What I always find remarkable, Robin, is that whatever lens you are using you always find a wonderful range of photos of varying subjects, and they are all great. Being in KL, with its interesting environment, clearly helps, but I think you prove that it's not the lens on the camera that counts, but the eye behind it.
Thanks Jim for the kind words. I think 40mm is not too far from what I normally shoot with - 50mm, so it is quite easy to adjust my composition with that lens.
40mm is realy good for portraits in small rooms. I like to use it when we go with friends to a bar or a cafe. They can keep talking to you or someone else, drink or gracefully smoke - and you just catching best non-staged shots. 35 is too wide for that 50 is too narrow
I do enjoy 40mm using my Panasonic 20mm f1.7. It can make very sharp photos, isolate a subject due to relatively low DOF, and I love the colour and contrast of the images it makes. I find the angle good for giving a little more context to the picture, there is something about it I like. Combined with my E-PL7 however it makes for a discrete and portable camera system. I agree with you though, focusing is slow at best and it can't keep up with modern camera autofocus at all, but it's ok for relatively slow moving subjects on an older contrast focus body. I also can't justify the cost of the Olympus 40mm, and it's also a bit large for the above combo. If only Panasonic had updated the autofocus the the MK II version. Maybe for the MK III...
When I bought my first good camera around 1977/1978, a Konica SLR, it came with a 50mm F/1.7 "normal" lens which I loved. My father was so impressed with my sharp photos he ditched his Kodak Instamatics and bought himself a Konica, and then got one for my mother. Both their cameras came with 40mm F/1.8 lenses (much more compact than my 50 but a little less sharp). I guess this focal length was popular even back then!
75mm is a very popular focal length for old medium format 6x6 cameras. In full frame terms it translates to 41mm. This makes for a really familiar street shooting experience "from the hip" looking down into the waist level viewfinder (or tilt screen on digital).
I own the Nikon 40mm f2 and it has quickly become my favorite street photography lens. Which is sad, because my Z system is supposed to be my work camera… but now I keep leaving my street cam Fujifilm X-pro2 at home in favor of this Z6 + 40mm combo!
I agree with all you said . I too can see the appeal of the 40mm, but in full frame terms I prefer 55mm over 50mm. This has meant I switched to using 30mm on MFT to match my favourite focal length on full frame cameras . With regards those who find 50 mm too tight , I can only add that by using my feet to step back to capture more of the scene . I also like doing portraits with 60mm and 120 mm on full frame . For wide angle I like the view of 29mm produced by my iPhone and find that anything higher than 15mm on MFT cameras as not being as useful . When I consider that all wide angle shots are taken on the iPhone , I am left with two primes and a kit zoom for my camera . In short , I shoot 30mm on MFT for just about everything and if I want to blur out the background it only requires moving closer to the subject or switching the lens . This works just great for portraits and the images are perfectly sharp . Careful metering and observing the angle of lighting to avoid washed out hues , also ensues that mono shots work equally well . I used a 40mm on full frame compact cameras back I the film days and they worked okay, but it never quite ticked my box as my go to lens . Zooms are a great compromise and work well for most of the time, but a prime will do more justice to your images if you are prepared to work the scene and avoid constantly checking each image taken . Don McMullen said that few photographers were willing to work the scene. All too often today he felt photographers were too lazy. Back in the day it was not always possible to check what you had on film and if you came away with six good shots on a roll of film you were doing something right. Using 5x4 film bodies really slows you down . I suspect the technical edge we have today may make us complacent .
For portraits definitely I'd prefer something much longer, 85mm or even 150mm will give better results, I want the perspective compression which redners more proportionate look on facial features and body parts. Wide angle lens (anything wider than 50mm) has too much distortion that nothing looks natural. I guess, what drives innovation is - being lazy. We want convenience, we want automation and even today, a lot of people want the camera to think for them.
