22-23 / 56
Technique
EF 40mm f2.8 STM lens
22
Reproduced from EOS magazine October-December 2012
Reproduced from EOS magazine October-December 2012
23
|23
EF 40mm lens information
There is something special about the feel of the
EF 40mm lens on my EOS 5D Mark II. This is a
big camera and the balance feels better to me
with a light lens mounted on the front. My EF 17-
40mm f4L USM lens weighs nearly four times as
much. Put the EF 40mm lens on an EOS 650D or
1100D and you nearly have a compact camera.
Optical quality
I pay less attention to MDF charts than I should,
and I don’t usually spend much time looking at
the corners of my photos, but the image quality
from this lens between f4 and f16 is amazing.
It’s similar to or better than the EF 17-40mm f4L
USM and there is only minimal barrel distortion
and chromatic aberration. I can’t fault it.
Why does an inexpensive lens have such
good image quality? It’s all down to the design.
Pancake lenses are relatively simple to design
and make. Unlike zooms, the lens only has to
work at a single focal length, so there are less
compromises in the design.
The 40mm lens has six elements (only the
discontinued EF 28mm f2.8 has less with five).
Furthermore, they are tiny – the front element
has a diameter of only a couple of centimetres.
All this keeps the manufacturing costs down.
Drawbacks
No lens is perfect and the EF 40mm pancake lens
is no exception. These are the drawbacks.
No lens data
in Lightroom, Photoshop or
Digital Photo Professional (DPP). This may have
changed by the time this article is published,
but at the moment there is no lens data (used
to correct vignetting, chromatic aberration
and barrel distortion) in Canon’s DPP or Adobe
Camera Raw RAW conversion software.
I use Lightroom to process the images, which
lets me correct aberrations (such as they are)
manually, so it’s not a big deal for me. However,
it does mean that at the moment you can’t
use the Peripheral Illumination Correction or
Chromatic Aberration Correction functions on
your camera (where available), or correct these
using in-camera RAW processing. This may
matter if you shoot JPEG files.
No distance scale
on the lens barrel. I
found this a bit disconcerting when shooting
landscapes as the only way to tell where
the camera is focused is to look through the
viewfinder or use Live View. It also means that
you can’t use the hyperfocal distance focusing
technique with any precision.
The EF 35mm f2 or (if your pocket can handle
it) EF 35mm f1.4L lenses may be better options if
you can’t do without a distance scale.
Maximum aperture of f2.8.
F2 or even f1.4
would have been nicer – but I appreciate this
might not be technically possible in a pancake
lens. If you really need a fast aperture for low
light shooting or creative use of depth-of-field
you should look at the EF 50mm f1.8, EF 50mm
f1.4, EF 35mm f2 or EF 35mm f1.4L lenses.
Lens comparisons
How does the EF 40mm f2.8 lens compare to other Canon lenses in a
similar price range? Let’s take a look.
EF 50mm f1.8 II
The ‘nifty-fifty’ retails for less than half the price of the EF 40mm
lens. In terms of image quality I doubt you would be able to tell the
difference between the two (both are excellent), but you certainly will
when it comes to build quality and autofocus performance. The metal
body and mount of the 40mm lens is a world away from the plastic and
somewhat flimsy 50mm.
Another drawback of the 50mm lens is the micro-motor autofocus
drive – it’s noisy and can be slow to focus. Personally I don’t like the
autofocus on this lens, which is why I purchased the EF 50mm f1.4
USM lens instead.
The main advantage of the EF 50mm 1.8 II lens it that the maximum
aperture is nearly a stop-and-half wider, giving you more options in
low light, or when using a wide aperture to blur the background. It’s
also Canon’s least expensive lens and can’t be beaten in terms of value
for money.
EF 35mm f2
This lens retails for a little more than the 40mm lens. At only 5mm
difference when it comes to focal length, I doubt you would notice
much difference between the two. The 35mm lens is larger and has an
arc-form autofocus drive which is slower and noisier than the stepper
motor on the EF 40mm. It’s also an older design and certainly not as
cool as the 40mm lens. If they were the same focal length the 40mm
lens would be a new, improved version of the 35mm lens. I don’t see
any reason for purchasing the 35mm lens over the 40mm, other than
the wider maximum aperture.
35mm
f2
40mm
f2.8
50mm
f1.8 II
Introduced
Oct 1990
Jun 2012
Dec 1990
Angle-of-view
horizontal
54°
49°
40°
vertical
38°
34°
27°
diagonal
63°
57°
46°
Elements/groups
7/5
6/4
6/5
Diaphragm blades
5
7
5
Aperture
minimum f22
f22
f22
maximum f2
f2.8
f1.8
Closest focusing (metres)
0.25
0.30
0.45
Maximum magnification
x0.23
x0.18
x0.15
Distance info for E-TTL flash
–
returned
–
AF actuator
AFD
STM micro-motor
Filter diameter
52mm 52mm 52mm
Size (diameter x length)
67 x 42mm 68 x 23mm 68 x 41mm
Weight
210g
130g
130g
Accessories
lens cap
E-52
E-52
E-52
lens hood EW-65II
ES-52
ES-62
lens pouch LP-1011
LP811
LP1014
Magnification with
Extension tubes
EF 12 II
x0.58-0.35 x0.50-0.32 x0.39-0.24
EF 25 II
x1.00-0.77 x0.88-0.70 x0.68-0.53
EF Extenders
not compatible
Price RRP (inc. VAT)
£319.99
£229.99
£129.99
22
Close-ups with EF 40mm lens
Right
I took this photo of my girlfriend’s eyelash
extensions with the 40mm lens fitted to an Extension tube
EF 25. This combination gets you remarkably close to your
subject.
EOS 5D Mark II, 1/125 second at f2.8, ISO 6400.
The EF 40mm lens didn’t work well with my
Canon 500D close-up lens – it didn’t reduce
the minimum focusing distance enough to be
worthwhile. But I got excellent results with
Extension tubes EF 12 and EF 25. This wasn’t
a complete surprise as extension tubes are
generally more effective with wide-angle lenses
than close-up lenses.
I preferred using the Extension tube EF
12 and got some very good photos with this
combination. For most things, the Extension
Tube EF 25 was a little too powerful.
I enjoyed playing around with the maximum
aperture of f2.8 with my close-up photos. I often
find it essential to use a wide aperture when
taking photos of flowers to blur the background –
at smaller apertures the background comes into
focus and becomes a distraction.
The EF 40mm lens, even with extension
tubes, doesn’t get you as close to the subject as
a macro lens. You shouldn’t expect it to match
the image quality of a macro lens either. Macro
lenses are optimised to give high quality images
at close focusing distances. But it is an excellent
way to experiment with close-up photography
and extend the versatility of this lens.
Above and right
These two photos were
taken with the EF 40mm
lens fitted with Canon
Extension tubes EF 12
(above) and EF 25 (right). I
set f2.8 for both to give the
limited depth-of-field and
soft background.
EOS 5D Mark II, 1/1000
second at f2.8, ISO 400
(above) and EOS 5D Mark
II, 1/2000 second at f2.8,
ISO 800 (right).