A Weekend WIth Canon EF 40mm f2.8 STM Pancake Lens

Instead of taking photos of fireworks like I do on every Canada Day weekend, this time I took out my friend's new stubular pancake lens for a spin. Although mounting it on a full frame would have been ideal, I had to slap it on my 1D MK.III.

Before we go on, I should warn you that I will not be talking about how sharp this lens is. In fact, let's get that out of the way first. The 40mm pancake is more than plenty sharp for $200 price range. whether it is sharper than EF 35mm f2, EF 50 f1.# non-L, and sigma 30mm f1.4, is not my priority. There are other lens tests out there for that. I have a certain sharpness tolerance that may differ from others, but this lens gets a passing mark on sharpness.

Alright, now let's go on with other things that matter for a $200 lens.

The 40mm pancake lens comes with a STM (not to be confused with Sexually Transmitted Motor): STepper Motor technology. This makes quiet and fast to focus while retaining it's stubluar size. It is roughly half the size of the Canon 50mm f1.4, but what's more important here is the minimum focusing distance. The pancake lens has the minimum focusing distance of 30cm as opposed to the 50mm's 45cm. This mere 15cm difference lets the 40mm focus at whoever is sitting across from you at an average size dinner table. With the focusing speed and noise level, this little lens is a ninja-class, no doubt. Canon just doesn't have the right sized body for it. Yet.

The new 40mm already has several competition, notably both of the non-L 50mm prime lens as well as others. It is even questionable if Nikon making their somewhat-recent AF-S 40mm f2.8 Micro was a better move than making a pancake lens as well. Nikon has been making updated versions of their "affordable" primes for their non-motored bodies, which I thought was an awesome move. Canon has been updating their L lenses or revamping their existing cheap primes into $900 lenses. The price point of roughly $200 for the new 40mm pancake is certainly something the beginner, intermediate, and weekend photographers alike were searching for within the Canon-mount.

On a APS-C type sensor, this 40mm is just shy of being a 65mm (52mm on APS-H type). Still a better focal length than 50mm becoming an 80mm for the most part. If you're planning to have a 40mm as a standard lens or a dedicated street photography lens, you'll be more than happy with the 40mm. It even has a metal mount as opposed to the plastic everything, which the 50mm f1.8 offers. The extra $90 or so you'll be paying over the 50mm 1.8 is certainly a worth it investment.

The aperture of 2.8 is something that will turn off some users. Sometimes, we just need that extra push in the depth-of-field. Thankfully, i shoot most of my stuff in f2.8-5.6 outside so it didn't affect me as much. If you're spoiled by using f1.2 glass, this just might take getting some used to. And let's face it, with ISO performance sky rocketing per generation, low light situation with f2.8 can't be all that much of a challenge these days.

Now here's the question most people will ask: How is this lens with "bokeh"?

The bokeh looks just fine (for $200).

If I were to have any complaints with this lens is the STM or the focusing motor to be exact. To even manually focus, the lens needs to be powered, meaning the camera needs to be on. The 40mm tends to stick out when it is focused at minimum focusing range, so in order to "retract" lens, you first have to focus at infinity, or do it so manually before turning the camera off. I know its a short lens, but I still wouldn't want a chance to hit anything while the lens is stuck at the minimum focusing. If this 40mm were to be a USM lens, it would've been a full manual lens like most USM lenses are.

Playing around with this 40mm pancake has already won my heart over. My next spare $200 could potentially be spent on a 40mm of my own. And I was ready to bash this thing prior to the weekend test (Seriously, I was going to write "Canon's new 40mm f2.8 STM pancake lens makes a great body cap. The End") The pancake lens isn't perfect. Heck, it doesn't even need to be pancake. I bet most users are willing to have a 40mm f2 instead of 40mm f2.8 pancake. But at a $200 (how many times have I mentioned the price now?) price range, this lens doesn't need to be perfect. With Canon's standards, I'm surprised this lens is as this good for the price.

First Glance: Canon PowerShot G1 X

I had an opportunity to play around a little with the new Canon PowerShot G1 X earlier this week. Getting quite a bit of hype since its announcement due to increase in popularity of semi-pro compacts and mirrorless alike, I decided to take a quick glance at it.

The camera is noticeably bigger than the (now) old G12, although, when put side to side, it isn't that much bigger, making the G1 X still a fairly portable camera. Even being a bigger camera than the Fuji X10 is easily forgivable due to the huge increase in the sensor size of the G1 X (just 20% smaller than the APS-C type sensor). Being a bigger camera, it allows G1 X to have a 3" Screen (as opposed to the 2.8" of the G12), but what's more important was the quality of the screen has also been improved, providing a more detailed and fine visuals.

The G1 X definitely has a few good points. What really shines with this camera has to be the surprisingly good ISO performance. The following are the ISO-labeled photos for comparison purposes. Please forgive the lack of composition, among many things.

