Nikon's Nice Move (the New 40mm f/2)

Nikon has, as per its earlier promise, released a highly sensible everyday normal lens for full-frame Z-mount that happens to have my personal favorite spec: 40mm ƒ/2.

Forty millimeters splits the difference nicely between 35mm and 50mm. When I shot with a Leica M6 and owned both the 35mm Summicron and the 50mm Summicron, I was forever torn over which lens to put on the camera. And ƒ/2 is perfect because then the lens is fast enough but not too big.

Background
I'm probably as much an expert on 40mm ƒ/2 lenses as anyone, only because I've been obsessed with them for such a long time. I've owned and used a large number of them over many years, whether the specification was exact or merely close, or whether it was a digital equivalent. These ranged from the Leica 40mm Summicron-C for the CL rangefinder and the 40mm ƒ/2 OM Zuiko to the Pentax 43mm Limited, on into the digital era with lenses like the Panasonic 20mm for Micro 4/3 and the Zeiss 24mm for Sony...among many others. I've owned many older examples such as the 40mm ƒ/1.7 on the Canon G-III 17 fixed-lens rangefinder of 1972 and the 42mm ƒ/1.7 on the earlier Olympus 35 SP.

Of course I've also used a great many 35mm, 45mm, and 50mm lenses too. It's the range in which I'm most at home, and I've been writing about equipment—lenses especially—since 1988. As to which one is best of all, I do have a clear all-time favorite, but I'm not going to say what it is. I don't want to do anything to encourage its prices to spike. Read on for more about that!

My portrait of Sally at the time of our visit.
Shot with a Nikon N8008 and 85mm ƒ/1.8.

A casual word
What got me started? In the 1980s I visited the American photographer Sally Mann at her cabin on the Maury River in Virginia. One of my photo students, Lely Constantinople, had gotten a case of hero-worship, so I simply wrote to Sally and asked if we could come visit. Sally generously invited us to come for a few days. I slept in the woods in a tent! There was no room for a non-family male indoors. Lely ended up working for Sally for a while.

Sally's artwork was eventually done with a large-format 8x10, of course, but she started out her career doing photographic odd jobs around her home town of Lexington with a 35mm. She shot Olympus, and her favorite lens was the 40mm ƒ/2 OM Zuiko, which she said was "about right"—it had no trace of the wide-angley feeling that 35mm's sometimes have, but not quite as restricted an angle of view as a 50mm. I've owned no fewer than six of them over the years. One of my best scores was that after the price had risen to the $500 range I found one marked $55 in an out-of-the-way camera store in Chicagoland.

Curiously, the OM Zuiko 40mm ƒ/2 was not popular when it was new. Apparently no one quite knew what to make of the in-between focal length, or the "pancake" form-factor, with the odd aperture ring at the very end of the lens mount (you screwed the lens hood directly into the aperture ring, and could change the aperture by turning the lens hood! I've never seen that on any other lens). I later learned that the production run was 3,000 units, 1,000 of which were for North America. I recall seeing the lens selling on closeout for $69, a steep discount, in the small-print discount ads in the back of Modern Photography and Popular Photography magazines. They went begging for what seemed like forever, being listed month after month and, if memory serves, year after year.

Lately, the very same lens has been all the range among DP's (directors of photography, i.e., cinematographers) tired of "perfect" rendition and searching for lenses with a "look," and the old 40mm ƒ/2, has been all the rage, with used ones selling recently for at least $2,900. I believe several sold for north of $3,400, but those have scrolled off eBay's records now. And today, of course, a 40mm ƒ/2 is the new "nifty fifty." It just doesn't rhyme, is all.

The new Nikkor-Z
Sadly, to me anyway, Nikon has not yet to my knowledge published the block diagram of the new lens (six elements in four groups), nor has it published MTF charts. [CORRECTION: published here—thanks to Andre Y. for this.] From what we do know, however, the new Nikkor-Z 40mm ƒ/2 ticks all of my personal boxes:

• It's small, slightly less than two inches long (45.5mm).
• It's light, only six ounces (170g).
• It's affordable at $300.
• It focuses close, to less than one foot (.29m).
• It has internal focusing and is dust and droplet resistant (although not fully waterproof—that's OK).
• Its AF is quiet.
• It takes the traditional 52mm standard Nikon filters.

