A New Pancake Lens? [CR1]

[Lee Jay]

Size size size. It makes your rig so small you don't mind leaving the bag behind and just slinging your camera around your neck all day.

I leave my 70-200/2.8 "around my neck" all day, no problem. It's all about placement (shoulder, not neck), and strap (Optech, not Canon).

 

[bseitz234]

Size size size. It makes your rig so small you don't mind leaving the bag behind and just slinging your camera around your neck all day.

I leave my 70-200/2.8 "around my neck" all day, no problem. It's all about placement (shoulder, not neck), and strap (Optech, not Canon).

^^ This a dozen times. I already throw my 28 1.8 in a bag without thinking about it... compared to a 70-200 2.8, which I'm totally comfortable with, any of those USM consumer primes (28, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 gets a tad long with hood, but still not bad) are really pretty portable...

 

[mb66energy]

Do people like these pancakes just because they are cute (no argument there)? What am I missing?

Many people bought the 40 mm just because it was 'cool' and then lost it somewhere between the padding of their camera bags and never realized it went missing :

Funny idea! Just checked if my copy of the 40mm is in the lens drawer where it has to be ... it was there so I haven't lost it in the padding of my back packs

But a real advantage is that at least an APS-C body with that lens fits in a lens compartment so it has solved the problem of carrying two bodies in a not too large photo back pack.

I tend to use 150mm equiv as MY standard lens. The 64mm equiv of this lens on APS-C is a moderate wide angel for ME. Two bodies with 100mm Macro and 40mm pan cake are a good combo for ME.

About a 24mm pan cake: I don't believe that it is possible to produce one at f/2.8 for full frame. Might be an EF-S - so not too interesting for me. I own the old EF 2.8/24mm and this one is at least very light and on the compact side.

 

[ecka]

I would love to have 20mm pancake on FF

I think we'd like a 20mm prime of any sort in FF. Canon hasn't made a new once since 1992.

- A

True, I went for the Sigma, which for all the bad press still is a great and fun lens to have in my kit.

A reasonably priced ($200-$300) EF 20mm STM pancake would be nice.

 

[wickidwombat]

its a shame its 24mm a 20mm or 21mm would have been better... and partnered the 40mm better

but that said 24mm will give 38mm on apsc so its kind of like a aps-c version of the 40 on full frame

 

[pdirestajr]

I wonder what the limits of a "pancake"'lens are. Could they make a 14mm or 85mm pancake?

Since Pentax can make a 70mm f2.4 Pancake and a really small 15mm f4.0 for APS-C, I think it is not completely impossible but the Limiteds are a bit pricy unlike the EF40.

I believe the pentax pancake lenses don't have AF motors built in to the lenses. They are screw drive from the camera. How much space does an AF motor take up?

I have no idea.

 

[rrcphoto]

I would love to have 20mm pancake on FF

I think we'd like a 20mm prime of any sort in FF. Canon hasn't made a new once since 1992.

- A

yeah a nice 20-21mm prime would be sweet - 21mm IS USM

pancakes at with canon's registration distance at 20mm? would have alot of compromises.

the Voigtländer 20mm 3.5 skopar is a good example. vignettes like hell, and blows the snot out at the corners. it makes the 17-40 look good in the corners.

Not sure i would like that versus just having a regular 21mm as sharp as the other current 24,28,35 IS USM lenses - especially for under 1k.

unless this is an EF-S lens and if so, why 24mm? the same as 40mm on full frame perhaps?

for EF-S .. a more likely and needed lens would be a 30mm 1.8 EF-S IS STM (IMO - but that's what everyone in the EF-S world usually complains about not having)

 

[rrcphoto]

I would love to have 20mm pancake on FF

I think we'd like a 20mm prime of any sort in FF. Canon hasn't made a new once since 1992.

- A

yeah a nice 20-21mm prime would be sweet - 21mm IS USM

pancakes at with canon's registration distance at 20mm-24mm? would have alot of compromises.

the Voigtländer 20mm 3.5 skopar is a good example. vignettes like hell, and blows the snot out at the corners. it makes the 17-40 look good in the corners.

