40mm f/2.8 STM is insanely good

I just picked up a 40mm f/2.8 STM to go with my 5D because a) I wanted a lighter lens for street photography than the 50L, b) love the 40mm focal length especially after a month of shooting with the Lumix 20mm f/1.7 II on M4/3, and c) the lens is so affordable that there was no reason to not buy it.

Holy smokes. I'm SO IMPRESSED. This lens is crazy! It's sharper than every L lens I've owned (with the possible exception of the 135L at equivalent apertures but even then I'm not sure), and it's on par with my bro's Sigma 50 1.4 Art, which is one of the sharpest AF lenses I've ever seen. Corner sharpness is very good too, and since most of my landscapes are shot at 40mm this will likely become a new go-to landscape lens. Bokeh is nice, and while AF is not the fastest, it nails focus every time. Price is only marginally higher than the nifty fifty but build and optics are light years ahead.

So if you've been thinking about this lens, go for it. It'll make your Canon DSLR much lighter, and optically it's one of the best. In terms of value for money I don't think there's much out there that comes close.

I can't wait to get out there and shoot with this thing. Good things really do come in small packages.

Agreed 100%.
Glad you like it.

Thanks for this, I want the Sigma 50mm F1.4 ART but find it too expensive at the moment. So then I thought maybe the 40mm... sounds like a good idea if I read your praise

I picked mine up in a bundle at a deep discount with the intention of selling it but I was so impressed I kept it. It is a really nice and very handy lens.

misty66 wrote in post #17445572
Thanks for this, I want the Sigma 50mm F1.4 ART but find it too expensive at the moment. So then I thought maybe the 40mm... sounds like a good idea if I read your praise

It's worth it for the size alone. Both have a place in the bag since the Siggy is 2 stops faster, but that "Art" lens is massive for a 50mm prime.

nqjudo wrote in post #17445587
I picked mine up in a bundle at a deep discount with the intention of selling it but I was so impressed I kept it. It is a really nice and very handy lens.

Yeah I got it brand new at a steep discount too. I was already thrilled because it brought a new dimension of portability to my 5D, but the optics, build and focus accuracy really blew me away. I was not expecting this level of performance. It also means I can lighten the load when birding with the 400L by having this tucked in my pocket for non-bird shots.

the enthusiasm for a new lens. sharper than your L lenses ? let's get a follow up in about six months if you still have the lens

ed rader wrote in post #17445643
the enthusiasm for a new lens. sharper than your L lenses ? let's get a follow up in about six months if you still have the lens

Agreed. I couldn't get that excited about this lens, although I wanted to. I ended up selling it.

ed rader wrote in post #17445643
the enthusiasm for a new lens. sharper than your L lenses ? let's get a follow up in about six months if you still have the lens

Sure thing ed you'll get your update. Sharpness isn't everything but this thing is noticeably sharper than the 50L and 24-105L by some margin, as well as the 85L wide open but not sure about equivalent apertures (I sold the 85L because it was too big, even though it was once my favorite lens).

You're probably right about the new lens enthusiasm though. This is the first Canon lens I've bought in over 3 years (since the 50L) and I chose it based on size and price. I actually shoot Olympus M4/3 now as my main system because portability is that important to me - lots of travel and hiking; I shoot with the E-M10 + 20mm f/1.7 pancake about 90% of the time. For that reason I'm pretty confident this lens will stick around, simply because its size will make me use the 5D more often.

Unless of course Canon releases an f/1.2 pancake lens or something

being 2.8 normal prime, it doesnt excite me much. Used to use it a fair bit to keep my camera small, but now shoot sony and with adapter, that lens isnt very small anymore.

it's a quality lens for sure.

It's crazy to me that people still recommend the 50mm f/1.8 instead of this lens.

The pancake is exceptional!

misty66 wrote in post #17445572
Thanks for this, I want the Sigma 50mm F1.4 ART but find it too expensive at the moment. So then I thought maybe the 40mm... sounds like a good idea if I read your praise

Do eet! It's fantastic. I prefer the 35 IS, but it costs 4x as much.

mclaren777 wrote in post #17446142
It's crazy to me that people still recommend the 50mm f/1.8 instead of this lens.

The pancake is exceptional!

While everything really does favor the 40 f2.8. Sometimes that extra stop and a third that the 50 F1.8 II has is more important for the user (for light & depth of field purposes).

I have both, and we use the 40 a lot when running around. It's a good lens. I sure wish it were faster, like F2, but it's really good at everything and inexpensive and small, so it's one of those "keepers" lenses that you don't mind owning even if you don't use it a ton.

Very best,

I said this many times, and I'll say it again-this lens is really close to the 43.3mm ideal normal focal length for the 135mm format, which is great-and it is a much less costly, adapter free replacement for a 45mm F2.8 Tessar (and better IQ to boot). For the price, it is a no brainer.

I used to shoot a lot with 5d3 & 40 stm. Excellent lens in a pancake package. On 5d3 it's possible to shoot with one hand only.

The 40F2.8 doesn't really interest me. I have the Canon 35F2IS, and it is sharp and fast. I also have the Sigma 50F2.8 macro lens. If a prime lens is only f2.8, I want it to be a macro lens, unless it is long or a zoom. While the 40 is sharp, no doubt, so are the other options in my bag.
It is unfortunate that Canon doesn't make an IS version of their 50. That would be a draw for me.