep, I am intrigued. I had been hoping to look at the MTF chart this morning, but it isn't up yet, at least on canon USA's website. The novalty is part of the draw, but mostly, I am intrigued by the size and weight.
EDIT:
Just checked---
Looks pretty good. Some fall off on a FF, but for a crop, looks pretty sharp.
$199 MSRP! I'm intrigued. I hope the 7D gets a firmware update to allow full time AF in video to take advantage of this lens, but I'm not holding my breath. I wonder if the digic 5 bodies only will get an update. Canon can't have only its flagship rebel with full time AF in video, right?
I guess they do... Perhaps more camera's will come out soon(7D mark II?), I don't know. But what I've read is that the 650D has special AF sensors merged into the main sensor so you can have full time AF during video.(while also having a dedicated AF sensor like normally) The 7D doesn't have this so you probably won't get any update on that. At least, that's what I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by thekingb
The 40mm lens does seem very very interesting. I believe STM is for Silent Stepper Motor, whatever that means. I do know that the STM does have full time manual override. Too bad it isn't just a stop wider. f2 would be amazing and if quality was good it would definitely be interesting to replace the 50mm 1.4
We'll see. At least this lens got my attention.
All I can compare to is the 50mm f/1.8, as it's my most similar prime in terms of length and price.
I'm expecting it to be super sharp wide open, as all of Canon recent designs seem quite good. Sure, faster would be nice, but the 50mm f/1.8 isn't at it's best before f/2.8 anyway. I usually limit myself to f/2.5.
I'm expecting nice bokeh, not pentagons.
The AF HAS to be better the than the 50mm f/1.8, especially since it's a brand new system. I expect the MF will be better too. Someone has already said it has FTM, which is nice.
The price is nice too.
Yes, I'm interested in this lens.
Yes. I hope the testing pans out to make this lens a must have.
The guys at dpreview say that it's about half the thickness of the 50mm f1.8 That's insanely thin!
It has a 7-blade aperture, don't know if it's rounded, but it probably will give you much better bokeh than the 50mm f1.8. All in all it does seem like a very interesting lens:rolleyes: Albeit it must perform extremely good at f2.8 otherwide the price-difference will be too big I think.
From DPReview: "Precision control over the circular, seven-blade aperture is enabled by the EMD, producing a beautiful bokeh effect and an aspheric lens with Super spectra coatings ensures optimal image quality from the centre of the lens to the periphery for stunning shots of practically any subject."Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheiky
To me, that sounds like it's rounded--not 100% sure though.
Yep, that definitely sounds like it. Any idea what that EMD(Electro Magnetic Diaphragm) is by the way? I couldn't figure out precisely how that is different than normal.
Yes, the aperture blades are rounded. The EMD supposedly allows more precise control over the aperture setting.
Initially, I felt this lens was rather blah. But having this lens on a gripped body or 1D X will basically be like having no lens at all - it will barely stick out beyond the bulge of the pentaprism and portrait grip. That means the camera body - with a lens for taking pictures - can fit in a small case like my Lowepro Utility Bag 100 AW, and I can take that in my computer satchel on overnight trips, etc.
So, if the IQ is decent (will wait for ISO 12233 comparisons on that front), for a mere $200 it's interesting. Sure, f/2 would be nicer, but coupled with the ISO capabilities of the 1D X / 5DIII, f/2.8 should do fine.
I don't know how it works in a lens. In other devices, such a fuel injector, a coil which produce a magnetic field capable to move a small part. Maybe in this lens an electromagnet is uses instead a gear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheiky
Speaking about blades an non-understanding, I've never understand why the number of blades are so important to bokeh. If you want the less DOF, you must select the widest aperture. And almost all the lenses that I've seen has a perfect circle when they are wide open because blades are completely retracted.
Because sometimes you care about the quality of the blur when not completely wide open.
So, you want a large DOF, close the diaphragm, and also you are worried about the shape of the not so blurred circles. Surely there must be situations like this but I don't know if they are common enough to justify all this concern about the number of blades.Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidEccleston
Here's a pretty easy explanation: When taking a portrait you often want your subject to be in compete focus. Thus, you would calculate the depth of field required to keep your object in focus. When doing this, you rarely will calculate a wide-open aperture. Everything outside of your subject will be blurred, or partially blurred, depending on focal length and fstop. Any type of light or reflective surface will produce nice little bokeh balls if out of focus enough. With a crappier lens you will get stop signs or petagons instead of nice little bokeh balls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agilulfo
Below is an example. Notice how the dog's face is not completely in focus? I shot this wide open with the 50 f1.4. If I took more time and had a dog that would sit still longer I would have probably shot this at f2.8 or above to try to get the dogs whole face in focus (notice that the nose and ears are blurred a little). The lights in the background would still be far enough away to be out of focus. With the 50 f1.4 these lights would have been stops signs at f2.8, and not as pleasing. Thus, I would have had to make the decision...face in focus or pleasing out of focus highlights. With more advanced aperture blades I wouldn't have to make this decision.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7060/6...ba430949_z.jpg
I really like that pic dsiegel.
Dave
Great shot dsiegel5151. And it is a perfect example of what I'm trying to say: in a picture like this, shot wide open often produce better results.
Yes, the nose and most of the hair are out of focus. But for this reason you had centered the attention in the sight of the dog. With a large deep of field, you would have captured more details of the head but -firstly- in a portrait like this I don't think those details are needed. On the contrary, you would have loosed the softness of the hair.
And secondly, no matter the number of blades, the light spots in the background would be more focused. I don't think focus is needed in this area. It's hard to say without comparison, but I think you had chosen the best aperture in this case.
I'm having thoughts...
Thoughts along the lines of:
EOS 3 + 40mm Pancake + iso400 B+W film (Tmax or Ilford) = Street Shooting Fun