40mm Pancake lens.

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>It's certainly possible a Canon MILC could be built using the t4i sensor (and the 40/2.8 lens), since it has built in phase sensitive AF detectors but I'm sure it would use a new, thinner, set of lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Very likely. I just wish they'd hurry and launch it. </p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim. </p>

[ddomonkos]

<p>My guess is it's an EF lens because the next generation xD crop and FF cameras will support the STM video AF. </p>

[anders_carlsson]

<p>Lenses aren't mutually exclusive of course. Still, for someone (like myself) who's been waiting for upgrades of the 35/2 and any one of the two cheaper 50 lenses -- better build, USM, rounded blades -- this is a very odd offering indeed. The size advantage is moot given the "depths" of current DSLRs. And if you pocket it, where do you put the 15-85, 17-55, 18-200, 24-70, 24-105, 70-XXX or whatever zoom that you're switching from?</p>

[tpurvis]

I degripped an old XT body today, mounted a 50 1.4 and shot today with the frame of mind "what would ths be like if this

lens was half as long, wider and lighter". For 199, I'm in. Don't see the need on my gripped 7d, but a rebel body, heck

yes.

[anders_carlsson]

<blockquote>

<p>Is it really intended for use on an EOS 5D or EOS 1 series body? The EOS 1 series bodies are so big and heavy that a small, light lens won't make them any more portable.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Food for thought: Is it totally impossible that Canon at some point will release a Rebel or 60D-sized full-frame body? I'd totally shelf my MILC plans if they do. Or get both.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<blockquote>

<p>The size advantage is moot given the "depths" of current DSLRs</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not really, all other lenses protrude further out from the body than the grip. The 40mm will not, so it takes up a lot less room depth-wise. </p>

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>The size advantage is moot given the "depths" of current DSLRs</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I - OTOH - agree with that. I look at the total "volume" of lens + body. In that regard, the difference between 50/1.8 and 40/2.8 is not significant IMHO. Sorry Robin.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim. </p>

[db_w]

<p>Just out of curiosity.....why is <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/870179-REG/Canon_40mm_f_2_8_EF_Pancake.html">B&H</a> offering the 40mm Pancake at $199.00?</p>

[phule]

<p>Is that a trick question?</p>