In addition, the "focusing ring" can be assigned to manual focus, or programmed to adjust aperture, ISO, or exposure compensation. I don't know if that's usual for Nikkor-Z lenses, but it sounds like a nice touch.

B&H is closed for the religious holiday, but Amazon is guaranteeing its pre-order price.

All things considered
Finally I'll just note that the sample pictures provided by Nikon for this lens are solid tier better than the usual, and two tiers above the general run of the lamentable "test shot" genre (which I am guilty of perpetrating too, of course). I particularly like the shot of with the two figures way back in the bokeh. To whomever is responsible, good job.

Of course I haven't seen or shot with the new 40mm, and image quality would overshadow everything else. But I'll approve and applaud on principle. Nice move, Nikon.

Mike

P.S. Sally Mann also paid me one of my favorite compliments I've even gotten about my writing. "Your writing is so...tasty," she said. It's remained my goal ever since.  :-)

Book o' the Week:

Andy Warhol: Polaroids 1958–1987. "Carrying a Polaroid camera from the late 1950s until his death in 1987, [Andy Warhol] amassed a huge collection of instant pictures of friends, lovers, patrons, the famous, the obscure, the scenic, the fashionable, and himself...this book features hundreds of these instant photos." Any book with Grace Jones on the cover has to be cool.

The above is a link to Amazon from TOP. Here's Andy Warhol: Polaroids 1958–1987 at The Book Depository. The following logo is also a link:

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

James: "Mike said, 'And today, of course, a 40mm ƒ/2 is the new "nifty fifty." It just doesn't rhyme is all.' I'm sticking with my usual 'Sporty Forty.'  :-)  "

Mike replies: That works! Where were you when I was titling this post?  ;-)

Richard Parkin: "Or ‘Shorty Forty’ for the pancakey ones?"

Aaron: "As much as I love 40mm lenses—the Panasonic 20mm (Micro 4/3) continues to be one of my favorite lenses of all time—Nikon's stellar Z 35mm ƒ/1.8 S will be a tough act to follow. Field of view and aperture differences are small, though we don't really know the full extent of image quality and performance of the 40mm yet. If the 40mm was a true pancake, I would have already pre-ordered; as it stands, I'll wait on some user reviews of the 40mm before I consider adding to or replacing my 35mm S."

Earl Dunbar: "As if the asking price for the Zuiko 40mm ƒ/2 couldn’t go much higher—there you go!  😂  "

Mike replies: That's pretty nuts. I wonder if these outlier asking prices actually have a psycho-marketing underpinning...as in, maybe a much higher price signals to some buyers that the sample really is superior to all the others—in this case, all the others currently listed in the low $2,000's. You'd have to have a buyer who is rich enough to be immune to any sort of price sensitivity to a bauble in this price range.

But what I really like is the pop-up next to the "Make Offer" box:

Given that the cheapest one of these lenses I ever bought cost $55, do you think he'd take $55?

Andrew Kochanowski: "Mike, I saw an earlier post of yours about the Oly 40mm ƒ/2 selling for insane prices on eBay, so I rummaged around for mine in the back of the drawer. I bought it for maybe $350 some years ago more out of nostalgia than anything else. I shot with another sample in the late 1990s on an OM-4Ti and liked the way it felt more than any concrete reason.

"I posted a simple eBay ad with a Buy It Now price of $2,ooo and waited for the order. And waited, and waited. I did get over a dozen 'offers' of about $1,500 to $1,700 from dealers or tire kickers, and long emails how I am being unrealistic and so forth. eBay had turned into Craigslist so fast I didn't even notice!

"So don't feel bad. There may have been a few sales in crazy numbers but only to crazy collectors. I may just dust off my old OM-4ti and shoot a few rolls with the lens just for the heck of it."

