Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Pentax Lens Review Database » Film Era Pentax K-Mount Lenses » M Prime Lenses
SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8 Review RSS Feed

SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8

Sharpness 
 8.1
Aberrations 
 8.2
Bokeh 
 7.8
Handling 
 7.7
Value 
 7.3
Reviews Views Date of last review
32 101,186 Thu December 29, 2016
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average User Rating
75% of reviewers $96.45 7.73
SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8

SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8
supersize
SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8
supersize

Description:
Also known as the "pancake," this is the smallest SLR lens that Pentax ever produced. It includes all the features of any other M lens.

In 2006, it was superseded by an even smaller DA version, but that version did not feature an aperture ring.



SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8
Image Format
Full-frame / 35mm film
Lens Mount
Pentax K
Aperture Ring
Yes (no A setting)
Diaphragm
Automatic, 5 blades
Optics
5 elements, 4 groups
Mount Variant
K
Max. Aperture
F2.8
Min. Aperture
F22
Focusing
Manual
Min. Focus
60 cm
Max. Magnification
0.08x
Filter Size
49 mm
Internal Focus
No
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)

APS-C: 39 ° / 33 °
Full frame: 57 ° / 48 °
Hood
RH-R49
Case
Hard case HA-90B
Lens Cap
Plastic clip-on
Coating
SMC
Weather Sealing
No
Other Features
Diam x Length
63 x 18 mm
Weight
110 g
Production Years
1976 to 1984
Engraved Name
smc PENTAX-M 1:2.8 40mm
Product Code
20167
Notes
Lens was sold without hood. The folding rubber hood RH-A49 fits
Features:
Manual FocusAperture RingFull-Frame SupportDiscontinued
Price History:



Add Review of SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8
Author:
Sort Reviews by: Date | Author | Rating | Recommendation | Likes (Descending) Showing Reviews 1-15 of 32
New Member

Registered: February, 2013
Posts: 20
Lens Review Date: December 29, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: size, size, size :)
Cons: 5-bladed iris ain't ideal (but better than 6)
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 7    Value: 7    Camera Used: Pentax MX, Fuji X-M1   

Nifty little lens which just got a new lease of life on my Fuji X-M1, just look/click at the following picture why:


Plenty sharp from F5.6, impeccable coatings (what else would you expect from Pentax), handling is a bit challenging because of it's size, but this lens IS about size...
   
New Member

Registered: June, 2016
Posts: 1
Lens Review Date: December 9, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: size and field of view
Cons: cost
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 8    Value: 8    Camera Used: ME Super and MX   

I bought mine from Ffordes in 2007 for £90 in excellent condition as I wanted a small versatile lens for my ME Super for a holiday I was going on. I was only taking 1 camera and lens. Previous experience has taught me that the ideal focal length for a single lens/camera combination on 35mm is the range 40-45 for general scenic shots in the UK. On the continent I prefer a longer FL, say 55mm. This is because of the scale of the land/cityscape here is smaller than continental Europe or northern America. For outdoor photography the max aperture is plenty adequate.
I have not done any tests on this lens' optical quality. In my experience this lens produces perfectly acceptable images on 35mm film at all apertures in general walk around photography. In part, a reason I wanted one is that several years ago I remember an "opening shot " double spread image taken with one in Photography Monthly which was stunning. It was a picture of somewhere in the Lake District with sun breaking through clouds.
In terms of handling, it is not so easy to focus as a more normal sized lens but its not a significant problem. You can either use zone focusing as the DOF is quite deep or just take a fraction of a second longer to focus.
The build quality is as good as all other M series lenses I have used, certainly a lot better than the newer FA or DA series,excluding the special edition models. Its a lot better built than my Zeiss 45mm f2.8.
I've played around with it on my KM and KX bodies but it just feels and looks all wrong, but on my ME Super and MX its lovely and balanced. I can't see the point of using this lens on digital at all.
If you think small is beautiful, you really want one of these lenses in good condition for your ME Super or MX.
I paid top price for mine back in 2007, but I haven't regretted it one bit!
   
New Member

Registered: November, 2014
Posts: 3
Lens Review Date: July 12, 2016 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $50.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: really flat
Cons:
Sharpness: 8    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 8    Value: 9    Camera Used: K-30 and film   

Great little lens. I use it often for 35mm film, and is a nice light general purpose on DSLR.
Put it on f/8, 250th ISO 100 and its a simple walk-around point and shoot.
At 40mm it is a "nearly wide angle", with great depth of field. The image quality is very good.
It seems quite resistant to flare, and colours are as one would expect from an SMC lens.

This shot is taken with Pentax ME Super, XP2 film, scanned at 2100dpi.



This shot is taken with K-30.

