Pancake Lens for E-Mount

Can anyone recommend a good pancake lens for a Sony E-mount camera?  Anything from 30mm to 70mm equivalent would be ideal. Thanks.

The 20mm f2.8 is a nice option.

You may find it interesting to check out some of the third part, manual focus lenses from companies like 7artisans. There are some very small primes to be found in that segment of the market, and while they won't give you the same IQ as the Sony which others have recommended, they can be fairly decent.

The 16-50 is one of the gems of the system. As you go down the ILC rabbit hole, it's easy to toss aside the kit lens, but the fact that Sony went with a pancake with OSS makes it a keeper even after spending considerably more on your kit.

Robobonobo wrote:

The 16-50 is one of the gems of the system. As you go down the ILC rabbit hole, it's easy to toss aside the kit lens, but the fact that Sony went with a pancake with OSS makes it a keeper even after spending considerably more on your kit.

Completely agree with this. This lens gets an undeserved bad reputation in my opinion, however in my experience I have found it to be highly versatile and convenient. You can find de-kitted versions for cheap online. Imagine quality is not quite as good as a prime or higher end lens, but is more than acceptable in most situations, especially for video. The fact that it has OSS built in makes it all the more versatile.

I would say that unless you can clearly define a specific focal length where you absolutely need a prime with wider aperture, save the money and just use the 16-50. In situations where compact-ness is not the highest priority, then you can bring larger lenses for more field of view variance or wider aperture. Most of the time though, unless I need something specific, the 16-50 is my go to lens.

dht wrote:

Robobonobo wrote:

The 16-50 is one of the gems of the system. As you go down the ILC rabbit hole, it's easy to toss aside the kit lens, but the fact that Sony went with a pancake with OSS makes it a keeper even after spending considerably more on your kit.

Completely agree with this. This lens gets an undeserved bad reputation in my opinion

I wouldn't say undeserved. It's probably more accurate to say that the quality control for that lens varies wildly, so some may get a good one and others may get an awful one. I was one of the unfortunate ones, and I can say unequivocally that it was the absolute worst lens I ever used on a digital ILC. Only mildly better than a cell phone. It was so-so for near subjects, but anything in the distance just turned to mush. Landscapes were completely out of the question.

I'm glad you've had a good experience with it, but people looking to spend money on a new lens should be aware that the 16-50's bad reputation is truly deserved. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but if someone is going to buy it I would strongly recommend they do so from a seller who allows no-penalty returns.

7artisans Photoelectric 35mm f/5.6 Pancake Lens for Sony E.

As it's made for full frame you may find it tempting to get their made for APSC 35mm f1.2 instead, as it isn't much bigger. There are two versions, below is the first;

There's nothing else between 30-70mm other than the kit, which of course is only a pancake when closed. But that's when being a pancake most matters imho.

As mentioned there is the old, not very good Industar 69 28mm f2.8, which needs tweaking and putting on an L39 adapter (it is still tiny with the adapter). Not used mine in ages as it ruins many photos, but others have better copies.

There is the Rockstar 27mm f2.8 pancake which is something like $50 off Ali Express. One reviewer said it is so average in the edges that you may as well get one of the similarly priced and not much bigger 25mm f1.8 lenses from 7Artisans or Pergear.

I love pancakes and would definitely like to see more, ideally autofocus. Fuji have the 27mm f2.8 which is the only Fuji lens I am keeping after my recent switch to Sony. So it can be done for APSC around that focal length. Pentax famously did it with a 40mm and a 70mm (they may have been manual and not adaptable to APSC mirrorless).

Blood N Guts Murphy wrote:

Pentax famously did it with a 40mm and a 70mm (they may have been manual and not adaptable to APSC mirrorless).

Yep. I loved the 70 Ltd and the 21 Ltd back in my Pentax days!

I tried using an adapter for them when I switched to Sony mirrorless, but the one I got (K&F brand) only allowed 4/3-stop jumps for some reason. (Those lenses do not have aperture rings, so I was dependent upon the converter to manually change the aperture.) So I gave up on that almost immediately. I was very sad the day I sold the Pentax 21 - it was easily my most-used lens for years.

I have the Sony 20mm f/2.8. It's okay, but nothing special optically. I mainly use it if I'll primarily be shooting a long zoom but would like to have the option of something shorter for a few shots... for instance, baseball games. It fits nicely in my pocket, so it's perfect for that.

MoriceE wrote:

I love pancakes and would definitely like to see more, ideally autofocus. Fuji have the 27mm f2.8 which is the only Fuji lens I am keeping after my recent switch to Sony. So it can be done for APSC around that focal length. Pentax famously did it with a 40mm and a 70mm (they may have been manual and not adaptable to APSC mirrorless).

Different topic; what was your reason to switch?

I like left EVF cameras and all left Fujis have a 17mm or less eyepoint (or eye relief), which doesn't work with my eyes. A bonus is the Sony raw files work better on Lightroom Mobile imho. I was never fully satisfied with the sharpness with Fuji, so always went for a retro look.

dht wrote:

Robobonobo wrote:

The 16-50 is one of the gems of the system. As you go down the ILC rabbit hole, it's easy to toss aside the kit lens, but the fact that Sony went with a pancake with OSS makes it a keeper even after spending considerably more on your kit.

