50 1.8 or 40 Pancake

mata.morrison

mata.morrison

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,033
Name
Matthew
Edit My Images
Yes
Well I have just moved to full frame and wanting to get a fast prime to go along with my 24-105L. I don't want to break the bank with this one so my two choices are the 50mm nifty or the 40 pancake (2nd hand)

I had a nifty when I was on crop and didn't like the focal length at all, however I have been borrowing a mk1 version and it is a whole lot better.

My main point is 40 being slightly wider is probably a good thing, 2.8 slight downer but IQ is it much better than the 50? Better build (even though there is not much 'build' if you know what I mean).

STM function won't get used as I have a 5Dc but does it work on a 600D? My wife has one so that could be a bouns...
 
STM quiet/smooth focus for video only works with the 650d afaik as it's the only one that has the continous AF. It'll still be nice and quiet obviously but won't be smooth for video.

The 40mm is only F2.8 as oppososed to 1.8 but it is sharp straight off whereas the 50mm isn't sharp till a few stops higher from what people seem to say?

Other than that the only other main difference is the size I guess (other than focal length!)! Weight isn't much different.
 
Thanks for the info, will have to think about it. I do think 40mm will be better on the wife's crop so i think I am heading in that direction.

Now just have to decide not so sharp and have 1.8 or sharp from 2.8, will it be enough? Will have to read more and see what I can find.
 
Hi Matthew,

The 50 1.8 is a great lens! For the price, nothing can beat it. Optically it's excellent.
My main concert with it is the AF: you simply can't trust it. It may focus in the right place or a few cm to the front/back. You never know. Also, the bokeh isn't the most pleasant, sometimes.
Mine was very sharp right from f/2!

The 40 2.8 is a fantastic lens! It's very small and has an incredible IQ, even wide open. Also, it's better constructed than the 50 1.8.
It's not, however, so fast like the 1.8. So, if you need to shoot in low light, the 50 may be a better option for you.
 
I cant comment on the 50mm f/1.8, but i do have the f/1.4 version and the pancake.
My f/1.4 is also pretty hazy wide open on my 60D, but on my 5D its much better. I'd take the 50mm with a few extra stops if needed over the pancake. Yes, the pancake is sharp wide open but if there came a time where f/2.8 wasn't enough its nice having f/1.8, even if it is at the cost of slightly reduced IQ. Its easier to improve a soft shot than a blurry shot IMO.

What about the Canon 35 f/2? Having owned that in the past id say its the best of the 3, and not too expensive.
 
mata.morrison said:
Well I have just moved to full frame and wanting to get a fast prime to go along with my 24-105L. I don't want to break the bank with this one so my two choices are the 50mm nifty or the 40 pancake (2nd hand)

I had a nifty when I was on crop and didn't like the focal length at all, however I have been borrowing a mk1 version and it is a whole lot better.

..
Click to expand...

I have the nifty fifty and I'm always pleased with what it does...but having paid £118 from Procamera for the pancake its a close call which is best value.
This is straight out of my 5D Mk1

8758413675_e4990d2cc6_c.jpg
 
I owned a 50 1.8 and a 40 STM and couldn't tell any difference in IQ, but agree the bokeh is nasty hexagonal shaped on the 50.

Might sound unimportant (and it is) but the 40 on a 5D would look like a body cap.
 
You may find the 40mm is more "usable length" on a FF sensor, being closer to the diagonal of the sensor size (supposedly ideal for genaral purpose framing). The 40mm gets rave reviews from most owners, and is certainly better built and sharper optically than the 50mm F/1.8. The 50mm is of course one and a third stops faster which will be handy if you shoot in very low light.

I personally would go for the 40mm in a straight either/or contest.
 
Hmmm. I got my 40mm because i wasn't happy with my 50mm f/1.4. Ive never really taken to it, although its the only lens ive had that ive never thought of selling (and still aren't :)

I much prefer the 40mm on my 60D, although i do prefer the 50mm on my 5DMKIII.
The closer minimum focus distance is a big deal to me, its much easer to shot people who are close, like at a restaurant or pub table of example. Ive missed a lot of shots with the 50mm because ive been too close.

Given the choice of the 3 i would take the 50mm f/1.4 over the other two if it was just for a full frame camera.
 
daugirdas said:
you should be better looking at 50mm f/1.4. The 1.8 is not very nice for many reasons, while 40mm is only 2.8. 40mm f/2.8 is not that special
Click to expand...

You may be right, but this lens has stunning IQ, even wide open, and a very nice bokeh. :)

I also have the 50 1.4, though. :D
 
Problem with f2.8 is that it's only 1 stop faster than the 24-105mm f4L IS. IS is able to compensate for up to 3 stops for static subjects anyway. If you don't need the compact size of 40mm f2.8, then I don't think it's worth it.

I had 50 f1.8, was never pleased with it, wide open it's quite a bad lens. Now I have 35mm f2 and couldn't be happier.

My only reason to buy prime is to use it at f2. so if it's not sharp wide open, it's not a good prime for me. 35mm f2 and 85mm f1.8 are my prime lenses, both very sharp wide open.
 
Last edited:
Ive owned two 50mm f1.8s, one was from new and it was great. The second was used and didnt seem as good.
Id go for the 50mm simply because its f1.8, as cool as the pancake looks I just think f2.8 might not be fast enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top