>Canon RF Pancake: f/2.8>Nikon Z Pancake: f/2.8>Sony FE Pancake: f/4.5 chink shitWhy can't anyone make a half decent Sony pancake lens?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1200Image Height900Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>4352097because of the baby mount
Because only faggots use pancakes and sony is for heterosexuals>i need a small lens for my big cameraBuy a nikon/fuji, have fun missing focus
>>4352097What's the purpose of a pancake?I'm not trolling. I genuinely don't understand what you would ever want one for.
>>4352172It's a neuroticism thingEven if the camera is so big it would never fit in a pocket, a neurotic "needs" a pancake because the protruding lens is bothering their OCD. Camera companies are having a massive laugh at this as neurotics put non weather sealed, optically bunk, slow aperture lenses on their massive $3000 pro cameras.I would much rather have a nikkor z 24mm f2.8 designed like a normal lens, not a 3 stop vignetting POS with buzzy autofocus and soft edges at f8, than the slightly shorter 26mm f2.8 pancake. Thank you, neurotic fags, for meming nikon into making a shitty lens.
>>4352177>Thank you, neurotic fags, for meming nikon into making a shitty lens.The tessar design pancake has been a thing for 60 years. They made a really old MF F mount version, a modernised AI/AIS F mount version (still MF though) and now one for their Z mount. Some people just like the design.
>>4352187You know, it would have still been a tessar design pancake if they made it very slightly larger to accommodate internal focusing and not vignetting down to MFT or worse exposure push levels for 2/3s of the imageBut they did not, because claiming to have the shortest lens matters to the kind of nutjobs that represent hobbyists buying pro gear now. And then you need to put the hood on it, plus UV filter, to give it a slim chance in the rain, protect the protruding front element, and also use filters. Making it larger regardless. The design is pure marketing cope.
>>4352177the great irony is, sony is the only brand that actually has a small enough camera to warrant a FF pancakeE mount IS capable of f2.8 pancake lenses. look at the nikon and canon pancakes. do the optics go to the edge? no. has son already demonstrated the ability to miniaturize lenses? yes. why isn't sony making a pancake?honestly, i think they have so much money flowing in from professionals that targeting the street photography larp market isn't worth the $200k in R&D that a single shitty double gauss lens can take in bloated japanese corporate structures.
>>4352097Physically not possible. If it were, Sony would have made it when the a7 first came out 10 years ago (the first emount lens ever was the APS-C 16/2.8 pancake).
>>4352337Once again, look at the nikkor z 26mm. The optics do not go to the edge. It would, believe it or not, fit inside E mount.Now think about the nikkor z 26mm's build. It focuses externally. It has no filter threads. It is not fully weather sealed. By the time you add the hood to mitigate the WR, although not the heavily focus breathing design, the soft edges at every aperture, noisy focus motor, and extreme vignette, it ceases to be a pancake, increasing in length by about 50% (slightly more with the clear filter that is necessary to protect the protruding focusing group). It is suddenly ~1.5" long, just like sony's muffin lenses.Canon RF's 28mm has a similar issue with a fragile protruding focus group and heavy focus breathing. It's optically superior to the nikon, and also, does not actually exceed the dimensions of the lens mount and could theoretically fit in E mount.Sony has never, to my knowledge, released an FE mount non-macro lens with protruding focusing groups except for the repackaged minolta lenses. Why has sony not released a pancake? Probably because given a reasonable R&D budget, they ran into all the same issues as every other manufacturer. External focusing.
>>4352337That's because the NEX cameras were actually small enough to warrant such a small lens, and would benefit even more with the Viltrox
>>4352343The a7c/ii/r is actually small enough to warrant itBut it's impossible to make an FF mirrorless pancake with>internal focusing>minimal focus breathing>weather resistanceJust look at canon and nikon failing hard and delaying much better muffin lenses instead of pancakes with muffin sized hoods100% of the new mirrorless mounts are too shallow for designs that penetrate deeper into the camera ala leica Ms bountiful pancakes. 100% of the jap companies fucked up bigtime by designing shallow mounts instead of shoving the sensor plane as far back as possible and allowing lenses to penetrate deeper into the camera. Mount depth is why film SLRs and rangefinders are so compact. The sensors in these new cameras are basically sitting on the face of the body with Z mount being the absolute worst, hence the oversized lens plague. f1.8s the size of sony's f1.4s.