Great Video and it made me think. Back when I started learning photography 1968 about all that has changed. That 40mm perspective was very common on non interchangeable cameras. I believe the most natural perspective to normal vision. I thought of years past cameras I list a few here. Olympus 35RC 42mm F2.8 and the 35RD 40mm F1.7. great pocket 35 film cameras. Yashica Electro 35 used a very sharp 45mm F1.7. A Canon I enjoyed for years was the AF35ml which used a 40mm F1.9 Many times the 40 or 42mm fixed lens was used. I like to think of the 40mm as a Retro focal length from the 70"s Today it seems the focus is on the nifty 50 or the wider 35mm. The forty is a great alternative all purpose lens.
Like you said, Robin, eventually it comes down to taste. I also wouldn't say it replaces either of them. That being said, I had all three and I traded in my 50mm for the 40mm as it's closer to what I prefer as a do-it-all lens and wouldn't use the 50mm much anymore after the 40mm was there. I still like 35mm for indoor environmental portraits as sometimes 40mm is too tight for that. On the rare occasion that I need the 10mm more over the 40mm, I will reach for a zoom lens. --- So, some may call it a hype, I'd rather call it a revival that I much appreciate. :-)
Yes, it is in a way a revival. Used a Zuiko 40 mm f2 quite a bit for a documentary project and found it great for single and double environmental portraits -- and maybe this is the perfect "people" picture lens. Would that I still had that Zuiko. But the Voigtlander Ultron is available in at least three SLR mounts.
Hi Robin. Great video. I've just picked up photography this year and been using a 5D II and the nifty fifty (50mm F1.8). It's a great lens but sometimes to compose what I want, I have to step back and oftentimes find myself running out of space 😅 It's frustrating to be honest. I recently got a cheap 20-year-old clunky Tamron 28-85mm and discovered two things; 35 is too wide for me, and I hate unwieldy heavy lens. So I've been watching reviews of the 40mm pancake and that's how I came across this video. Thanks for this video. By far you're the best 40mm reviewer I've watched. I'm now saving up to get this 40mm pancake. Hope to bump into you while shooting street scenes in KL.
When i was still using 5dm3, this one is my go to lens, light weight, good af performance, affordable. Sometimes i still miss this lens, it gave me lots of memory
I've had the OM Systems 20mm f/1.4 since it came out, and I have to say in the last six months I've really warmed up to it, especially just around the house. If there's such a thing as agoraphobic street photography, this might be perfect focal length for it. I've kept it on my OM-1 since I received that body and, particularly since the lens gets so close, it has proven to be a lot more versatile than I had imagined. I bought it as a travel lens but ironically it has become my go-to stay-at-home glass.
Years ago when you could work on cars, I had a toolbox full of different sockets and wrenches in standard and metric sizes, to work on a car properly you need a variety of tools. Photography is much the same, lens, prim and zoom lenses are the tools of photography, depending upon what you photograph you build your toolbox to photograph in different lighting situations and subjects. I have always photographed many different subjects including events and many of my lens can be used to photograph events and many other subjects. The thing that I break down my camera equipment is where I will use the cameras, when I go on vacation, I want to be able to photograph my experience, but the full frame cameras stay home and I pack a APSC or micro 4/3. If I do a day trip I use one of my full frame cameras and a lens that will cover what I will photograph. If I go out for a bird / wildlife I pack a Fujifilm XH2 and XT5 with the 100-400mm and a lens or two that I can do some seascape photography. So cameras and glass are just tools to create photos and you choose the one that allows you to best capture your vision of the subject that you will be photographing.
I have a panny 20mm v.1 arriving today to try out the 40-hype. Back when I shot analog i used 50mm or even 85mm for street and almost everything else. The main selling point with the 20mm on a small m43 body like E-PL, GM or GX series is the unobtrusiveness. Great, stealthy ninja stuff at affordable prices. Disclaimer: I only shoot for fun, I am not a pro.
Thank you for your impressions. I like that you go for feeling. And that everyone should do. I myself love the MFT 45 mm focal length, and 12, and 200 mm. My favorite lens is still the 12-100 pro. Keep on having fun. wish you the best
I use the Olympus 35 1.8 most of the time on my Pen F. Just suits what I do and can move my feet, if need be. Have to admit the 12-40 2.8 Pro is a very,very handy all round lens if you don't have a specific scenario in mind when heading out.
