Sony announce the new 20mm f/2.8 pancake. Olympus 75-300mm announcement to follow soon.
Image of the 20mm pancake
Sony announced the new stuff for the CP+ show and it’s rather unspectacular. First we have the new 20mm f/2.8 pancake. Than we have the 18-200mm Powerzoom lens that will be sold as lens only too (it was available as kit lens for NEX camcorder only). Both are already available for preorder at BHphoto (Click here for 20mm pancake) and for the powerzoom (Click here).
And Olympus will also announce something unspectacular this week. An updated version of the current 75-300mm lens 
HAROLD GLIT
5 months ago |i wonder where this silly trend of getting out both 30mm and 60mm FOV lenses. These are two focal lengths which were never offered until two or three years ago because they are both too long and too short. Silly marketing
Harold
BladeGunner
5 months ago |All you have to do is take a couple of steps forward and backward. There is no perfect foal length for one person. If 60 is too close than keep a distance, if 30 is too wide than walk up closer. For some 50 is too wide and for some others it is too narow.
Eric Tastad
5 months ago |Because 35mm and 50mm film lenses aren’t just as silly? Two lenses that are popular just because they happened to make them 80 years ago, doesn’t mean they are better focal lengths. They were what was made so people used them.
I see no reason to stick to such “standards”, especially when most of those lenses aren’t quite what they list on them anyway. Consider it 50mm class lens and 35mm class lens. Likely the Sony 20mm f/2.8 will be similar field of view as most 28mm film lenses in practice.
Eric
El Aura
5 months ago |A 30 mm equiv. lens is perfectly fine but 60 mm equivalent (beyond macro use) are not quite as useful. To me the range from 60 to 75 is neither fish nor fowl. I positively disliked all the xx-70 mm zooms. 70 mm is simply too short for most short tele uses (using a 50 mm on APS-C, ie, 75 mm equiv. was also always bit too short). But 70 mm is also too long to get still something of the environment in.
Horse Radish
5 months ago |your comparing a 30 to a 60? of course theres a difference, but not 30 to a 20 aand not 50 to a 60. just get the lens nearest to the focal length you want. geez.
Pari
5 months ago |If you`re not after a pancake the 19/2.8 from Sigma is way cheaper.
ronnbot
5 months ago |Yay, another pancake… But kinda pricey for a f/2.8 especially when compared to the Panasonic 20/1.7. Come on Sony, you can do better.
Anonymous
5 months ago |Its Sony were talking about here..they make shitty nex lenses.
Eric Tastad
5 months ago |The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 is not an equivalent lens, it is equivalent to a 26mm f/2.2 or so on NEX (*2/1.52), making it just as over priced.
Eric
ronnbot
5 months ago |You’re right, they don’t have the same FoV, but FL is exactly the same. Also, the Pany is still brighter at f/1.7, which is still f1.7 exposure-wise regardless of sensor size. Sure, the Pany may seem expensive but it has proven itself to be an optically good lens and has retain its value.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy that Sony finally released another pancake, I was just hoping it was a bit brighter or cheaper. That said, I expect the 20/2.8 to be optically excellent for that price.
Sam Waldron
5 months ago |The 20mm F1.7 is the same price, arguably a more useful focal length and while ‘equivalent’ to F2.2 in the NEX world for DOF, it is almost one and a half stops faster than this pancake and stabilised, real world, 3 stops on the Olympus OMD EM5.
It is also a proven, very sharp lens and given the NEX-6 has only a 1/3 stop ISO sensor advantage, well I know which one I prefer!
JJ
5 months ago |Oh man, you folks. why dont you ask for a million dollars as well. Pancake lenses are small becuase they have less elements, that why they call them pancakes. They try to find a good balance beteen optical performance and its size. the more brighter the lens the more bigger the elements, and have you ever and i mean ever seen a IS pancake? Now you wnt them to sopmehow put magical mechanics in them for IS? Where do you think the mechanism can go, right in the middle of the lens? Next thing youll be asking for is for Sony to care about its csutomers. LOL
spaceman
5 months ago |Sam Waldron – you mean the Panny 20/1.7 has a “NEX equivalent DOF” of what f2.7 would give, and the FOV is not the same either, so in practice NOT comparable. 1/3 stop compared to the OMD? Nice twist, but as the OMD in camera ISO rating is more exaggerated then in the NEX we are looking at 1 stop advantage. You stick to your beloved m43 but you don’t have to twist the truth because of it.
Big sensors are here to stay, live with it.
San Waldron
4 months ago |Spaceman, the difference between APSC and M43 is 2/3 of a stop, so you need to review your math, knowledge or both.
The 1/3 stop ISO difference takes into account both manufacturer ISO ‘accuracy’ variances as well.
That is to say, the ISO performance between the two platforms is barely there. IBIS and faster, smaller, sharper lenses most certainly are.
But good try.
Horse Radish
5 months ago |Well I cant wait till Steve Huff does a so called ” real world ” test with these lenses. Bullshit tests that involve difeerent focal lengths and different apertures and even different framing on the crops. the dude has even compared the omd tot he nikon d800 and “according to his bullshit tests, the omd comes out looking caomprable….comparably BULLSHIT if you ask me.
woof woof
5 months ago |These are all cameras, they all take pictures, I therefore see no problem comparing them to each other. I myself compare my 5D to my CSC and even to my LX5.
The world will not end if we do things like this, so calm down
Horse Radish
5 months ago |I know that, doggie. i was making a statement about how steve huffs tests are bullshit and pruposely flawed, not whether hes comparing a camera to dog crap. try reading my comments carefully , kid.
Will
5 months ago |You miss the point of those tests done by Steve, firstly, they’re called “Crazy Comparisons” – hint 1, and second, it’s for people who are interested in either of those cameras to compare it to something that is supposedly “obviously” better or worse, I sure like them, and just like the other person pointed out, I compare my Medium Format cameras to my RX100, of course, because i’m just interested to see the difference… so shutty.
rjs
5 months ago |The Samsung 20/2.8 proved to be a bit of a flop as it was such a marginal improvement over the 20-50mm kit lens shooting 20@f3.5. Can’t see this being much different.
Horse Radish
5 months ago |yes but dont forget the samsung 20-50 kit lns is a pretty good lens, it even won ametuer photograpers mirrorless kit lens of the year award. So being slightly better than that and faster for a kit lens is not a bad thing. the 20-50 is pretty underrated lens and its a damn good one for a kit.