Comments

[Christopher J May]

Nikon Rumors has the block diagram and MTF published:

https://nikonrumors.com/2021/09/14/nikon-officially-announced-the-nikkor-z-40mm-f-2-lens-available-for-pre-order.aspx/#respond

[William Schneider]

I found a lens diagram and MTF curves for the new 40mm. Scroll down about a 1/4 page...

https://nikonrumors.com/2021/09/14/nikon-officially-announced-the-nikkor-z-40mm-f-2-lens-available-for-pre-order.aspx/

I pre-ordered one from B&H yesterday before they closed, using your "spiff" link of course.

[James]

Mike said "And today, of course, a 40mm ƒ/2 is the new "nifty fifty." It just doesn't rhyme is all."

I'm sticking with my usual 'Sporty Forty' :-)

[Andre Y]

Mike, Nikon has indeed published the optical diagram and MTF chart for the 40/2: https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/z-mount/z_40mmf2/spec.htm

I preordered mine the night it was announced and it looks like it will be a nice character lens.

[Dave Stewart]

Pre-ordered yesterday.

[Dave Stewart]

Block diagram and MTF charts at a few sites, including here: https://photographylife.com/news/nikon-z-40mm-f-2-announcement

[Tom Duffy]

For years, I used a 40mm Summicron, intended for the Leica CL on my M6. I had a little of the nub on the lens mount ground down so that the 35mm frame lines appeared rather than the 50mm default. Since the frame lines on the Leica M were very conservative, the 35mm frame lines exactly matched the 40mm field of view.
In DSLR days, I loved the 40mm Canon pancake lens. Very sharp and tiny. I'm using the lens on my R5 but it's a bit of a disappointment. Since the EF to RF adaptor has to be substantial enough to support a large EF lens, I now have a very heavy pancake lens. Still very sharp though. I've also come to realize that the 40mm Canon is slow to focus compared to the RF 24 to 105 f4 kit lens. This is not a function of the adaptor but rather that the 40 was never that fast to begin with. Congratulations to Nikon for making such a nice 40mm lens.

[David Wilson]

My kind of lens. I pre-ordered it as soon as I saw the announcement. If it’s as good as the majority of Nikkor Z lenses, it’ll be great; the compact dimensions and negligible weight will be a welcome change.

[Daniel]

Not sure about your favorite lens but nice to see a good images of one of our favorite photographers.

[Moose]

"Curiously, the OM Zuiko 40mm ƒ/2 was not popular when it was new. Apparently no one quite knew what to make of the in-between focal length, or the "pancake" form-factor . . ."

One answer to "Why" this unusual design becomes clear when one looks at lens diagrams. In order to clear the mirror, SLR lenses go to retrofocus designs @ 35 mm, which makes them much larger than similar FL/aperture RF lenses.

40mm was likely chosen as the shortest non-retrofocus FL that could be designed for an SLR body. Next, F2 is likely the fastest that could be designed without needing at least one more element for acceptable IQ, thus raising size, defeating the design goal, and raising price, possibly defeating the marketing goal.

Although admired recently for its "Look", when the lens was released, it was panned for its modest optical performance. You can get some idea of Oly's target for the lens from their Sales Information Book, where "Applications" are listed as:

General photography.
Interior photograhy.
Snapshots and family gatherings.

Others made similar lenses. One I know is the Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, with similar optical design, identical weight and just a tiny bit larger.

Definitely soft @ f1.8, improving as it's stopped down. A much cheaper choice for my menagerie of old and less than perfect MF lenses than the Oly.

Not quite as bad as I might like for that group, but the look wide open is a pleasant sort of softness. \;~)>

[Kenneth Wajda]

You do nice work with an 85mm f1.8 as well, Mike. :-) Beautiful portrait of Sally. What was she famous for back in the 80s, that your student wanted to meet her? Immediate Family was published in 1992.

[She had published an earlier book, and the work that became "Immediate Family" had been shown around DC. --Mike]

[David Dyer-Bennet]

I can see "shorty forty". "Sporty" doesn't work for me because it makes me think of sports, which for me require long lenses.