   
New Member

Registered: December, 2013
Posts: 11
Lens Review Date: November 28, 2015 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: N/A 

 
Pros:
Cons:

I've owed my MX from new when it first came out and still going strong. It came with the standard f 1.7 50mm. Some years ago I purchased a f1.4 50mm , although excellent , it made the camera front heavy and unbalanced. Recently I began to use again an old f2 I had neglected .[All the above are manual SMC.] I find the f2 excellent in terms of lightness and compactness and seems to suit the design of the camera body . This lens I think is a better alternative to the pancake.I remember when the pancake came out I was warned off it by my camera shop . Now it seems popular. Times change. As an aside , I purchased the MX as a first SLR because of it's very compactness being used to rangefinder cameras all the hitherto SLRs , FTb , Nikon F2 , were monsters to me . [ Small hands.] And so the pancake attracted me but I was persuaded instead to buy the F2 . Quite right I think looking back.
   
Site Supporter

Registered: October, 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,124

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: August 12, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $93.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Excellent build, small size and focal length on film.
Cons: All the negatives associated with buying a manual focus pancake lens with no "A" setting.
Camera Used: Pentax film bodies (K1000, KM, KX, K2, K2DMD, MX, LX, Super A, P50)   

The M40/2.8 was released in 1976 and remained in production until 1984. It was the first Pentax pancake lens and the smallest in height.* A new digital optimized version the DA40/2.8AL, was released in 2004 and remains in production today. * Excluding the Takumar 18mm fisheye lens from 1963.


Optics:
Decent optics and the M40/2.8 is sharpest at f/11 and pretty good at f/8 & f/16. At f/11 its center/edge sharpness can compete with any of the other M Series non macro 50mm lenses. Outside of f/8 to f/16 is where things are just average optically!

Focal Length:
On film this is a wider normal/standard lens and is perfect for street shooting. On APS-C you get the opposite, a long normal/standard lens. The 40mm FL on film is the main reason to buy this lens, as itís just about perfect.

Build:
Excellent all metal build in a very small package!

Usage/Handling:
The M40/2.8 being a pancake lens, is pretty hard to focus and adjust the aperture. This however is pretty obvious when you buy a pancake lens, so the poor handling comes with the territory. I tend to use hyperfocal focusing & aperture priority a lot with the M40/2.8, to compensate for the small size. I leave the aperture ring at f/11, move the focus infinity mark to 11 on the distance scale and set the camera to the auto shutter setting. No metering and everything from 7 feet/2.1 meters to infinity will be in focus, so I only have to adjust for close-up shots.

There was one lens hood that was usable on the M40/2.8, the 49mm round rubber hood made for the other normal/standard M Series 50mm lenses.

Speed:
F/2.8 is not very fast for a normal/standard prime, but again this is a pancake lens and if it was any faster its size would increase. So all things considered, f/2.8 is adequate for a pancake lens. Note the much newer DA version still has a maximum aperture of f/2.8.

The M40/2.8 vs my other similar FL normal/standard primes:
I also own the FA43/1.9 and the FA43 is better in all respects except for size (if you are looking for a small lens) and build, but thatís not really a surprise as one is an elite auto focus lens and the other designed specifically as a pancake. Both focal lengths are superb on film!

Summary:
I would only recommend the M40/2.8 for a film shooter, as the DA40/2.8 is probably a better choice for digital. As I only shoot film Iím quite happy with the M40/2.8 and using it as a street lens in the fashion I indicated above. You just have to accept if you buy this lens you are getting poor handling, average overall optics and a slower speed.

I would rate the M40/2.8 Pancake lens an 8.5, rounded down to an 8.

Price:
I bought my M40/2.8 from a local seller I know on Craigslist and paid $120 CDN. It was in mint condition.

Sample shots taken with the M40/2.8. Photos are medium resolution scans from original negatives and slides. The first shot was taken around Vancouver, Canada and the second in NYC.


Camera: Super A Film: CineStill 50 ISO: 50




Camera: Super A Film: Fuji Provia 100F ISO: 100

   
New Member

Registered: March, 2014
Posts: 1
Lens Review Date: January 14, 2015 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Tack sharp from f/5.6
Cons: A tad soft wide open
Sharpness: 8    Handling: 8    Value: 6   

Judging from previous reviews, I only expected mediocre sharpness from this lens. And sure enough, at f/2.8 the lens is somewhat unimpressive.

However, when stopped down to f/4 the quality improves vastly, and by f/5.6 the lens is sharp across most of the (APS-C) frame, with an exceptionally sharp center.

Handling is similar to other M primes, although the focus ring is almost a bit too small.
   
