| Author: | | New Member Registered: March, 2014 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: January 14, 2015 | Recommended
| 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
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 23, 2014 | Recommended | 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: 62 | | Review Date: December 28, 2013 | Recommended | 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.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2013 Location: Sydney Posts: 844 | | Review Date: September 15, 2013 | Recommended
| 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 | | Review Date: June 20, 2013 | Recommended | 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.
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: August, 2012 Posts: 90 | | Review Date: April 7, 2013 | Not Recommended
| 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
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: November 14, 2012 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
|
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
| | Review Date: November 11, 2012 | Not Recommended | 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
| | Review Date: November 4, 2012 | Recommended | 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 | | Review Date: July 15, 2011 | Recommended
| 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...
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2011 Location: Chester Posts: 719
2 users found this helpful
| | Review Date: June 23, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Size, Sharpn, Colours | | Cons: | Bit slow, bit dire wide open, odd focal length | |
Admittedly, I paid a fairly small price for this, and that came with a flash unit, an ME, and a case, but it was totally infested with fungus. Considered throwing it away because it was soft and unusable, but after scratching the front to a ridiculous degree, I took it apart and cleaned it, because I loved the size, and there's just something enjoyable about it. This was the first time I'd ever taken a lens apart mind you.
And now, for $40, I have what is possible my sharpest lens, with ridiculously vibrant colours, in a tiny package, and I love it. I can see where it's bad rep might come from, as it blooms like flowers in spring wide open and it's soft at the edges, but stop it down and it's incredible, beautiful for flower or general outdoor use.
Lookie here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/coffiend/5864916880/in/photostream for an example, this thing is worth looking at. If you can get hold of one cheaply, even with fungus, I'd snap it up. Take it apart and clean it, it's really easy, and you'll have an excellent little lens, that's a conversation starter too!
| | | | | Forum Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Gwynedd Posts: 93 | | Review Date: June 14, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Size, Weight | | Cons: | Min Focussing Distance, Speed, usual price. | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 8
Value: 6
| |
Some people seem to have quite a downer on this lens and I have no idea why! Personally I think it makes the perfect standard lens due to it's size, especially on an ME body.
Optically it's nice, I find it more than sharp enough wide open. There are the smallest hints of Purple fringing, nothing at all to worry about. Bokeh is OK, not the best, not the worst. Quite swirly, once stopped down a bit the aperture shape can be quite distracting as it's pentagonal.
Ideally it would have been nice to have an f1.8 version, and minimum focussing distance could be lower, but these things would all have compromised the small size, so in that respect you can't really fault it.
I didn't pay a lot for my copy, £42 including an ME body which is well below the current going rate for a lens on it's own. They do tend to be pretty expensive, and not as common as the 50mms. If you prioritise size, then I would definitely reccomend one, however there is no denying a 50mm would be a tad more versatile and cheaper to boot.
Some test samples can be seen (Non working link removed)
| | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2008 Location: Pune Posts: 2 | | Review Date: October 1, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | pan cake, light, sharp | | Cons: | | |
Lens is very light, sharp, nice bokeh, nice colours
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: March, 2009 Location: Australia Posts: 207 | | Review Date: August 16, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Small | | Cons: | Very small | |
I bought this lens on a whim and have only recently had a good chance to use it (with an MX body).
So far, my main use has been on "scenics", using it in hyperfocal distance focusing mode.
After having read some less than complimentary reviews on this lens, I was very pleasantly surprised by the results, which were more than satisfactory IMHO.
I'm not a "pro" and not a "pixel peeper", so I was more than happy with it.
It is TINY and somewhat fiddly to adjust, however, using it in hyperfocal distance focusing mode, it is faster to use than autofocus would be.
As to a lenshood, I found a "standard" (screw-on circular rubber) lenshood designed for a 50mm lens worked perfectly (no vignetting).
BTW, used with colour print film, it is amazing the amount of small detail it will resolve. For example: bare twigs, a duck's feathers and beak, both 20m distant, giving not just the shape but also the subtle shade of colour.
Very satisfied  | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: June, 2010 Location: Tromsų, Norway Posts: 886 | | Review Date: June 13, 2010 | Recommended
| Rating: N/A |
| Pros: | small, light, sharp focus | | Cons: | the focus dial is fiddly | |
I got this lens along with my father's old Pentax LX camera, and i have had fun using it. along with a 13mm extension tube, it makes an awesome macro lens, but it is also very nice to use on its own, because of its small size. i haven't had much success taking closeups with it (alone), but it is a good lens to use for longer range portraits. I look forward to using it with my new K-m!!
| | |
;)
;)
