Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 04 Feb 2013 (Monday) 16:05
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

35mm f2 or 40mm Pancake

 
benji25
Goldmember
Avatar
1,189 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 281
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Feb 04, 2013 16:05 |  #1

I need a wide angle lens to put on my 60D. I like the 35mm focal length but I see that that lens has a very loud AF. As the 40mm focal length is not very far off and it is significantly less money, is there reason not to go for the 40mm pancake over the 35 f2?


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
anscochrome
Senior Member
Avatar
443 posts
Likes: 37
Joined Jan 2010
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:03 |  #2

Neither choice performs as a wide angle lens on a 60D. Your best bet is a 10-20 something wide angle zoom (for ultrawide to wide angle use), or a 17-50 something zoom (which gives you wide angle to normal to moderate long lens). The pancake is a GREAT lens, but it acts as a long normal lens on a 60D, not as a wide angle lens.


http://anscochrome.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ace ­ and ­ Deuce
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,749 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 468
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:10 |  #3

For what it's worth, Best Buy has the 40mm pancake for $149 (external link)


GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,189 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 281
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:11 |  #4

anscochrome wrote in post #15572236 (external link)
Neither choice performs as a wide angle lens on a 60D. Your best bet is a 10-20 something wide angle zoom (for ultrawide to wide angle use), or a 17-50 something zoom (which gives you wide angle to normal to moderate long lens). The pancake is a GREAT lens, but it acts as a long normal lens on a 60D, not as a wide angle lens.

Let me clarify - I am not looking for UWA. I understand that with a crop it puts these lenses at ~50-60 mm. I just picked up an 85mm so I am looker for something at the wider end of the specturm as I don't see the 50mm being wide enough or that much different from the 85. Also the pancake is half the price of the 35 which makes it very attractive.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maverick75
Cream of the Crop
5,718 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 621
Joined May 2012
Location: Riverside,California
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:14 |  #5

anscochrome wrote in post #15572236 (external link)
Neither choice performs as a wide angle lens on a 60D. Your best bet is a 10-20 something wide angle zoom (for ultrawide to wide angle use), or a 17-50 something zoom (which gives you wide angle to normal to moderate long lens). The pancake is a GREAT lens, but it acts as a long normal lens on a 60D, not as a wide angle lens.

It works as a wide angle because the focal length doesn't change, it's just cropped.

I LOVE 35mm on my crop also.


- Alex Corona Sony A7, Canon 7DM2/EOS M, Mamiya 645/67
Flickr (external link) - 500px (external link) - Website (external link)- Feedback -Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blackzarg
Member
158 posts
Joined Jul 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:17 as a reply to  @ benji25's post |  #6

Both are light and sharp lenses - the 40mm focuses better, in my experience, but the caveat of course is the f2 vs the f2.8. If you are shooting without a flash indoors, the 35mm will serve you better. If you plan to use it at smaller apertures, then the 40mm would probably be a better choice.


Canon 60D | Sigma 30mm f1.4 | Canon 55-250mm f4-5.6 | Canon 85mm f1.8 | Canon 50mm f1.8 II
Flash: YN465 | RF602 Triggers
Other Stuff: Gorillapod SLR-Zoom w/ Manfrotto 484RC2 | Other tripods and ballheads

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bubbygator
I can't tell the difference
Avatar
1,477 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 63
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Sarasota, sunlight, butterflies, fish, Gators, and Seminoles
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:27 as a reply to  @ blackzarg's post |  #7

I have 28/1.8, 50/1.8, 85/1.8 . I shoot mainly HS basketball. The AF on my 50 was too flakey on moving subjects. So I got the 45/2.8. I've been very satisfied with it for close shots. Of course, I have to jack up the ISO to get good shots.


Gear List
The avatar is my middle grandson. (the TF can't tell the difference, but the fish is frowning and the kid is grinning)
Sarasota, sunlight, butterflies, fish, Gators, and Seminoles

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,189 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 281
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:37 |  #8

blackzarg wrote in post #15572291 (external link)
Both are light and sharp lenses - the 40mm focuses better, in my experience, but the caveat of course is the f2 vs the f2.8. If you are shooting without a flash indoors, the 35mm will serve you better. If you plan to use it at smaller apertures, then the 40mm would probably be a better choice.