It is also worth noting the G1 X comes with a lens cap. Millions are affected each year with lens cap loss, so this might be an issue to some, however, the lens cap for the G1 X looks reliable and even comes with a lens-keeper-string. With proper installation, one should not have to fear losing this lens cap. Lens cap designs and quality may seem insignificant at first, and it doesn't affect the image quality of the camera in anyway, but sometimes it's the little things that matter more. Canon definitely deserves some points for this one.

Having said that, Not all is perfect with the all-in-one-semi-professional-G1-X. To start the bashing, the rugged (and somewhat matte) finish the G12 had is no more. The G1 X has a cheap exterior finish, which one would expect on a Canon ELPH compact series. It's disappointing to see Canon has continued on their path of reducing the build quality of their Canon PowerShot G## by the generation. An asking price of $800.00 with this hideous level of finish, which also forces it to be a smudge+finger print magnet, just might be too steep for some, but this being a new camera, it just might drop to a more affordable price as time goes on.

An annoying thing one might come across while using the G1 X when one challenges the odd minimum focusing distance. The shortest being 20cm with "macro" mode, and 40cm on normal, this might remind any ex-rangefinder users of this nostalgic feeling, but it sure wont be an welcoming one. Rangefinders typically have 70cm as their minimum focusing distance, so it could be worse, but even the Canon S100 and pretty much all Canon PowerShot cameras at this generation have better minimum focusing distance than this. Of course, a FA-DC58C macro filter adapter can be purchased, but it'll also come with a bad taste in your mouth if you ever need to purchase one. And for some reason, many features including Colour Accent, Colour Swap, (Digital) Fish-eye, Miniature, and other "fun mode" features are nowhere to be found on the G1 X. It's pretty clear Canon intended G1 X users to be "serious" with their photography. I am not going to lose sleep over those features, but I just don't understand why it's not there. Every other Canon PowerShots have them.

It's supposed to read, "Minimum Focusing Distance Sucks".

Moving on to the optical viewfinder I can say not much has changed, or more accurately, nothing's changed. Viewfinder zooms in or out like the lens does but, it is still mediocre quality like the previous G12. I can see myself using the viewfinder most of the time since I am somewhat patriotic in regards to viewfinders, but for some reason, I can't bring myself to ask for a better one. Not sure why, maybe I just accepted this is as good as it's going to be for a while. Besides, even the famous Fuji X10 doesn't exactly offer a better viewfinder.

Canon had all the tools and experience to make G1 X a one ground-breaking-possibly-mirrorless-killing-monster-camera. While it excels in what it is good at, it makes it hard to truly appreciate G1 X's good points over the many drawbacks that it might annoy you with.

Canon EOS-3 (Not Really a Review)

This is Canon 5D of the film-era. It's also a good way to piss away film.

I had a silly thought in the Summer of this year: "Hey, what if I get an AUTO-FOCUS FILM CAMERA?"

Okay, maybe this is a bad way to start this post. EOS-3 is an amazing camera. It has 45 AF points, and even seem to focus as fast as a 5D MK.II- if not, faster. It has a good enough build quality. Not quite like the Canon 1V or the Nikon F5, but it's not made out of paper, either. And most of all, I enjoyed shooting with it through out this Summer. Well, until I got my negatives back from the photo lab.

Having the auto-focus system that spoils its user, every time I used the EOS-3, I shot like I shoot with a digital camera. Shooting things several times just in case and because I think I got the room in my memory card. The only difference here is my memory cards for the EOS-3 came in either 24 or 36 shots and were meant for single use. It's not a pleasant thing to see a roll of negatives where most of the shots are the same. And to add insult to my own injuries, they were not even moving subjects.

Owning the EOS-3 more or less felt like having a very, very enthusiastic girlfriend: You keep having to use condomsfilm. And you really shouldn't use the same one over and over.*

There are things that I am still excited about the EOS-3, though, like the Eye Control Focus (ECF) system. Upon calibration, the user simply looks at the part of the viewfinder, and the camera will focus in that area. Considering this camera came out back in 1999, that is a very impressive feature. It doesn't really work with people who wear glasses, and I did use this feature less than a handful of times, but it's probably one of the features I like the most.

Going back to the thought I had earlier this Summer, it really sounded like a good idea back then. It works with all my Canon lenses, it even loads my film for me (I only have to pull the film a line in the back, and it will latch on automatically once the door is closed) and it knows what film it has been loaded with and sets the ISO automatically. I don't even have to wind the film, it does that by itself, too. Once the film is finished, it winds it back. Again, by itself. Heck, even Ken Rockwell likes this camera. And funny enough, this is the only full frame Canon camera I own!

As I said before, Canon EOS-3 is an amazing camera, but it's just not for everybody. Despite shooting with digital the way I do, I like doing everything myself once it comes to film. The loading of the film, the winding, the focusing, the rewinding of the film, etc. I even miss going to a dark room now. Maybe I'm just the type to work harder than I need to for my own photos, but that's just me, I guess.

Regrettably, my EOS-3 that I shot 4 rolls of film through, is now up for sale. Thankfully, I still have my other film camera , which I use more often.

*: Unless you like multiple exposures.