Due to moving to Asia I have to reduce my 170 vintage lenses collection (for full-frame) down to 12 lenses. Therefore I performed a lot of comparisons during the last months. Although I am usually a 50mm shooter the Konica Hexanon AR 40mm F 1.8 made it into my small collection (to my surprise). This lens is quite a marvel because it is compact, light-weight, razor-sharp and has a great contrast and nice blur. Using 40mm is very practical in many environments since it provides a wider field of view than a 50mm without creating the need to crop images as often as I have to do it with a 35mm lens.
I used to use 40mm Canon pancake on my Canon bodies when I had them. Switched to Pentax to have access to their 43mm F 1.9 FA Limited, a sweetheart of a lens. 43 mm corresponds to the square root of 24mm squared + 36 mm squared, which is how all normal lenses are defined (square root of hypotenuse of format dimensions) See the wikipedia article on "Normal Lens" which lists normal focal lengths for a variety of formats, with explanatory notes for some usage cases (mostly motion pictures uses a focal length double that of the value derived from the Pythagorean theorem used to derive the focal length). I have loved the switch-been shooting the 43mm DA limited for about 2 years now.
The EF 40mm is my current favorite outdoors lens on 5D II for it fast focussing (compared to 50mm/1.8) and pancake design. Indoors I prefer the EF 35mm/2.0 for the IS and larger aperture. I wished the Lumix 20mm/1.7 focussed faster on M43. Instead, I had to settle for Oly 17mm/1.8.
40 mm: the tightest focal length that can still take a selfie. The widest lens that can still take a portrait without a goofy distorted perspective. The focal length of choice for almost all fixed lens cameras throughout the 60 s and 70s. The right focal length for a friend across a cafe table from you. The easiest focal length to pair with a small low power flash to good effect. And apparently an easy focal length to make small cheap and acceptably sharp lenses for. I like it.
I love this focal Length as well as 35mm & 50mm. I am currently using my 28mm F2.8D on my D7100. It feels very natural. Like you say Robin, a slightly tighter 35mm. Great video and honest.
On a crop sensor camera the 40mm translates to a 64mm and find this perfect for portraits and just a good walk-around lens. Sure there are limitations but being small and light it is great for travel and using on the run.
Go for Panasonic 25mm 1.4 II (water and dust resistant) and is so fast with om-1, using the original version from 2012 and never stop. I love the 17mm 1.8 also
Great vid, Robin. I don’t know if you were aware, but from what I’ve read, Canon first brought out the EF 40 2.8 as a video lens for, what at that time, was the new T4i (650D). It turned out to be great for photos too
I used to have the Lumix 20mm f1.7, I replaced it with the Lumix 25mm f1.7, I preferred the focal length and the faster AF. In recent times I have used the Oly 17mm f1.8, I have really enjoyed that lens. I am not sure what I prefer, it depends.
In the last few months I find myself gravitating towards the 40mm focal length. Not sure why since I've usually been a 35mm focal length guy but of late the 40mm is my go to lens.I've recently bought 3 40mm f/2.8 lenses, one for my Leica M camera, one for my Sony A6100, and one for my Sony A6600.
Many Japanese rangefinder cameras from the 60's used 45mm as their normal fixed lens. Yashica did, Minolta did (on the 7S , not their compact bodies like the Minolta E), Richo did (on their 500/ Jet fixed lens bodies) and a few more. Canon did 40mm on their G QL cameras, Konica did 45, 47, or 50mm depending on the model (my classic Konica IIIA has a 50mm F 1.8, the AutoS did 47mm, the AutoS2 did 45mm)
I opined on the 40mm (FF=) focal length on your last vid on this topic. It's just preference. I really like the 40mm focal length personally after having shot the Panny 20mm for two weeks on holiday. As an old M43 lens, it is in fact both slow and noisy compared to more recent lenses. Wouldn't use it for video or for shooting that required quick AF, for example. But for more patient stills shooting, it's still an exceptional lens. I have both the 17 and the 25 in addition, but the 20 is just different from those, and it is a difference that I have come to like a lot.
The diagonal of a frame size has long been considered the "standard" size. The diagonal of a 24mm x 36mm full frame is 43mm, so 40mm is closer to this standard than a 50mm, but not as close as a 45mm, of which there used to be a number. I still use a Minolta f2 45mm manual focus lens. Pentax currently has a 43mm f1.9 AF lens.
