07-23-2018, 01:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2018, 01:53 PM by Brightcolours.)
(07-23-2018, 03:53 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: Yes, the f/1.4 ones  but f/2.8? On a mirrorless? The 50 and 35 mm both are f/2 and a filter thread for M43. This 16/2.8 comes with M49 and is a full stop slower.
Yeah, the current Canon EF 28mm f2.8 IS USM is bigger than the EF 28mm f2.8 it replaces, and the same goes for the 24mm lenses.
I agree that the 16mm f2.8 seems oddly big, but the Sony 16mm f2.8 pancake is a horrid lens and the Samsung 16mm f2.4 is not that great wide open either... Maybe only Canon has talent working for them to design good pancake lenses (22mm, 24mm, 40mm?)
07-23-2018, 02:14 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2018, 02:15 PM by JJ_SO.)
I don't know. I never wanted to squeeze the last tiny millimeters out of my bodies/lenses, so I have no experience with pancakes And Olympus?
07-23-2018, 02:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2018, 02:21 PM by Klaus.)
(07-23-2018, 01:53 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: (07-23-2018, 03:53 AM)JJ_SO Wrote: Yes, the f/1.4 ones but f/2.8? On a mirrorless? The 50 and 35 mm both are f/2 and a filter thread for M43. This 16/2.8 comes with M49 and is a full stop slower.
Yeah, the current Canon EF 28mm f2.8 IS USM is bigger than the EF 28mm f2.8 it replaces, and the same goes for the 24mm lenses.
I agree that the 16mm f2.8 seems oddly big, but the Sony 16mm f2.8 pancake is a horrid lens and the Samsung 16mm f2.4 is not that great wide open either... Maybe only Canon has talent working for them to design good pancake lenses (22mm, 24mm, 40mm?)
The true king of pancakes remains Pentax ...
Altough Voigtlander had a nice 20mm lens and then there's this one here:
https://taosphoto.fr/ms-optics-perar-17mm-f4-5-retro-focus-ultra-thin/
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
The 16mm f2.8 is part of the "Fujicron" line with the 23mm f2, 35mm f2, and 50mm f2. They share a similar form factor, Weather resistance, are smaller/slower versions of existing lenses (16mm, 23 mm, 35mm f1.4 and the 56mm f1.2) and have moderate prices ($400 USD or so). They are probably the most popular Fuji lenses, especially now that Fuji sells more affordable bodies (X-T100).
As for the reasons it's not a pancake... I've used the Sony 16mm f2.8 for a couple of years, and I don't want that again! Also, we want the aperture ring on the Fuji lenses, and there is not enough place on a pancake for it. Try the Fuji 27mm: I've had it for years and barely used it because it lacked that ring.
Not every user wants that far-too-easy-to-move aperture ring. And not all lenses have one - few need to be operated by camera's front-dial which to me is the more versatile way to do - at least if there's a top display like on X-H1.
07-23-2018, 02:36 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2018, 02:46 PM by Brightcolours.)
Pentax has a few pancakes, most with quite horrid bokeh. Not sure if that makes them king? 21mm f3.2 APS-C, 2x 40mm f2.8 APS-C, 1x 43mm f1.9 FF. They used to be about the only one to offer pancakes, but that is the past?
Voigtlander had the 20mm f3.5 SL II (N) which measures horribly in MTF testing and is quite good in "infinity" reality, and the rather lovely 40mm f2 (nice bokeh rendering). The also discontinued 28mm f2.8 was only nice for APS-C (soft at the edges on full frame).
So? The Canon 22mm and 24mm are merely APS-C lenses as well.
You forgot to mention the Pentax 70mm f/2.4 and the 18-50mm F4-5.6 DC WR RE. The 15mm f/4 is on the verge of being a pancake at least. Historically they had two interesting fisheye pancakes (rather miserable though).
Voigtlander also had a 21mm, 25mm, 35mm, 40mm pancake.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
07-23-2018, 03:30 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2018, 03:37 PM by Rover.)
(07-22-2018, 08:00 PM)JJ_SO Wrote: Looking at the pictures, it's more like a stack of pancakes...
https://www.fujirumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Fujinon-Lenses-2-1320x697.jpg Hmm... not much point in its existence then, but it can't hurt to have another option. 
(07-23-2018, 02:36 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Pentax has a few pancakes, most with quite horrid bokeh. Not sure if that makes them king? 21mm f3.2 APS-C, 2x 40mm f2.8 APS-C, 1x 43mm f1.9 FF. They used to be about the only one to offer pancakes, but that is the past?
Voigtlander had the 20mm f3.5 SL II (N) which measures horribly in MTF testing and is quite good in "infinity" reality, and the rather lovely 40mm f2 (nice bokeh rendering). The also discontinued 28mm f2.8 was only nice for APS-C (soft at the edges on full frame).
That Voigtlander 28/2.8 looked super cool though, and I thought Lenstip said it was good by f/5.6? (so it is/was better than the awful Leica 28/5.6 lens released recently, at least you had larger apertures for when you don't really need/want good corners. )
Lenstip f5.6 sample, not "good" at the edges at f5.6.
http://pliki.optyczne.pl/voi28/voi28_fot14.JPG
(07-23-2018, 08:46 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: Lenstip f5.6 sample, not "good" at the edges at f5.6.
http://pliki.optyczne.pl/voi28/voi28_fot14.JPG
Well, uh, then why did they measure it hitting their "decency level" by f/5.6 or thereabouts. Anyway some of my lenses aren't even on that level. Thankfully I only shoot full frame very rarely (mostly when I procure a backup body in that format), I'm shocked how much vignetting and corner softness appears even on good lenses, let alone some more mediocre stuff.
|
