Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

Whutttt

It looks really good! I would be interested to add one to my 5D2 and use it as a nice light weight carry around.

It'll make really nice normal lens on my 1D3 if the pricing will be sub £200 then I'm getting very soon (if of course it'll be optically good, say at least as good as EF50/1.4 and ideally as good as SMC Pentax DA40/2.8 Ltd pancake, which I have fond memories of )

Our mirrorless is coming! (hoping..)

BryantFC wrote in post #14541787
Our mirrorless is coming! (hoping..)

If this is for the mirrorless, then they did a franken-EVIL like the Pentax K-01. Nobody really wants a mirrorless camera that's as thick as a DSLR, do they?

tkbslc wrote in post #14542532
If this is for the mirrorless, then they did a franken-EVIL like the Pentax K-01. Nobody really wants a mirrorless camera that's as thick as a DSLR, do they?

+1, but this lens would work out well imo on a smaller system. Otherwise, what's the point of this lens? Odd focal length overall.

and that Pentax is horrible lol.

40mm is around the mount depth of SLR cameras. A pancake is generally designed around that same depth. Most SLR pancakes are around 40mm.

tkbslc wrote in post #14542532
If this is for the mirrorless, then they did a franken-EVIL like the Pentax K-01. Nobody really wants a mirrorless camera that's as thick as a DSLR, do they?

Canon has actually advantage over Pentax here because EF mount has shorter registration distance than K mount. One way to look at it is that taking out the mirror box will allow for lens design with recessed elements, which might be useful for WA lenses so the overall balance will end up lot better than say NEX. I believe this is the route Pentax is working on...

Then of course you could see mirrorless cameras of this type as replacement for entry level DSLRs. It's entirely possible that Canon could drop EOS 1xxx line and replace it with MILC. Same body for but EVF instead of OVF or just articulated screen. Omitting the mirror box would cut the cost down and if one would want real DSLR they'd be pushed to go for the EOS xxxD line...

My 2p

BryantFC wrote in post #14542547
+1, but this lens would work out well imo on a smaller system. Otherwise, what's the point of this lens? Odd focal length overall.

and that Pentax is horrible lol.

Odd for Canon maybe but there is a few lenses like that:
Pentax M40
Pentax FA43ltd
Pentax DA40ltd
Pentax 43 special for Leica mount
Voigtlander Ultron 40/2
Nikon had 45/2.8 I believe

The Pentax M and Nikon lenses date back to 80s.
The points are:
Diagonal of 35mm film is 43mm so these lenses provide as normal FOV as possible from human vision perspective.
These lenses turn SLRs/DSLRs int surprisingly compact package. Even 1D type body would gain on transportabilty...

wow, with this on my 5D I could almost put it in my pocket!

More info...

http://www.canonrumors​.com …0mm-f2-8-stm-information/

No red ring, what the hell...

there was no room for it...

tkbslc wrote in post #14542532
If this is for the mirrorless, then they did a franken-EVIL like the Pentax K-01. Nobody really wants a mirrorless camera that's as thick as a DSLR, do they?

It would be nice to have a good meaty grip. Otherwise it's rather useless to me.