I think the "43mm being the standard size" is very subjective. When I shoot with 40mm it does not feel natural at all. 50mm felt more at home with how I see things
I loved the Panasonic 20mm lens aside from the AF being too slow. I moved to the Olympus 17/1.8 and while the change in focal length took a bit of adjustment I really like it.
@@robinwong In my opinion the AF of 20mm f/1.7 is fine on Panasonic bodies, even on GF1 from 2009. There's no AF-C of course, but in normal indoor lighting focusing from close to far and vice versa takes a second or less, given that there is something to focus on. Changing the AF would mean basically changing the whole lens design. P.S. I would love to see a video of comparison of older Olympus and Panasonic cameras (E-P1, E-PL1 or E-P2 vs G1, GH1 or GF1).
Hi Robin, All the opposite for me: always found the 50mm a little too strech for my photography and happy with the 35mm, even if sometimes a little too wide... But I'm perfectly pleased with the 20:1.7 on both Olympus or Panasonic : idealy tiny and sharp! The Zuiko f:1.4 is too expensive and larger and has no clutch even if wp: not interesting new, I'll wait for a used one... Still trying to love the 25mm nevertherless... With a Zhongyi Mitakon 25 :0.95! Keep on smiling : it's our Robin therapy! 😉
Great video, as usual! As a mainly mft shooter, I use a sigma 19mm lens, which gives me a 38mm equivalent. I also have the sigma 30mm. I do find the 30mm a bit 'long' for general use, though it's good for portraits. On mft, the 19mm falls neatly between a ff 35mm and 40mm, and I've become very used to it.
Thanks for sharing bro. I really like 40mm or EQV and yes, F2.8ish is fast enough for FF. No need for faster max aperture except for some very special situations. Why not share your settings?😂
“The autofocus is unreliably slow.” ??? I own the Lumix 20/1.7 and I can’t say I’ve ever experienced “unreliably slow” autofocus on the streets of NYC. I don’t think it was ever intended as a sports lens. The only negative is due to its age, you can’t use AF-C focus mode with it, but AF-S is as fast and reliable as all my other micro4/3 lenses. I highly recommend it, it is incredibly sharp.
Thanks for sharing. Personally, I prefer a combo of 40 mm, 28 mm and 55 mm and that covers all my needs. As always, I love your photos. Ciao from Portugal. Jan.
I could never get happy with 40mm too. I’m mostly a 50mm guy. I too struggled to get happy 35mm. What helped was I really pushed myself to do street with a 28mm lens. Once I was getting images I liked from that I found that 35mm made sense. Nowadays I’ll just decide what sort of focal length mood I’m in and take that lens.
I like the 40mm focal length. But to be fair I like 35mm focal length. For me, it's the little bit of cropping I would do with my 35mm images to keep the story within the image simpler and more focused.
I have the OM System 20m F1.4 and what a surprise! First I thought what a weird focal lenght, BUT its really a great one! its awesome picture quality, nice bokeh, nice small and light one...so 20mm is my lens to go on regular shooting :)
Since I acquired the Ricoh GR IIIx that mounts a 40mm, I stopped using the 28mm of the GR III. For me the 40mm focal length is perfect for many situations. I love it.
I love my 20mm pany pancake. First I tried on the 25mm to snap my kids, Christmas, birthday celebrations, indoor events, trips to restaurants.... And the focal length of the 'nifty fifty' was all wrong for me. I went to the 20, and now I get what my eye seems to want to see. Admittedly I miss 1 in 3 shots when kids are on the move with the lackluster autofocus, but not as bad as some say. It seems sharper than the 25mm. Much more inconspicuous, and therefore I actually take it with me to public places. And for more formal shooting, and for portraits, and outdoor stuff, I now use my sigma 30 f1.4. So yes, for me the 40mm equiv is a very useful one.
I remember the first 35mm camera i bought. it was the agfa optima flash compact camera. I still have it actually but it has not been used for a long time. I bought it as i was going on holiday and needed a camera. This had a fixed 40mm lens and i really liked it. i got some great photos from it and the lens seemed to be good quality probably made better by being a fixed focal lenth and not a cheap zoom. Since then i have always liked the 40mm focal length.
