Lust for Fujifilm X100V cured by Sony pancake

I had been lusting after the Fujifilm X100V (silver model) as a stylish, retro, fun, and compact APS-C camera. It has a fixed 23mm f/2.0 lens. However, I decided to first buy a used Sony 20mm f/2.8 pancake lens for my a6000 to see how I felt about being limited to that focal length. After having used it on various occasions for about 6 weeks, I have decided that this combination is perfectly satisfactory, my covetousness has been cured, and I saved about $1200. The Sony combo is actually a little smaller and lighter than the Fuji. I will concede, however, that the X100V *looks* fantastic.

A couple of photos from the other day with the 20mm pancake are below; there are others in these recent threads in case anybody's interested:

Harpers Ferry - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4645087

Boulder - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4639805

Sherpa House - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4637994


Staircase at Marriott Hotel, Bethesda, Maryland (2022-05-04).


Courtyard at Marriott Hotel, Bethesda, Maryland (2022-05-04).


Tastee Diner, Bethesda, Maryland (2022-05-04).


Ultimate Frisbee practice (uncropped). I know this lens isn't for sports, but it's the only lens I had with me and my girlfriend wanted a photo of her son's practice.


Ultimate Frisbee practice (same image heavily cropped).

--
Jeff DLB
https://www.flickr.com/jeffdlb/

Jeff DLB said:

I had been lusting after the Fujifilm X100V (silver model) as a stylish, retro, fun, and compact APS-C camera. It has a fixed 23mm f/2.0 lens. However, I decided to first buy a used Sony 20mm f/2.8 pancake lens for my a6000 to see how I felt about being limited to that focal length. After having used it on various occasions for about 6 weeks, I have decided that this combination is perfectly satisfactory, my covetousness has been cured, and I saved about $1200. The Sony combo is actually a little smaller and lighter than the Fuji. I will concede, however, that the X100V *looks* fantastic.

A couple of photos from the other day with the 20mm pancake are below; there are others in these recent threads in case anybody's interested:

Click to expand...

The Sony 20mm pancake is a very small lens, and one that has no competition by any third party. It can be put in a large jacket pocket or belt pouch, and takes adequate, or as you said, "satisfactory" pictures from f4-8 in good light.

But then, so can the original 16-50 kit lens from 20-40 in good light at f4-10, and it is much more versatile, and not that much larger.

I have a very good copy of the 16-50 lens, but once I got the 18-135, it has been collecting dust. If you can deal with satisfactory IQ, and restrict your self at only 20mm, it is a good lens, for you. ;-)

snapa said:

The Sony 20mm pancake is a very small lens, and one that has no competition by any third party. It can be put in a large jacket pocket or belt pouch, and takes adequate, or as you said, "satisfactory" pictures from f4-8 in good light.

But then, so can the original 16-50 kit lens from 20-40 in good light at f4-10, and it is much more versatile, and not that much larger.

Click to expand...

I do own the 16-50mm kit lens. It is 50% longer (30mm vs 20mm). I feel the IQ of my 16-50 is worse than that of my 20mm.

My point was not to compare those two lenses, but rather to compare the fixed-FL X100V with an equivalent APS-C prime setup.

snapa said:

I have a very good copy of the 16-50 lens, but once I got the 18-135, it has been collecting dust. If you can deal with satisfactory IQ, and restrict your self at only 20mm, it is a good lens, for you. ;-)

Click to expand...

I also have the 18-135, which is my go-to lens. The 20mm is more for compact use.

The one demerit of that pancake lens is that it is a full stop slower than the x100 family lenses. Can you share some samples of any portrait or streety work you've done with this lens? Have you managed to get any pleasing background blur going or is that not really a thing with this device?

BarelyAmateur said:

The one demerit of that pancake lens is that it is a full stop slower than the x100 family lenses. Can you share some samples of any portrait or streety work you've done with this lens? Have you managed to get any pleasing background blur going or is that not really a thing with this device?

Click to expand...

I'm more of a landscape/travel photographer than portrait/street, and I usually shoot at f/8, so at the moment I don't really have anything like what you're asking. However, I will try to get such shots and add them to this thread.

Jeff DLB said:

I had been lusting after the Fujifilm X100V (silver model) as a stylish, retro, fun, and compact APS-C camera. It has a fixed 23mm f/2.0 lens.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your lust for that cam… although I'm partial to black. The white markings would make it easier for me to dial in the settings. Don't get me wrong… I enjoy my a6600, but it's siren song leaves me longing for a retro cam such as this.