Senior Member

Registered: November, 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 167
Lens Review Date: November 23, 2014 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $90.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Vibe, usability
Cons: Vignetting, if you dislike vignetting
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 10    Bokeh: 10    Handling: 10    Value: 10    Camera Used: MX, ME Super, K01   

I don't understand people who dislike this lens.

Mine is sharp. Very sharp. I shoot mostly film with a little digital on my K01. I've also owned the DA40XS, which I sold because I didn't like it any better than this lens. I've owned this one for maybe two years now, and ran tons of film through it.

The M40 has a lot of "mojo" or "vibe." Maybe the vignetting is part of its unique look. The focal length is nearly perfect; 40mm is such a natural FL. The amazingly smooth bokeh is definitely part of this lens's personality.

I should say that I have owned Super Tak 50/1.4 and 105/2.8, M 50/1.4, /1.7, and /2, K 35/3.5, M 20, M28/3.5, M28/2.8, and the M35/2. I also own a Minolta system with a bunch of glass. I would sooner stick this lens on my camera and go shoot than almost any of the above (except maybe the K 35).

Its handling is quirky, but soon becomes transparent. As a lens that you can use every day, it is a very good value.
   
Forum Member

Registered: September, 2013
Posts: 59
Lens Review Date: December 28, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $130.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: very compact and sharp
Cons: not detected
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 9    Bokeh: 9    Handling: 10    Value: 10    Camera Used: LX, ME-super, K-30   

good lens, with ME-super is very light kit to travel.
sharp and easy-to-use.
Little slow? yes, but at the day light You never open more than f/5.6.
this lens is not for "bokeh-hunters", but for travel and indoor it is great.

I was sold it last month, because now I'm using only DSLR K-30, and obtain auto-focus DA40Lim instead.

there is a BIG pros for M40 and DA40Lim - so small lenses not "scaring" children and other peoples, they never taken seriously so small lens and filling free and naturally.
only one thing - for my big hand tiny focusing ring is to thin
but in any case - it is a very good lens.
   
Pentaxian

Registered: September, 2013
Posts: 817
Lens Review Date: September 15, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Size, Sharpness.
Cons: Doesn't quite focus to infinity on digital.
Sharpness: 10    Aberrations: 9    Bokeh: 7    Handling: 10    Value: 8    Camera Used: P30T, K-x   

Awww, it's sad seeing this lens being marked so low! I picked up one of these in immaculate condition, and it's actually far better than the reviews here would have you believe. The bokeh when stopped down is nothing special, but my copy of this lens is actually sharper than my DA40 limited!

The only real issue I've found, is that on a DSLR, my copy doesn't quite focus to infinity. On film however, this isn't a problem at all. I don't have any problems focussing the 'M', the focus is nicely damped, and whilst the ring is smaller than most lenses, I've never found it to be difficult to get the right focus (Mind you, I tend to manually focus the DA version on DSLR most of the time, so it might just be something I've gotten used to)

The lens is so small, that you'll always be able to find space for it in your bag. Looking at some of the reviews here, and then looking at my copy, makes me wonder if a large number of copies have taken a fair few knocks in their time, having spent most of their life as 'the spare lens' bouncing about at the bottom of a camera bag?

If I was to give the lens a mark on it's own merit, it would be a firm 9. It's extremely sharp, extremely small, has a useful focal length on digital, and can be picked up fairly cheap. Sadly though, I'm going to have to give the lens an 8. The problem really is the DA40 limited. The DA40 outclasses the M40 in almost every way (except sharpness), is a bit smaller, and is much more enjoyable to shoot with. If you shoot manual film cameras, or are on a budget, then the M40 is nice little lens (if you get a good copy). If you only shoot digital, or shoot with an autofocus film body, then the DA40 is likely to be a better choice.
   
New Member

Registered: January, 2012
Posts: 15
Lens Review Date: June 20, 2013 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $100.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very compact & light weight, sharp, Good looking when fitting on DSLR
Cons: Hard to focus
Sharpness: 9    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 10    Value: 8    Camera Used: K10D   

Super compact and light weight. Fitting on DSLR is very good looking.
Cons : Focus is difficult & hard to use, more difficult in low light condition.
   
Junior Member

Registered: August, 2012
Posts: 28
Lens Review Date: April 7, 2013 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: N/A | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Small, well built
Cons: Mediocre optically, very small focusing ring
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 8    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 5    Value: 6    Camera Used: LX, ME Super, *ist DL, K-01   

This lens has only one claim to fame - its size. The downside of this was that the focusing ring is very narrow. Optically it is not stellar although good enough for most purposes, especially when shooting film. I used it a bit back in the film days but it never was one of my most used lenses, I mainly used it when I wanted a compact package. The ME Super with this lens was as compact as you could get with a film SLR. The focal length makes more sense on film than on APS-c digital cameras.
   