Good video. I've almost gotten that lens a couple times for my Canon 5D2 since it is so cheap, but I usually shoot with a 28-75mm f2.8 zoom or my 50mm f1.8, so I've been afraid it would be a lens I rarely would use. I do use Olympus' 17mm pancake lens with my E-M5 since it allows me to fit the camera in my pocket, but the full frame Canon DSLR is too big to have that advance even with a pancake lens.
Hey Robin. I just got myself a canon 5D classic like the one you have with the 50mm1.8. I'm considering picking up a wider angle lens. Last week I took my kiddo to a museum and realized the 50mm is a bit tight.l, although the 1.8 aperture was necessary. Would you recommend the older (non IS) 35mm f/2 or the 40mm 2.8?? I like the 40mm but don't know if 2.8 would be enough for low light situations like the museum. Can you do a review of the older 35mm f2 that you have? Love your work. Thank you for all you do.
Unfortunately, it remains unclear whether the perspective of the 40 mm lens is meant for full-frame or for APS-C. In any case, this focal length is somehow in between and is covered by the common normal zoom lenses. We mft guys are happy with 17 mm prime (equiv. 34 mm with FF) and 25 mm prime (equiv. 50 mm with FF) and don't necessarily ask for the 20 mm prime lens. Exception: I rediscovered my old slow Sigma 19 mm f2.8 DN "Art" and I love it, although the M.Zuiko 17 mm with the clutch for manual focusing is the more modern and perfect solution. For street photography I also like to use 12 mm (manual focus). - Thank you, Robin, for the portraits and street scenery. I like the photos very much, they are masterful.
I made it very clear the 40mm was on full frame. The 40mm F2.8 Canon was a full frame lens, attached on a full frame Canon 5D camera. The rest of the video was discussed based on this.
For me, the 40mm ff and equivalent match how I see best. Everyone's area of comprehension (my term, not official) is different. Some folks see wide and others see narrower. It's all good.
When I was shooting on APS-C my favourite lens was 28 mm (~45 mm on FF), so I guess I must be one of those "40 mm photographers". 😉 When I moved to micro four thirds I got the 25 f/1.8 (50 mm FF), but it initially seemed too tight for my taste. It's nice to know that you also feel such small differences 😅
Last fall I was lucky enough to find the Fujifilm X-E4 + 27mm f.28 WR bundle, and that 40mm equivalent setup is...well, convenient for sure. It's size along makes me enjoy shooting as it is always able to be with me. But I can't say I love that focal length...not really. I haven't every really shot 40mm before as like you I do prefer 50mm, really enjoy that new 33mm f1.4 from Fujifilm. Is 40mm mainly popular because the lens size usually is fairly small and makes it easier to have with you?
I use my Panasonic 20/1.7 often as it lets me put my GX9 in a jacket pocket despite a bright aperture and excellent sharpness. The slow autofocus does require thinking ahead a bit more than other lenses. I do enjoy the focal length and find it a bit more versatile than 25/50mm.
Ahoj Robin, tvoje videa už mě baví možná více než rok. Dnes jsi mě potěšil Canon 5D Classic, které jsem si pro jistotu koupil hned tři. 🙂 Na rozdíl od tebe mám doma desítky objektivů z dob, kdy jsem hledal svoji cestu fotografií. Ještě nejsem na konci, ale vzal jsem si k srdci tvé poučení - dát technice dostatek času na seznámení. Naučit se dostat z techniky maximum. Ber to jako moje poděkování za tvoji práci. Martin from Czechia.
A 28mm lens equates to around 42mm on an APS-C crop sensor camera. That puts it more in the middle between 35mm and 50mm - so that little bit tighter than 40mm. A 24mm lens on an APS-C camera comes in about 36mm. This stuff is worth considering for the many hobby photographers shooting with APS-C cameras ,like the Canon Rebel series - as so much of the information on youtube relates only to Full Frame cameras.