Jeff DLB said:

However, I decided to first buy a used Sony 20mm f/2.8 pancake lens for my a6000 to see how I felt about being limited to that focal length. After having used it on various occasions for about 6 weeks, I have decided that this combination is perfectly satisfactory, my covetousness has been cured, and I saved about $1200. The Sony combo is actually a little smaller and lighter than the Fuji. I will concede, however, that the X100V *looks* fantastic.

A couple of photos from the other day with the 20mm pancake are below; there are others in these recent threads in case anybody's interested:

Harpers Ferry - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4645087

Boulder - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4639805

Sherpa House - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4637994


Staircase at Marriott Hotel, Bethesda, Maryland (2022-05-04).


Courtyard at Marriott Hotel, Bethesda, Maryland (2022-05-04).


Tastee Diner, Bethesda, Maryland (2022-05-04).


Ultimate Frisbee practice (uncropped). I know this lens isn't for sports, but it's the only lens I had with me and my girlfriend wanted a photo of her son's practice.


Ultimate Frisbee practice (same image heavily cropped).

Click to expand...

--
Regards,
Kirwin

Jeff DLB said:

BarelyAmateur said:

The one demerit of that pancake lens is that it is a full stop slower than the x100 family lenses. Can you share some samples of any portrait or streety work you've done with this lens? Have you managed to get any pleasing background blur going or is that not really a thing with this device?

Click to expand...

I'm more of a landscape/travel photographer than portrait/street, and I usually shoot at f/8, so at the moment I don't really have anything like what you're asking. However, I will try to get such shots and add them to this thread.

Click to expand...

Nice pics! The a6000 is a great compact camera especially with the 20mm. The size is mentioned hear quite a bit, but it's so easy to operate with one hand too. If I were pining for that sort of camera, the Ricoh GR is pretty sweet, but the Sony's do the job.

I own both the Sony A6400, not with a pancake, but with some primes from Sigma and Sony and the 18-135 zoom and the Fuji XV100.

To me, the Fuji feels much better and I enjoy the experience of the leaf-shutter, the display and the individual controls more than using the Sony. I love the film-simulations.

Isn't the Sony much bulkier than the Fuji, even with a pancake?

This said, the Sony - the 6400 - has a much better and more reliable AF. I rarely use the Fuji in continous mode.

Might sound a bit silly, but using the Fuji, I feel like being a real photographer. The sound of the leaf-shutter alone...

But as you show, the Sony used the right way doesn't prevent you from making great pics.

I have a Ricoh GR, too, and the difference between the 18 of the Ricoh and the 23 of the Fuji is huge. So if you like the 20 and considering the pics you make, 23 might be not wide enough for you. 23 resp. 35 in FF is a good compromise between wide angle and tele, but in this regard it is a compromise. 2.0 and 2.8 makes a difference as I can tell owning the Fuji 2.0 and the Ricoh 2.8 in APSC.

DirkPeh said:

I own both the Sony A6400, not with a pancake, but with some primes from Sigma and Sony and the 18-135 zoom and the Fuji XV100.

To me, the Fuji feels much better and I enjoy the experience of the leaf-shutter, the display and the individual controls more than using the Sony. I love the film-simulations.

Isn't the Sony much bulkier than the Fuji, even with a pancake?

Click to expand...

Fuji is wider and taller but thinner.

Jeff DLB said:

snapa said:

The Sony 20mm pancake is a very small lens, and one that has no competition by any third party. It can be put in a large jacket pocket or belt pouch, and takes adequate, or as you said, "satisfactory" pictures from f4-8 in good light.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

At f5.6, I find that the 20mm is more than satisfactory. With wider apertures, the edges aren't that great, but the center is still very sharp; f5.6 brings up the edge performance. If only interested in center sharpness, it's my sharpest lens, wide-open. It's crazy. It just needs stopping-down to improve the edges; aside from that, I just shoot it without worry.

The Sigma 30 has better edges with wider apertures, but 30mm isn't 20mm so it's not really a replacement -- just saying that the 20mm pancake competes well, but one might argue that the Sigma 30mm is a bit better overall.

Jeff DLB said:

Jeff DLB said:

But then, so can the original 16-50 kit lens from 20-40 in good light at f4-10, and it is much more versatile, and not that much larger.

Click to expand...

I do own the 16-50mm kit lens. It is 50% longer (30mm vs 20mm). I feel the IQ of my 16-50 is worse than that of my 20mm.

Click to expand...

In my tests, visually and with a test chart, the 20mm is much better than the 16-50. The 18-55 (at 20mm) is much better than the 16-50, getting pretty close to the pancake's performance. (In the early days, it was suggested that in the 24mm range, it competed pretty well with primes, at least with the center sharpness.) If you want a kit lens to replace the 20mm/f2.8, use the 18-55, not the 16-50! Then we're back to it not being a pancake.