Not sure i would like that versus just having a regular 21mm as sharp as the other current 24,28,35 IS USM lenses - especially for under 1k.

unless this is an EF-S lens and if so, why 24mm? the same as 40mm on full frame perhaps?

for EF-S .. a more likely and needed lens would be a 30mm 1.8 EF-S IS STM (IMO - but that's what everyone in the EF-S world usually complains about not having)

 

[cid]

this thread brought me to finding these two lenses

especially the 28mm pancake looks so sweet and I bet it exactly fit my travel bag ;D

You do realize these are MF (with confirmation) only?

yes I do, but I think MF should be fine for travel landscape

 

[Maximilian]

What isn’t getting mentioned anymore is the thorn-in-my-side Canon EF 100-400 replacement.

*lol* How annoying if the pink unicorn would stay a legend...

 

[mrsfotografie]

this thread brought me to finding these two lenses

especially the 28mm pancake looks so sweet and I bet it exactly fit my travel bag ;D

You do realize these are MF (with confirmation) only?

yes I do, but I think MF should be fine for travel landscape

For that, these primes are excellent. I shot this panorama with the Voightlander 40mm at f/5.6 (7 frames combined). Mind, I sold the 40 mm after a year or two because I found I wasn't using it much, and for a walkaround the MF was inconvenient, and the 40mm focal length uninspiring.

 

[tapanit]

Can somebody explain the appeal to me? Not trying to start a flame war, just trying to understand.

A 24mm pancake (which won't have IS) seems a bit redundant with the 24mm 2.8 IS, which by all accounts is a very good lens, has USM and which Canon cut the price to a much more reasonable level. The size seems kind of irrelevant once you put it on a 5D, 6D or other full frame body [...]

The size is important for transportation, not for use. I have the 40mm as well as Voigtländer 20mm, and use them when I need to travel light - as in, hiking in the wilderness with already overweight backpack or struggling with airline carry-on restrictions.

If the rumored 24mm pancake becomes reality and is good enough I'll probably get it and start carrying it instead of the Voigtländer, even though I'd sorely miss the 4mm. A *good* 20mm EF pancake I'd pay serious money for.

I'd also love a bit longer pancake, say 70-100mm, especially a close-focusing one so it'd double as a portable macro.

 

[mrsfotografie]

...70-100mm, especially a close-focusing one so it'd double as a portable macro.

I know you didn't mean it that way, but that reminded me of the 'pancake zoom'.

http://www.olympus-global.com/en/news/2014a/nr140129zuikoede.jsp

http://store.sony.com/e-pz-16-50mm-f3.5-5.6-oss-e-mount-power-zoom-lens-zid27-SELP1650/cat-27-catid-All-Alpha-NEX-Lenses

 

[Sporgon]

Can somebody explain the appeal to me? Not trying to start a flame war, just trying to understand.

A 24mm pancake (which won't have IS) seems a bit redundant with the 24mm 2.8 IS, which by all accounts is a very good lens, has USM and which Canon cut the price to a much more reasonable level. The size seems kind of irrelevant once you put it on a 5D, 6D or other full frame body and for an SL1, you end up with a 37mm lens which is barely in the wide-angle realm.

Do people like these pancakes just because they are cute (no argument there)? What am I missing?

They are cheap to make being a simple, almost unmodified planar design, and were originally popular as a budget prime lens. The Nikkor 50 f2 was a pancake design but set deep into a 50 f1.4 barrel so it didn't look like one, and was sold as a budget option. Pentax introduced the 40mm f2.8 pancake in 1976 to go with its new miniature MX & ME, again a budget option but also very small to complement the small size of the two new cameras. One of the drawbacks of the design is that they are relatively slow, but they are very good across the frame.

So the advantages are small, cheap but high quality. The disadvantage is that they are relatively slow.

How does a 24mm pancake stack up against a very fine 24 f2.8 IS in the line up ? The pancake will have to be cheaper and won't have IS. It may also be slower than 2.8.

This lens would go very well with the SL1, ( 24mm makes more sense than 40 on crop) and indeed my FF cameras because personally speaking I disagree with those that say a 70-200 round your neck all day is no problem. The 40mm pancake on say a 6D radically alters both the weight and balance of the camera, making it very little different to carrying a compact of some sort; you just don't know it's there. It is also very discrete. I find the 40 a great lens for 'walk about', landscape, Panoramics etc. I don't find it that useful for 'events' such as a wedding.

If Canon introduced a high quality, small cheap 24/28 pancake with metal mount I'll buy one.