Good video, as I have the kit 14-42 lens for my Olympus I will practice with both 14 (18 equiv) and 20 (40 equiv) I am curious to see which one is more useful for me. Thanks
I used this lens on my Canon FTb. It's a great lens for the size. Very good for discrete-ish street photography. EDIT: Also, it's strange seeing you use a different camera than your usual Olympus.
Hi Robin, I don’t think it’s hype I remember some RU-vidrs like Kai W reviewed the Canon 40mm and the Pentax 40mm, he even compared them all in several years ago. I did notice some 40mm vintage lenses like the Pentax-M 40mm going up in value in the last few years. The Lumix 20mm F1.7 also got plenty of praise for it’s IQ. A lot of 40mm are pancake lenses or close to it that’s also an appeal for street shooters. It’s a nice focal length for street, the old Pentax Ltd lens has nice character. I picked up a Voightlander Nokton 40mm for around 200USD, I can’t imagine a 40mm having better IQ and character than that, for street I’ll stick to my GR III.
Thanks Robin for a very interesting video. I have never used a 40mm lens or its 20mm MFT equivalent. I don’t feel a need for it, nor do I especially like that focal length for my street photography.
You made some great photos with the 40mm I do understand what you mean about the fuji x100 ,, 35mm is hard for me to get used to also ,, i recently got the 28mm for my Nikon and luv it.. although I got a 50mm with my first camera Nikon F (in 1967) I find it (as your friends) say a bit tight for my taste now.. I may try a 40mm... VIVA !!!! I always enjoy Your Perspective :) :) (as a journalist and freelance photog in the 70's to mid 90's I only shot on my two Nikons with a 24mm on one camera and a 105mm on the other) it forced me to work within those parameters (rather than a zoom on one) I wanted a different perspective than other photogs also !!!!!
With the 15, 20 and 25mm ( m4/3) the spread is good, in street 25mm is too direct to the subject and don't give much context. the 20mm pancake (Panasonic) is super sharp but AFF and AFC not allowed, don't have problem with the slow focus cause I fine tune the composition. So the 20, sometimes the 15 and no so often the 25mm.
I disagree, it all depends on how you compose with the 25mm lens. To me it is just wide enough to fit a lot into the frame without excessive distortion, so in terms of composition it is cleaner and easier to manage and exclude unwanted elements.
@@robinwong A fact is that the majority of your photos are take "front" "straight" to the subject and I personally avoid this, mostly my position start of 10-30 degree on the side of the subject. A personal taste.
that 40mm pancake by Canon is simply amazing !!!!....I put it on my 1DX MK III body and it has been on that body for over one year ....the 40mm is a better perspective than a 50mm...... I have noticed that with 50mm I sometimes I have no room to backup or feel that I have no room .....
While I like the 40mm a lot, and I find it pretty flexible when I shoot weddings, Robin I think is 100% right when he states that it doesn't replace the 35 or 50. I never really got the suggestion that the 40 can replace those lenses; in the same way a 28mm doesn't really replace a 35 or 24 in my opinion. I think one of the big takeaways in this video is for someone to pick up an unfamiliar focal length used/on sale, and just have a go. Don't spend $1500 on THE BEST lens/focal length that you're curious about. Grab something within your budget, and experiment. You'll learn a lot. I love the 40mm, and I get along with it better than the 50mm. But I'm also primarily a 24mm shooter. So maybe that has something to do with it. We're all different and see things differently. Thanks for the video, Robin. :) By the way, as someone who uses 40mm a lot, I like your images here a ton! :)
The part to try, explore and experiment is very important for us photographers. While I have been shooting as a profesisonal photographer for years, I still need to allow myself to try new things, and move out from my comfort zone. I can't just keep using what I have and stay within my fixed routine. Photography is a lot more than that!
Along the line of thought I bought a used Sigma 19mm F2.8 MFT lens (38mm full frame equivalent). Sort of a test drive for the OM 20mm F1.4. I like the Sigma 19mm but unsure about the OM 20mm F1.4. Also I previously tried the Lumix 20mm F1.7. Returned it within days because auto focus was to unreliable on my E-M1 MKII.
I believe that everyone loves 40/45mm lenses because they are the pancakes - the smallest lenses that you can fit your FF Canon or Pentax... EF-S has 24mm pancake that is loved by Canon crop shooters. I have one 45mm pancake by Pentax and it is fine. I love to fit it on my Pentax MX and shoot film on street.