As you'd expect, it's the 16-50 that's the greatest compromise, and as long as you stay away from the 50mm end, results are often satisfactory. Good enough, much of the time (I have travel photos that I'm perfectly happy with), although I find it not to have good edge performance.

Jeff DLB said:

My point was not to compare those two lenses, but rather to compare the fixed-FL X100V with an equivalent APS-C prime setup.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting observation. Thanks for sharing. The Fuji probably makes sense if you like their interface? I'm glad there's the option, but makes sense to make use of your existing Sony.

Jeff DLB said:

Jeff DLB said:

I have a very good copy of the 16-50 lens, but once I got the 18-135, it has been collecting dust. If you can deal with satisfactory IQ, and restrict your self at only 20mm, it is a good lens, for you. ;-)

Click to expand...

I also have the 18-135, which is my go-to lens. The 20mm is more for compact use.

Click to expand...

The 20mm probably isn't my first go-to lens, but when I want to go compact, it sure is! I can use it without worrying much about the image quality, unlike some other lenses where you have to worry about the aperture more. (For an extreme example, take the 16mm pancake. Here's another lens that is super-sharp in the center, but it falls off like crazy towards the edges and corners. This lens is more fun, IMO, if used with the UWA or Fisheye adapters, although these days there are other options.)

I tried using the 16-50 as my main go-to lens for a while, but I have to regard it as nearly the worst. "Satisfactory" for many situations, sure, but still, I avoid it these days. The main advantage is that its compactness turns the camera into a P&S. Convenience.

GaryW said:

GaryW said:

My point was not to compare those two lenses, but rather to compare the fixed-FL X100V with an equivalent APS-C prime setup.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting observation. Thanks for sharing. The Fuji probably makes sense if you like their interface? I'm glad there's the option, but makes sense to make use of your existing Sony.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I was tempted by the Fuji because of its sexy retro appearance as well as the mechanical controls. However, $1,400 is a lot to pay for a second, less-flexible camera. The Sony+20mm combo is great for a business trip like my current one to a familiar somewhat boring location without a ton of new photo opportunities. It would also be good in a new city for compact carry and street photography.

The other negative for the Fuji was the EVF eye point: 17mm on the Fuji vs 23mm on the Sony. I have read a number of complaints in the Fuji forum on DPR about this short distance. I was not able to test in person because of the lack of stock at camera stores.

--
Jeff DLB
https://www.flickr.com/jeffdlb/

Jeff DLB said:

(...)

The other negative for the Fuji was the EVF eye point: 17mm on the Fuji vs 23mm on the Sony. I have read a number of complaints in the Fuji forum on DPR about this short distance. I was not able to test in person because of the lack of stock at camera stores.

Click to expand...

Owning both, I very much prefer the EVF and the OVF of the Fuji and I wear glasses.

Jeff DLB said:

GaryW said:

Jeff DLB said:

My point was not to compare those two lenses, but rather to compare the fixed-FL X100V with an equivalent APS-C prime setup.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting observation. Thanks for sharing. The Fuji probably makes sense if you like their interface? I'm glad there's the option, but makes sense to make use of your existing Sony.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I was tempted by the Fuji because of its sexy retro appearance as well as the mechanical controls.

Click to expand...

It does look like fun, and having more physical dials could be useful.

Jeff DLB said:

However, $1,400 is a lot to pay for a second, less-flexible camera.

Click to expand...

This is the problem I have. If I wanted to buy another non-emount camera, I might want something cheaper, like an RX100. $1,400 seems like a lot.

Jeff DLB said:

The Sony+20mm combo is great for a business trip like my current one to a familiar somewhat boring location without a ton of new photo opportunities.

Click to expand...

I've done exactly that, on a couple of trips. It's like the old days of carrying a compact film camera! Of course, you can also carry the 16-50PZ and it's like the days of P&S film cameras, complete with pop-out lens. But, yeah, on some trips, you know you're not going to take a lot of time for photos, as you're there for another purpose. I also like to drastically reduce what I carry when walking around some cities, etc.

On non-business trips, particularly if not flying, I'm more likely to take larger and/or more lenses.

Jeff DLB said:

It would also be good in a new city for compact carry and street photography.

The other negative for the Fuji was the EVF eye point: 17mm on the Fuji vs 23mm on the Sony. I have read a number of complaints in the Fuji forum on DPR about this short distance. I was not able to test in person because of the lack of stock at camera stores.

Click to expand...

GaryW said:

$1,400 seems like a lot.

Click to expand...

I had a hard time paying these 1.400,- when buying the Fuji, I admit.

It is a lot, if you compare it to a Sony APS-C, but dead cheap if you compare it to a Leica

DirkPeh said:

GaryW said:

$1,400 seems like a lot.