Is there really a big difference between 2 and 2.8? what is that, 1/3 of a stop?

Also I was thinking with the money saved by going with the pancake I could get a 430 ex or exII.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,118 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Aug 2009
     
Feb 04, 2013 17:52 as a reply to  @ benji25's post |  #9

The difference between F2 and F2.8 is a whole stop. It makes the difference in many cases of shooting crop at ISO 1600 or 1250, instead of 3200.
The 35 view is also more of a normal view on a crop, while 40 is a short telephoto.
I have the 35F2 and wouldn't trade it for the 40. It allows me to get low light shots and is more generally useful on crop....at least for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,407 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3431
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Feb 04, 2013 19:22 |  #10

benji25 wrote in post #15572353 (external link)
Is there really a big difference between 2 and 2.8? what is that, 1/3 of a stop?

Also I was thinking with the money saved by going with the pancake I could get a 430 ex or exII.

it's a full stop...so yeah it's a big difference

at the prices that the old sigma 30mm f1.4 are selling at now, i really don't see how you can't put that in the mix...2 stops faster than the 40mm, and a stop faster than the 35f2...and dirt cheap right now


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
outmywindow
Senior Member
Avatar
672 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jan 2013
     
Feb 04, 2013 20:04 |  #11

If the 35/2 was cheaper than the sigma 30 f/1.4 which is selling for $289.99 at many places, then it would be worth it. Otherwise consider the pancake if you want a lens that is compact, sharp wide open at f/2.8, but otherwise 2 stops slower than the sigma. If you can't live with the aperture of the pancake, then I would just go for the sigma ... in fact that's exactly what I did :)


Just a soul with a camera

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,189 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 281
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
     
Feb 04, 2013 20:36 |  #12

I picked up the Sigma 30. The low light performance is what I needed and the price was $100 cheaper than the canon. As this is just a hobby for me the Sigma will suit me just fine. Thanks for the help.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Feb 04, 2013 20:44 |  #13

Good choice. The Sigma is a great little lens.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Coffee400
Member
Avatar
48 posts
Joined Dec 2012
     
Feb 04, 2013 21:48 |  #14

benji25 wrote in post #15572268 (external link)
Let me clarify - I am not looking for UWA. I understand that with a crop it puts these lenses at ~50-60 mm. I just picked up an 85mm so I am looker for something at the wider end of the specturm as I don't see the 50mm being wide enough or that much different from the 85. Also the pancake is half the price of the 35 which makes it very attractive.

I have the 40mm, 50 1.4 and had the 85mm. I have also used the 35mm from time to time. The 85mm was too long for my needs on a crop body so I sold it. Between the 40mm and the 50mm, I prefer the focal length and size of the 40mm. Image quality is great, even wide open. The 50mm (either 1.8 or 1.4) you obviously get wider aperture, but neither are fantastically sharp wide open, and focus can be hit and miss (Especially the 1.8). From my limited experience, the 35 is a really good lens and the FL is probably a little more suited for what you want it for on a crop, but its hard to justify the price difference for the relatively small difference.

I say go the pancake.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Coffee400
Member
Avatar
48 posts
Joined Dec 2012
     
Feb 04, 2013 21:49 |  #15

Coffee400 wrote in post #15573230 (external link)
I have the 40mm, 50 1.4 and had the 85mm. I have also used the 35mm from time to time. The 85mm was too long for my needs on a crop body so I sold it. Between the 40mm and the 50mm, I prefer the focal length and size of the 40mm. Image quality is great, even wide open. The 50mm (either 1.8 or 1.4) you obviously get wider aperture, but neither are fantastically sharp wide open, and focus can be hit and miss (Especially the 1.8). From my limited experience, the 35 is a really good lens and the FL is probably a little more suited for what you want it for on a crop, but its hard to justify the price difference for the relatively small difference.

I say go the pancake.

Sorry - didnt see your above post that you already picked up a lens!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

8,568 views & 0 likes for this thread, 20 members have posted to it.
35mm f2 or 40mm Pancake
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is semonsters
1501 guests, 130 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.