>yfw sony could restyle their cameras and move the orange ring part of the mount into the camera just by getting a little better at layout and heat management, automatically making every single lens shorter by a filter's worth
>>4352347No it's not, there is no benefit to a lens shallower than the grip. Internal focussing also doesn't matter because when you're using the camera lens length doesn't matter. Weather sealing also doesn't matter because you're unlikely to use this type of lens in the rain. Shit pancakes in general are pretty much pointless because you're still not fitting the camera in your pocket. That's the real reason Sony hasn't made one.
>>4352177>>4352212>>4352215>>4352342>>4352347>>4352395
>>4352402Nikon and canons pancakes being unusable garbage isnt a cope is it?>NOOO SONY HAD TO MAKE A SHITTY LENS!Why? The metrics you fanboys make up are fascinating>>4352395>good weather sealing doesnt matter for travel lensesLmfao fuji is the brand for you
>>4352097>f/4.5 primes in 2024
>>4352404If you're travelling you'll probably want something more than a shitty slow prime and your bag won't be packed tightly enough that you couldn't go with something two or three times the length. And because it's in a bag that will protect it from rain.
>>4352402Idk what you think im coping about I actually owned the 26mm f2.8. What a fucking mistake that was.>>4352395>No it's not, there is no benefit to a lens shallower than the gripThe a7c has basically no grip, that's the thing.>internal focusing doesnt matterDust/moisture pump, catastrophic point of damage. Internal focusing also allows optical focus breathing minimization and quieter focus. It's a travel lens so it should do video.>Weather sealing doesn't matterPancakes are marketed as travel lenses. But you can't travel with one? Huh.>Not fitting the camera in your pocketAn a7cii with the body cap or the f4.5 slides into a jacket pocket as easily as an x100vi. If a good, wr 2.8 pancake were possible on mirrorless, it would be great. But it is not possible on any contemporary mirrorless mount. The mounts are too shallow. Copes like external focusing are just part of the deal.
>>4352413>If a good, wr 2.8 pancake were possible on mirrorless, it would be great. But it is not possible on any contemporary mirrorless mount. The eternal SNOY coping never ends!
>>4352418This is an f4.2 equivalent. That means it has the same physical aperture size and therefore light gathering as a 40mm f4.2.Such is life on crop sensors.
>>4352410this is your brain on equivalence arguments. you do not need more than f2.8 if it is nice wide open. >be me>shoot mft on cloudy day>iso 100 f/2 1/500 fucking everywhere>f4 equivalent!>sell my g9ii after 9001 equivalence arguments
>>4352395>Internal focussing also doesn't matterMaybe I don't want to strip the AF transmission if I bump it on something.
>>4352136The sony's are some of the smallest FF bodies, yet they have the largest lenses. They feel awkward to use, and they look ridiculous. Big camera, small lens >>>>>>>>> small camera, big lens
>>4352438>if I bump it on something.bumbling retard
>>4352480Sony has the smallest lenses actually, followed by cnaon
>>4352420>light gatheringshow me where sensor size is used when calculating exposure
>>4352487Another sensorlet filtered by the quantum physics of pixel peeping
>>4352480It is weird how Sony has the largest lenses.Nikon definitely needs to make an a7c rangefinder style body to go with the actual small lenses they have like the 26mm pancake and the 40/2.
>>4352491They probably wouldn't as they already have the ZF and nikon wasn't really known for interchangeable lens rangefinders. Canon making a digital 7S would be cool.
>>4352492Just shove a FF sensor in here and an EVF. It's already half done.
>>4352491>It is weird how Sony has the largest lenses.They really don't. They have quite a few smaller options that the others don't have like the f/2.5 primes and some slower f/4 zooms, their 50mm f/1.2 is a fair bit smaller than the competition. Canon's 70-200mm's are impressively small where as Nikon's f/2.8 is massive in both size and weight. Other zooms of Sony's are on par but when their bodies are smaller the overall package ends up being smaller still.
>>4352501Nice design btw. Like it more than my a7c.
>>4354133No viewfinder (but yeah the body looks nice, plain and simple and square)
