canon ef 40mm f/2.8 stm vs 50mm f/1.8

[otanes]

Hello everyone. Great forum. Got my first DSLR last week and it came with two lenses 18-55 and 75-300. I still feel like I need a good old fashion 50 mm for indoor and portrait use. I was about to order 50 then I saw there is a new 40mm pancake. After looking at 40mm in the store, I liked it better as far it being a bit wider view, smaller lens. What would be this group recommendation? I am not by any means pro photographer so little subtle differences most likely will not make any difference for my use. Is $50 more for 40mm worth it?

[otanes]

Hello everyone. Great forum. Got my first DSLR last week and it came with two lenses 18-55 and 75-300. I still feel like I need a good old fashion 50 mm for indoor and portrait use. I was about to order 50 then I saw there is a new 40mm pancake. After looking at 40mm in the store, I liked it better as far it being a bit wider view, smaller lens. What would be this group recommendation? I am not by any means pro photographer so little subtle differences most likely will not make any difference for my use. Is $50 more for 40mm worth it?

[otanes]

Sorry wrong forum.

[cicopo]

Although you didn't specify what camera you bought the kit lens tells me it's a 1.6 crop body SO the lenses will act as though they are longer than you are thinking. The 50 will act like an 80 mm lens & the 40 will act like it's 64 mm's. If you are used to a 50 on a conventional SLR you'll need to look for something in the 30-35 mm range. 

[ScottyP]

Both are good lenses for the low cost.  The 50mm is f/1.8, which is more than twice as wide an aperture vs. the 40mm f/2.8.  This means the 50mm will shoot with the same settings at half the light that the 40mm would need.  It also means that the 50mm will have a shallower depth of field, and thus be a bit better at doing that artsy-looking thing where you make the background blurry and the subject popping out of it.  Also, as Cicopo points out, 50mm on a crop is equal to 80mm full frame, which is (almost) within the "ideal" portrait range of 85mm to 135mm.  The 40mm, equal to 64mm on full frame, is a bit shorter than the ideal portrait range. 

On the other hand, 50mm CAN sometimes be a little too long, and not wide enough.  And the 40mm pancake does feel just a bit less fragile tha nthe 50mm does.  If you prefer the 40mm length, and especially if you don't do a lot of portrait-y shots, then maybe that is your lens.

[domina]

If you care about cost a lot, then get the 50/1.8. The 40/2.8 is nice but nothing beats the 50/1.8 in terms of value-for-money.

If you care about low-light photos without a flash, then get the 50/1.8. If light isn't a problem, then get the 40/2.8. This is the most important difference between these lenses: Get the 50 for low-light, otherwise prefer the 40.

If you care about bokeh (background blur), get the 40/2.8, it's much better. The 50/1.8 only has a 5-blade aperture so the bokeh isn't good unless you only shoot wide-open. The 50/1.8's 5-blade aperture sometimes may be good for artistically rendering night lights in the background (to make them 5-pointed circles instead of real circles).

If you care about size, then get the 40/2.8: it's as small as a lens can get. The weight is the same.

and if you care about autofocus noise, then grab the 40/2.8, it's quieter.

No need to get a lens hood for the 40/2.8, but you may want one for the 50/1.8 ($30 more or so).