Canon 40mm f2.8 vs Voigtlander 40mm f2.0: Quick comparison

<p>Here's my quick comparison of the two lenses. The result was surprising to me!<br>

http://photopensieve.blogspot.com/2012/06/canon-40mm-f28-vs-voigtlander-40mm-f20.html</p>

<p>Nice comparison! Having to switch AF off before manual focus on the Canon is a bit of an inconvenience.</p>

<p>Lovely comparison indeed!</p>

<p>Nice work. Thanks for the comparison.</p>

<p>Indeed. Thank you!</p>

<p>Also, I was under the distinct impression (from Roger's take, and a couple other reviews) that FTM focusing was available w/ the new STM focusing on this lens. </p>

<p>Oh, sorry guys, my bad. I checked again, and you CAN override the autofocus. I updated my review. But it's not exactly similar to manual focusing using other Canon lenses. I'm not sure if it "focuses by wire", or not.</p>

<p>Hey, this little $200 lens could be another of the classic, cheap EF lenses. </p>

<p>If the 50mm f/1.8 is the "plastic fantastic" or the "nifty fifty" and the 35mm f/2 is the "thrifty-35" (OK, I think I made that one up), then what can this one be called?</p>

<p>the "fabulous forty"?</p>

<p>? ?</p>

<p>Here's a shot, straight out of camera.<br>

<a title="Gay Pride NYC 2012 - 1 by Alireza202, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7130/7436529892_e35cc1333a_z.jpg" alt="Gay Pride NYC 2012 - 1" width="477" height="640" /></a><br>

I like the "punch" in this lens!</p>

<p>In your conclusion you label the voigtlander 20f2 instead of 40f2.</p>

<p><strong>Alireza</strong>, it looks like your crops in the review have some sharpening applied... </p>

<p>Alan: Thanks.<br>

Ruslan: Yes, both lenses are that sharp! The only sharpening, as mentioned, is the default sharpening of LR (25 points).</p>

<p>Nice review indeed. Very useful contrary to many others. I also agree that this lens begs for a cheaper FF camera. Awaiting an updated 35/2, how does one justify owning both the 40/2.8 and the old 35/2? Video might be the answer. Does anyone know how it focuses while recording on a non-650D body?</p>

<p>Thanks for the comparison.</p>

<p>I just received the 40mm STM from B&H today. I have to say that Im enthusiast about the size and construction. The focus ring works great for me; the lens is so short that you can adjust the focus with your forefinger while holding the camera body.<br /> <br />I have owned the Voigtlander 40/2 as a walk around lens. It as nice lens, the built and handling are amazing but I switched the EF 35/2 tired of out of focus shots. Now this new 40/2.8 STM seem to be the perfect walk around lens, non intrusive, small, compact and AF!</p>

<p>I go to NY for a four days trip this weekend so I will have the chance to test the lens intensively.</p>

Alireza, is your photo showing me some MAJOR chromatic aberration?

<p>Rick, I don't think so. I've seen much worse than this...</p>

<p>Nice review Thanks! I've been eying many of the Voightlander lenses and a body for a long time. However just a couple weeks a go I got the 40mm f/2.8 because I just got too frustrated with small P&S cameras outdoors as I start doing some general photography again. OK it looks a little funny mounted on a huge dSLR, but I got over it quickly. I'll see if it means I take my SLR out with me more often. I could have just mounted a 50mm, but right now I thought a little wider standard would be better for my interests. After I use it for a while, I'll probably do some comparisons with the 32 f/2 and 50mm lenses to see if I put it in my specialty bag or use it rather than 50mm. If it was faster it certainly would have been nice, but it's such a great deal now I think they made the right choice.</p>