Click to expand...

I had a hard time paying these 1.400,- when buying the Fuji, I admit.

It is a lot, if you compare it to a Sony APS-C, but dead cheap if you compare it to a Leica

Click to expand...

It's all relative, I guess!

The most I've paid for an e-mount camera was about $900, and that's for my main camera that I take the best pictures with. Perhaps that's a self-imposed limit, but it's just hard for me to justify spending a lot on an excess camera. But if I fell into excess money, I'd consider it.

GaryW said:

it's just hard for me to justify spending a lot on an excess camera. But if I fell into excess money, I'd consider it.

Click to expand...

I felt the same way - the Fuji would have been a very cool but limited-purpose camera.

I couldn't resist clicking on this topic and enjoyed your photos! I am a fan of the 20mm f/2.8 pancake lens even though I use it for video these days. It's been attached to an a5100 for the last few years after downsizing my Sony APS-C equipment.

I picked a time when Sony APS-C camera production has been halted to decide to purchase the a6600. While waiting for production to resume, I picked up the a6300 and have been very pleased with it. After reading this topic thread, I might attach the 20mm pancake and see what I can capture.

Thanks for sharing!

Jim

I'm a little late to the party, but I've enjoyed this discussion. However, the a6000 + 20mm pancake lens didn't cure my case of GAS when it came to the X100V. I haven't regretted buying the X100V, it's a fun thing to use, but I absolutely did not need it. And the a6000 + 20mm pancake combo would have worked quite well if I'd given it a chance instead of giving into my longing for a new shiny object, lol.

Today as it happened, I took my old a6000 with the pancake lens out to a park. This a6000 has been converted to infrared; today's conditions were right to get some fun IR images. While I had my cameras out I decided to get some quick snaps to show the relative sizes of the X100V and the a6000 + 20mm pancake. I didn't mess with taking the straps off the cameras, nor did I do a fabulous job with lighting and focus. As stated in the original post, the Sony combo is smaller than the X100V.


a6000 with 20mm pancake on the left, Fuji X100V on the right. The X100V is a bit taller and wider.




a6000 and X100V back-to-back. I added a hood to the X100V which makes it deeper.

I've replaced the a6000 with an a6600. The latter has a much better battery and is a bit larger than the a6000 - particularly on the right side where it has a larger grip (related to the bigger battery chamber). It's also heavier than the a6000. Even so, the a6600 + 20mm pancake combo doesn't dwarf the X100V, as this shot shows.




a6600 + 20mm pancake on the left; a bit bigger and heavier than the a6000 but still a nice size.

Finally, although it relates to FF cameras, I *did* cure my lust for the RX1R/RX1Rii by putting the 35mm 2.8 ZA lens on my A7R2. A few years ago that was the camera/lens combination I carried when walking around London for several days. I worried a bit about leaving the zoom lens back in the hotel room, but the camera/prime lens combo was easy to carry for hours of sightseeing, and I was pleased with the images. For one thing, the 42MP sensor gives a lot of image to work with when you want to crop like mad in post. The A7R2 fell off a tripod onto concrete and though it worked despite the dings, has been replaced by the A7R3. Just for fun I posed it with the 35mm lens, next to the X100V. It's thicker and heavier than the X100V but as FF mirrorless cameras go, that setup is fairly discreet and easy to carry.




A7R3 w/ 35mm 2.8 ZA lens, and X100V

Jeff, I have never, ever considered the Fuji. Specially when the GRIII exists.

Alot cheaper, alot smaller, you give up the viewfinder for a truly pocketable size (fits jeans with no problems). It also has IBIS and dual dials that can be used while shooting 1 handed (if you are holding an umbrella or a grocery bag).

The 20 is a fine lens (that's my copy in this picture), but the body is still too bulky. If you really want an "always with you" experience try the Ricoh. Rent one, it will blow your mind.

Bender79ita said:

Jeff, I have never, ever considered the Fuji. Specially when the GRIII exists.

Alot cheaper, alot smaller, you give up the viewfinder for a truly pocketable size (fits jeans with no problems). It also has IBIS and dual dials that can be used while shooting 1 handed (if you are holding an umbrella or a grocery bag).

The 20 is a fine lens (that's my copy in this picture), but the body is still too bulky. If you really want an "always with you" experience try the Ricoh. Rent one, it will blow your mind.

Click to expand...

I already have an older pocketable point-and-shoot so I'm not really in the market for another, but if I were I would probably get the Panasonic Lumix DC-ZS200. The sensor is only 1", but it has a viewfinder (essential IMHO), zoom lens, 5-axis stabilization, and RAW capability.