Awesome video bro. Would love to learn more about your views on the 50mm focal length. I'm relatively new to 50mm and to me there is just something magical about the look and perspective it produces!
I shoot 52 mm on my Pentax (35 mm F2.0 lens). I tried for one day to shoot at 42 mm (28 mm on my zoom lens). I really didn't like it but I realize that one day doesn't make a summer! It does seem like 40 mm is getting hyped!
You never mentioned the Pentax 43mm f/1.9 ltd, ok slightly longer but close enough to 40mm IMHO. It's an excellent lens and has been in the Pentax arsenal for decades.
I feel that the 40mm for me cannot replace either the 35mm or the 50mm. I use all three focal lengths, but for a lot of what I do I end up using the 35mm. I do like the perspective and the look of the 50mm because there is more compression than with the 35mm or 40mm
I've got a 40mm pancake on my 5D Mark II and it's a fantastic lens. I would like it better if the it could focus closer, but you still get great shots at 0.3m.
I just love my 20mm f1.7. this lens is practically glued to the front of my original OM-D E-M5 and although the focus is a bit slow, I find it adequate for most day-to-day photography using MFT cameras. I also have the OM-D E-M1 MK2 and in that camera I prefer to use my Lumix 25mm f1.7. but I have to confess I don't really like the 50mm focal length. To me the 40mm perspective is the Goldilocks of focal length. Not to wide, not to narrow, just right.
Glad that the 40mm works for you. My money maker, and the shots that my clients like always come from the 50mm perspective. Also for my own personal projects, my favourites are from my Olympus 25mm lenses. Anything wider usually gets chucked
@@robinwong That's a good point, I don't work with photography, I'm just an enthusiast, and the 40mm perspective works great for me on my travels, family photos (especially indoors), etc. But I understand that in a professional environment, the 50mm perspective might produce images that sell more. Keep up the great work. Love your channel and I follow you since 2014 (before your youtube channel) when I got my OM-D E-M5.
To me, 40mm is the best, super flexible. Except for very tight spaces. Pana 1.7 autofocus is not very good but the image quality is nice. For slow shooters, no problem.
The Panasonic 20mm f1.7 was the first prime I bought for my Olympus camera (Then my first PEN, now EM5ii). I have been using it for years now. I do a lot of street fotografy with it. Yes, it has slow AF voor video but I do not film a lot. I think 20 is perfect for street fotography, for me it is not a hype.
I used the Lumix 20mm f1.7 for about 10 months straight. I liked the form factor of the lens but, the focal length? Not for me... I ended up going for an M. Zuiko 25mm f1.8 later on.
It may be somewhat hyped at this day and age, but both Pentax and Olympus had 40 mms back in the analog days, both of them pancakes, so it is not a new "reach" but it has probably reached the mainstream user in these days. Why? Your guess is as good as mine, but it could have something to do with offering something "new" as to angle of view. Anecdotally speaking, I was blown away by the Oly 17mm when I got that having grown up on the prime trio, but with a 28 instead of a 35 mm Wide angle. For me, when I got the Oly, it offered literarily a new angle to view the world and I was instantly smitten by that. I think it is much the same with the 40mm these days, it offers a different perspective of the world, with a twist of the wrist, so to speak. Perhaps not much, but it makes for an easy approach for some "fresh" takes. :-)
The 40mm focal length is definitely not a replacement for the 50mm focal length, but for me personally it has replaced the 35mm focal length. I really enjoy using the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 (apart from the focusing speed) when I want to go wider than the 25mm Olympus f1.8. The pancake form factor works really great too on small Olympus PEN and EM10 bodies. I would buy a mk 3 version of the 20mm f1.7 with improved focusing speed in a heartbeat
Robin, could you maybe make a video on how you edit your photos? I have always admired the colours and the pop in your photos and I can't seem to figure out how to do it.
As much as I'd like to do a post-processing video, I did not do anything special to the images. The goal is to make the images look as realistic as possible, and the cameras are already very good to capture that. I did a little bit of contrast boost, that's all.