Does that make the Panasonic 20/1.7 for MFT the "plenty twenty"? :-) I still use it quite happily, if I'm shooting primes that day.

[John Camp]

Something else that might tick somebody's box: the new Nikon fc also has the Z mount, and will take this lens, where (because the fc is an APS-C) it will be a 60mm equiv. That is *very* tempting.

[Mike Ferron]

I can live with a 50 or a 35 butI cannot live without a 40. I this case a 20 for my G9 but you know what I mean.

[Eolake Stobblehouse]

Wonderful picture of Sally Mann, well done.

(I remember the last time you wrote about her and this lens. So how come I can’t remember if I’ve taken my pills this morning?)

Eolake Stobblehouse

[Eolake Stobblehouse]

By the way, these days I feel restricted by having no zoom, but if I would select one lens, this might be in. (And a 100mm.)

Eolake Stobblehouse

[Sreeram Chandran]

I appreciate everything that you have waxed eloquently about the 40mm lens genre, however I am dismayed by the cheap build quality and the plastic mount which can also be translated as light weight. Of course it costs only 300 bucks but so does the Viltroxes and TT Artisanses which are also priced similarly. How well built they are with their svelte metal bodies and etched numerals!

[Eolake Stobblehouse]

By the way, as for your writing, for years this has been the only blog I still follow.

Eolake Stobblehouse

[albert erickson]

Mike, I actually already order the lens from my local camera store in Columbus Ohio. I own both the 50 s and the 35 s and really don’t need this lens. But yes always a but, I really like the focal length and for the price I can’t not order it. Good post today. Since in your history you were a Nikon shooter, I am surprised you don’t want to try the Z series cameras. I own two, the 6 and 7 2, and use and love them both. All the best. Eric

[Ernest Zarate]

Another great addition to my book collection, thanks to you, Michael! The Warhol Polaroids are amazing in their raw material, immediacy, and accessibility. Only a small number are reaching to the breaking point in being “Artistic.” A great number of them are fascinating, relevant, and compelling.

Your book recommendations over the past years have added many scintillating titles to my bookcases.

A suggestion: do a Bakers Dozen where TOP readers send in photos of their Photography Book Collections. I think it would be interesting and revelatory as to scope, genre, and history to see what your readers have accumulated and value.

Thanks again for bringing this very affordable and well done collection by an important artist to my attention!

[Ernest Zarate]

https://art21.org/watch/art-in-the-twenty-first-century/s1/sally-mann-in-place-segment/

[Christine Bogan]

This Lens is more than interesting for me. Would buy it immediatly. But no Nikon Z in the house. My Panasonic 20 is still in use with Olympus OMD M1 II. Very nice combination. I use it for the most of my pictures.

Christine Bogan

[Rob L.]

This lens is making me regret getting the 50 1.8 a little, which is an amazing lens. A smaller 40 would be nice, but I don't need both 40 and 50. The rationalization required every time to choose which one to use would result in zero pictures being taken.

[cecelia]

The 50 f3.5 on the 100s is pretty close to 40 mm...and makes for a wonderful hand-holdable camera.

[Patrick Perez]

I'm not learned in the ways of lens design, but I thought traditionally a 'pancake' lens in 35mm format was specifically of a Tessar design and 4 elements typically ~45mm in focal length. Maybe it was a symmetrical design? Now it seems just to mean one that is physically short. Of course, I could also be completely mistaken.

Also, if the youths would please stay off of my lawn, I'd appreciate it.

Patrick

[Jeff1000]

Mike, I saw comparison photos between Nikon's new 40/f2, preproduction, and the Z 50/1.8 S. The 50 is a little sharper to my eye, but the 40 has more pleasing bokeh. With its plastic lens mount and all, the Nikon Z 40/f2 seems to be a "character" lens, and is not as achingly sharp as the other Z lenses.

[Earl Dunbar]

As if the asking price for the Zuiko 40/2 couldn’t go much higher - there you go! 😂

[Stan B.]

That should be the maximum allowable size for any prime 50 or under.