 

[cid]

this thread brought me to finding these two lenses

especially the 28mm pancake looks so sweet and I bet it exactly fit my travel bag ;D

You do realize these are MF (with confirmation) only?

yes I do, but I think MF should be fine for travel landscape

For that, these primes are excellent. I shot this panorama with the Voightlander 40mm at f/5.6 (7 frames combined). Mind, I sold the 40 mm after a year or two because I found I wasn't using it much, and for a walkaround the MF was inconvenient, and the 40mm focal length uninspiring.

very lovely panorama

recently I tried some travel photography with my 24-70 and 70-200 in the bag, I find 70-200 being quite heavy, but it's very useful FL for me...
24-70 is another story, it's superb lens, but I feel like it's quite heavy and I mostly use it on 24mm while travelling, so I'll buy 16-35 f/4 or something even wider (maybe 15mm Zeiss) or/and even better with some nice pancake

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I would love to have 20mm pancake on FF

I think we'd like a 20mm prime of any sort in FF. Canon hasn't made a new once since 1992.

yeah a nice 20-21mm prime would be sweet - 21mm IS USM
pancakes at with canon's registration distance at 20mm? would have alot of compromises.
the Voigtländer 20mm 3.5 skopar is a good example. vignettes like hell, and blows the snot out at the corners. it makes the 17-40 look good in the corners.
Not sure i would like that versus just having a regular 21mm as sharp as the other current 24,28,35 IS USM lenses - especially for under 1k.
unless this is an EF-S lens and if so, why 24mm? the same as 40mm on full frame perhaps?
for EF-S .. a more likely and needed lens would be a 30mm 1.8 EF-S IS STM (IMO - but that's what everyone in the EF-S world usually complains about not having)

Canon 30mm F1.8 IS STM ... It would be a dream lens for me. : :-*

 

[Chosenbydestiny]

Can somebody explain the appeal to me? Not trying to start a flame war, just trying to understand.

A 24mm pancake (which won't have IS) seems a bit redundant with the 24mm 2.8 IS, which by all accounts is a very good lens, has USM and which Canon cut the price to a much more reasonable level. The size seems kind of irrelevant once you put it on a 5D, 6D or other full frame body and for an SL1, you end up with a 37mm lens which is barely in the wide-angle realm.

Do people like these pancakes just because they are cute (no argument there)? What am I missing?

Size size size. It makes your rig so small you don't mind leaving the bag behind and just slinging your camera around your neck all day. Or it's such a small item that it's a no brainer to throw it in your bag as another FL option.

There's also a side argument (that some would refute) that the smaller your entire rig is, the more likely you'll bring it at all to take pictures.

But it will never 'compete' head to head at a feature level with larger lenses that offer IS, USM, weather-sealing, mechanical manual focusing, etc.

So I see pancakes as a nice option to reduce size when you don't need all those features -- leisure, walkaround, and street come to mind for lenses like these.

- A

+1! A 24mm and/or 40mm pancake would make a perfect compliment to a 70-200mm for my use anyway. I'd love to take just a 24mm pancake and lightweight 50mm or 85mm for a compact, lightweight, and somewhat lowlight setup too. I already enjoy carrying a 6D with 40mm around for family trips, would be nice to have more options.

 

[ecka]

I would love to have 20mm pancake on FF

I think we'd like a 20mm prime of any sort in FF. Canon hasn't made a new once since 1992.

yeah a nice 20-21mm prime would be sweet - 21mm IS USM
pancakes at with canon's registration distance at 20mm? would have alot of compromises.
the Voigtländer 20mm 3.5 skopar is a good example. vignettes like hell, and blows the snot out at the corners. it makes the 17-40 look good in the corners.
Not sure i would like that versus just having a regular 21mm as sharp as the other current 24,28,35 IS USM lenses - especially for under 1k.
unless this is an EF-S lens and if so, why 24mm? the same as 40mm on full frame perhaps?
for EF-S .. a more likely and needed lens would be a 30mm 1.8 EF-S IS STM (IMO - but that's what everyone in the EF-S world usually complains about not having)

Canon 30mm F1.8 IS STM ... It would be a dream lens for me. : :-*

Not much different from EF 35/2 IS USM, is it?

 

[tat3406]

if same price and size with 40mm but wider, I will preorder one.

 

[Random Orbits]

Why would it be f/2.8? The 24 f/2.8 IS isn't large, but it's not a pancake either. A 24mm pancake that is f/4 would make more sense, but I'm not sure how useful it'd be a crop camera.