Completely agree with this. This lens gets an undeserved bad reputation in my opinion, however in my experience I have found it to be highly versatile and convenient. You can find de-kitted versions for cheap online. Imagine quality is not quite as good as a prime or higher end lens, but is more than acceptable in most situations, especially for video. The fact that it has OSS built in makes it all the more versatile.

I would say that unless you can clearly define a specific focal length where you absolutely need a prime with wider aperture, save the money and just use the 16-50. In situations where compact-ness is not the highest priority, then you can bring larger lenses for more field of view variance or wider aperture. Most of the time though, unless I need something specific, the 16-50 is my go to lens.

It's always going to get flamed because almost every lens in the system is going to be a quality upgrade and it's not as impressive as some of the more heralded kit lenses out there, but it's great for family, travel or street photography. For landscape and more demanding work there's plenty of other great options, but I won't part with my pancake zoom because I get some great shots with it and it fits in a jacket pocket.

Robobonobo wrote:

It's always going to get flamed because almost every lens in the system is going to be a quality upgrade and it's not as impressive as some of the more heralded kit lenses out there, but it's great for family, travel or street photography. For landscape and more demanding work there's plenty of other great options, but I won't part with my pancake zoom because I get some great shots with it and it fits in a jacket pocket.

I don't think anybody ever complained about the practicality of the 16-50, it's the optical quality that is quite bad and needed a refresh a long time ago.

It has been the worse (optically) APS-C kit lens that I owned in the last 5 years; if we could have something sharp like the Nikkor Z 16-50 I'd love to use it every day.

Thing is this system has no other pancake lens with OSS, and while IBIS body owners might get away without it non-IBIS owners have no other choice for hybrid use.

Even though we are mostly still shooters on this forum board ,we should not forget that Sony APS-C are among the best hybrid bodies for stills + video.

The fact that we can't have a pancake OSS lens that can do both stills + video with great quality (at any price point it might be) is quite annoying, really.

I really wish they did a mark II of that lens, just improving it generally. They have did massively huge improvements in lens designs over the years, the time for a new kit lens has been mature for a while.

Samyang 24/35 2.8 are also very affordable pancake like lenses.

UBrot wrote:

Samyang 24/35 2.8 are also very affordable pancake like lenses.

Good point.  There are a few lenses in this range that might be worth considering.  Not exactly "pancake" lenses, but pretty compact.  The Sigma 30/f2.8 that I have, for example, is still pretty compact and may be easier to fit in a small bag than most lenses, but some of these newer lenses may be even shorter.  Yeah, that Samyang/Rokinon almost looks like a pancake.

Bender79ita wrote:

Robobonobo wrote:

It's always going to get flamed because almost every lens in the system is going to be a quality upgrade and it's not as impressive as some of the more heralded kit lenses out there, but it's great for family, travel or street photography. For landscape and more demanding work there's plenty of other great options, but I won't part with my pancake zoom because I get some great shots with it and it fits in a jacket pocket.

I don't think anybody ever complained about the practicality of the 16-50, it's the optical quality that is quite bad and needed a refresh a long time ago.

It's hard to know for sure, but combining the zoom with the pancake size just seems like it forces too many compromises. The RAW file, if unadjusted, shows the extreme distortion that must be corrected. I just wonder if it's even possible to do much more with it. If it were possible to improve it, would it push it out of the price range that's intended? It's meant to be a cheap pack-in.

Having said that, the Nikkor lens you mention looks really compact and is said to be sharp. So, it looks like you could have better quality in a compact size. Any chance Sony will feel the competition and try to compete with this?

No doubt it's the most convenient lens, with a useful range and compact size. It's also probably the worst lens in the lineup. Even so, it's usually good enough. I have a number of travel photos, and printed at normal 4x6 sizes, I can't tell what lens I used.

It has been the worse (optically) APS-C kit lens that I owned in the last 5 years; if we could have something sharp like the Nikkor Z 16-50 I'd love to use it every day.

Would you consider jumping to Nikon for this lens? I wonder how many Nikon users still upgrade to more expensive lenses.

Thing is this system has no other pancake lens with OSS, and while IBIS body owners might get away without it non-IBIS owners have no other choice for hybrid use.

I don't recall having too many problems with the 20mm and hand-holding, at least in decent light, but it's a good point. I have some lower-light photos that have some blur.

Even though we are mostly still shooters on this forum board ,we should not forget that Sony APS-C are among the best hybrid bodies for stills + video.

The fact that we can't have a pancake OSS lens that can do both stills + video with great quality (at any price point it might be) is quite annoying, really.

I really wish they did a mark II of that lens, just improving it generally. They have did massively huge improvements in lens designs over the years, the time for a new kit lens has been mature for a while.

Doesn't seem like we need a "Mark II", we need a new lens.