Junior Member

Registered: June, 2012
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 36
Lens Review Date: November 14, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 8 

 
Pros:
Cons:

As the other reviewers stated, its problem is a mediocre performance but above average price. I have nothing more to say than that the stated is truth. It doesn't mean it's an optically bad lens. It isn't. But its true potencial is in its size. Put it on a small manual film body and marvel at the size of the combo. Its IQ suits 35mm film better than APS-C digital, as well as its focal lenght. Use it as it is meant to be used and it's worth the money:-)
   
Junior Member

Registered: November, 2012
Location: Cosenza
Posts: 42

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: November 11, 2012 I can recommend this lens: No | Price: $90.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: compact, nice tonality in b/w
Cons: not too sharp
Sharpness: 6    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 8    Value: 6    Camera Used: Canon Eos 5D Mark II, Pentax ME Super   

I had it for a year or so (I love the 40mm focal length), as it made a really nice and compact package on my 5d mk II and, better still, on the ME Super. But I ended up selling it. It has two flaws:

1st flaw (this one only for Canon users)
To use it on a full frame camera you need to remove (better, less messy) or file down the rear fin that commands the aperture, otherwise it will hit the mirror, and badly. I seems to recall that someone ended up with a lens jammed on the camera, too, from what I read elsewhere.

Once removed the fin there is not a problem whatsoever. From what I understand there are no problems in using it on a 1.6x camera, even unmodified (but I didn't try).

2nd flaw
It is a good lens, just not exceptional. And given that you can buy, for a tenth of its money, a Pentax 50mm f/1,7 that not only will be almost the same weight and size but it will be faster, and probably will beat it to death, this pancake it's not a smart buy.

Please, though, take this with a grain of salt: my copy had the focus ring jammed after the previous owner let it fall, and I was able to repair it in a crude but effective way. So maybe my sample was in desperate need of a collimation . But what I read about his lack of sharpness mirrors my own experience with it.
   
Junior Member

Registered: November, 2012
Location: East Coast, Canada
Posts: 26

1 user found this helpful
Lens Review Date: November 4, 2012 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $25.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Compact, Lightweight, Color rendition
Cons: PF wide open, Soft wide open, Fiddly to focus for someone with large hands
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 8    Handling: 7    Value: 7   

Got this lens paired with a Pentax MX (yes.... for $25 ) Quite a compact lightweight combo. Great for street photography because of its small size and unobtrusive looks and the color rendition is also pretty decent. However compactness and good looks come at a price. This lens gives a "normal" FOV, being 40mm and f/2.8 it doesn't give a wide enough angle of view to really use it over the much sharper (and faster) M 50mm f/1.7 or even the f/2. The 40mm exhibits more purple fringing than both 50's, and is much softer wide open. This lens does have a cult following and prices have managed to stay heightened despite its sub par performance compared to other M lenses of similar "length".
   
Veteran Member

Registered: July, 2010
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,501
Lens Review Date: July 15, 2011 I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: N/A | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Small... Stopped down it's sharp-ish...
Cons: Thin focus ring... Bokeh not amazing... Colour rendition
Sharpness: 7    Aberrations: 7    Bokeh: 5    Handling: 5    Value: 5    Camera Used: K-x - MEsuper - MG   

Like others I'm not keen on using this on a digital camera (K-x in my case)

The bokeh isn't great and at 2.8 it isn't too sharp (read soft)... The centre does sharpen up at f5.6 but edges and corners do remain slightly soft at all apertures...

Edit: the use of a standard metal screw-in hood has dramatically improved sharpness... It's still no razor of a lens but no longer a slouch

It's normally paired up to my black MEsuper and using Ilford XP2-400 I've obtained some cracking shots... Enough contrast for good B&W street shots...

Its size on the MEsuper make a pretty damn perfect 'inconspicuous street shooting rig'... Nobody ever seems to notice me with this combo...

On my K-x shooting RAW I can't use AWB with this lens... Everything comes out a bit yellow... Set the WB manually and colour rendition is much improved... A longer process...
If you're a DSLR only shooter... Maybe not for you...

If you want it for a 35mm camera its worth what I paid... I will make a profit when I sell as prices on this lens are simply crazy... So if you can pick one up... (NB: I've noticed a few attached to MEsupers that ebayers tend to miss go very cheaply)

I may sell at some point but it does raise conversation among my shooting buddies when it comes out...

(I have made a few edits to my original review and dropped the score to a 7... It is a lens with character and although not 'stellar' in terms of IQ it is not a dog of a lens however much I appear to have slated it...
Add Review of SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:53 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top