40 mm pentax pancake ?

[Dave Wooten]

Any comparisons or hands on experience with the 40 mm pancake lens of the 70's and the new limited versions?

 

[Ian Grant]

No, but I bought a Pentax MV with the original for my mother, it was a great lens very sharp & contrasty, it had no downside (except the speed) but compared to modern DSLR lenses it's FAST

Ian

 

[Hamster]

The focus ring on the 40 is a bit fiddly to use, but otherwise it gives nice results. Quite happy with mine.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Nice lens just don't try to focus wearing gloves.

 

[JCJackson]

I've had the old version for 30 years. Sharp, good contrast, and sooo compact. With ME or MX you have a package comparable in size to a rangefinder, but with a big, bright viewfinder.

 

[Vonder]

Funny you should ask! I recently purchased a Pentax ZX-60 body to use with the DA 40mm lens. I shot a roll of film with it this weekend. Flare is an issue, but in non-flare-prone shots, this lens excels. I really like the sharpness and the defocussed areas have a nice blur to them too.

I can not detect anything that makes this lens a "DA" which are supposed to be limited to the APS-sized digital sensor. The edges look fine to me, although I haven't inspected them under a microscope.

 

[Galah]

Any comparisons or hands on experience with the 40 mm pancake lens of the 70's and the new limited versions?

Check out this link:
http://www.pentaxuser.co.uk/forum/topic/pentax-smc-m-40mm-f-2-8--pancake--lens--comments--13415

and this one:

Dead Link Removed

 

[Dave Wooten]

Thanks all!

 

[elekm]

I think it's a Tessar design -- at least that's the impression I got after viewing some prints that I took with it.

 

[Steve Roberts]

Any comparisons or hands on experience with the 40 mm pancake lens of the 70's and the new limited versions?

Very neat lenses, and make a very compact unit for a coat pocket when fitted to an M-series body. They can be a bit fiddly with the focussing, but that's a price worth paying for the compactness IMHO. I like the 40mm focal length and sometimes wish there was a normal sized, faster 40mm lens (did Konica once make something along those lines?). Pentax made a snub-nosed case front especially for that lens and M bodies.

Have fun!

Steve

 

[Dave Wooten]

After checking some of the info links posted above, I got also interested in the Konica 40 mm f 1.8 and picked one up on ebay with camera, case and manual for 35.00, excellent condition.

 

[PentaxBlue]

If everyone thinks the M 40 is small, they should see a 18mm f11 takumar fisheye in person. The M40 is like a stack of pancakes. On aps-c, it isn't fishy. It is so thin it lacks a focus ring. I've been looking to snag one ever since I saw a friends.

There are chinon 45mm pancakes out there in K-mounts as well that are interesting lenses.

 

[Dave Wooten]

If everyone thinks the M 40 is small, they should see a 18mm f11 takumar fisheye in person. The M40 is like a stack of pancakes. On aps-c, it isn't fishy. It is so thin it lacks a focus ring. I've been looking to snag one ever since I saw a friends.

There are chinon 45mm pancakes out there in K-mounts as well that are interesting lenses.

Pentx Blue, I havent seen the 18 mm. What other lenses are compatible with the pentax? Who is the manufacturer of the Chinon lenses?

 

[rembrant]

The pancake 40 was always good optically,but no better than the 50 mm alternatives. Now.....on ebay the Pancake goes for 4-5 times the price of a regular 50... quite a bit more than a 50 1.4.

 

[Steve Roberts]

There are chinon 45mm pancakes out there in K-mounts as well that are interesting lenses.

Last week I saw a Cosina 40mm pancake lens in a secondhand shop. It looked (without comparing them side by side) identical to the Pentax item. Certainly from a few feet away you couldn't have told them apart. Pentax seconds, knocked out cheap to Cosina, perhaps???

Steve

 

[elekm]

To add to my previous comments.

It's a good lens with compactness being its primary feature. Optically, it's very good. However, it's a bit slow at f/2.8, and its optical performance in no way matches its lofty price. It's good, but not that good. A standard f/2.0 50mm (most are copies of the Carl Zeiss Planar) will be a much better performer. And that focusing ring is very narrow.

The lens is a bit of a cult item, and that explains the selling prices that you see today.

 

[dynachrome]

I think my favorite slow standard lens is the original 55/1.8 SMC Pentax. To my eye it's even better than the 50/1.7 SMC M. Recently I got a 50/1.7 SMC Pentax F. It's supposed to be even better. I'll be using it as a manual focus lens. My shorter standard lenses include a 45/2 Rokkor which needs to be closed down only a little to be pretty sharp, a 40/1.8 Konica Hexanon and a 45/2.8 GN Nikkor C. The 40 Hexanon is an excellent lens optically but not a star mechanically. The GN Nikkor isn't to interesting to me for the GN feature but it has a nice look of its own especially its out of focus rendition. I'd like to get a 45/2.8 Tessar for my Yachica SLRs.

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

The old M 40/2.8 (from seventhies) and new Limited 43/1.9 are good for 35 mm cameras, particularly the 43/19, very excellent lens. The DA 40/2.8 is designed for the APS-C digital sensor and not cover the full frame 35 mm.
Ciao.
Vincenzo