# small primes to go with SL1?



## kubelik (Mar 22, 2013)

I'm actually pretty excited about the announcement of the SL1. price-wise and function-wise it seems very competitive against m4/3 cameras which I've been considering for a while for a back-up/casual camera.

the weird thing to me though, is it seems that there's a mismatch now between body and lens. the shorty-forty (40mm f/2.8) pancake lens seems to be a great physical fit for the body, but I'm not at all a fan of the 64mm-equivalent focal length that it creates. I'd love to have a 35mm equivalent pancake prime to go with a SL1, but does such a thing exist? I'm aware that Sigma produces a DX 30mm f/1.4, but even that just gives you a 50mm-equivalent, which I hate. I have a Canon 50mm f/1.4 on my 5DII, and while I love the lens for many things, I loathe it as a general-purpose walk-around lens. I enjoy shooting architecture and landscape, so the 24 to 35 range is much more my cup of tea.

it seems silly to buy a tiny, compact, reasonably-priced camera to walk around with, and then have to mount a honking 15mm f/2.8 Zeiss lens on it to get the right focal length. am I missing something? any suggestions? do we think Canon is going to start producing EF-S pancake primes to follow onto the shorty forty, or was that a one-off?


----------



## Act444 (Mar 22, 2013)

Hmm...how about the new 24 and 28mm 2.8 IS lenses?


----------



## Random Orbits (Mar 22, 2013)

I don't see Canon coming out with a bunch of EF-S primes any time soon. It makes more sense for Canon to do make the smallest lenses for the EOS-M because of its smaller lens mount and reduced lens to sensor plane distance (no mirror box). Canon has also determined that there is a market for EF IS primes, and the lenses with IS are larger than their non-IS predecessors. There are already two lines forming: L glass that is fast or specialty (i.e. TS-E) and consumer grade IS primes under that. I don't think a third product line makes much sense.

Although I see the logic in creating small wide EF-S primes, I don't know think that the market is big enough for Canon to make it a priority. It is also telling that Sigma has yet to bother maker wider fast EF-S lenses after making the 30mm f/1.4. Many of the Rebel buyers use the kit zooms and others see a APS-C camera as a stepping stone to full frame cameras down the road. These segments probably outnumber the enthusiasts that would be interested in what you're proposing by quite a bit.


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 22, 2013)

You can go for 24, 28, 30 or 35 focal lengths. They're "normal" lenses for APS-C. If you can get a good "new" 28mm F1.8 (something manufactured just recently), I think it's worth the money. As you know, the reviews for this lens is mixed bag. The Sigma 30mm F1.4 is good but it's not an FF lens. The new 24 and 28mm F2.8 IS lenses have very good IQ but still a little bit expensive. If you can afford them, it's worth going for them.


----------



## mb66energy (Mar 22, 2013)

I don't see wide angle primes in pan cake format for EF/EF-S mount because the flange distance doesn't allow very small lenses with high quality. You have to use a retrofocus design which needs negative lenses in front of positive groups and therefore consumes space. A very contrasty, sharp and distortion free lens like a f/4.0 25mm seems possible with perhaps 30mm length. But nothing more.

One existing pancake like lens is the Color Skopar of Voigtlander:
* NO AF
* Moderate IQ
but
* small size
* great mechanics
I never used it and I am not interested because I have the old 24mm f/2.8 from
Canon which is a little bit larger but gives me the IQ I need and is made from sturdy
but light plastics. Perhaps that lens is another alternative for the 100D (and should
be cheaply available).

SL II lens collection of voigtlander (except 58mm lens available for EF mount):
http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7pyj95.html

A test of the 20mm:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/504-voigtlander20f35eosff

Best - Michael


----------



## funkboy (Mar 22, 2013)

The Voigt 20mm makes a great "35-like" lens on APS-C (it also has the advantage of being FF compatible); the smaller sensor is mostly within it's "sweet spot". They've also recently released a 28mm f/2.8 pancake.

The new Canon 40mm pancake is also really really nice for the money. It seems that the new IS wide-angle primes are great too, but I'm not ready to pony up that kind of cash for an f/2.8 lens in a focal length already well covered by my 24-105 f/4L. If you don't have an F4 or better stabilized standard zoom then the argument may be different for you.

Unfortunately I've found that the old micromotor lenses are basically useless with contrast-detect AF (at least on my 6D). My nifty 50 just hunts all over the place & often gets false confirmations. I get the feeling that the contrast-detect AF's feedback algorithm just doesn't work with the slower micromotor. Using the focus ring in manual mode is also not much fun as it isn't damped & turns too easily as a result. My USM lenses work well enough for 6D video though.

Personally I think Zeiss should have delivered their classic 45mm f/2.8 Tessar pancake in EF mount while they had the chance. Now that Canon has a good inexpensive 40mm f/2.8 pancake it's a little late for them to fill that gap.


----------



## kubelik (Mar 22, 2013)

michael, thanks for sharing that! the Voigtlander 20mm f/3.5 Color Skopar looks very cool. I actually had no idea they designed any lenses natively in EF mount. too bad there's nothing faster, like a 2.8, but yeah, I could definitely see something like that pairing quite well with the SL1 body.

funkboy, it's funny that you mention the nifty 50's focus ring turning too easily, one of the few things that annoys me about my 50mm f/1.4 is that the manual focus ring is very gritty and often snags


----------



## sandymandy (Mar 22, 2013)

Wide angle lenses and aps-c dont work well together. You gotta invest a lot of money to get a wide angle view like on FF. Its my main problem about APS-C.


----------



## Artifex (Mar 22, 2013)

If you like manual focusing, I would maybe advise you to good look at the Voighlander products. They seem pretty nice and well made. Personally, I am a big fan of manual focus and great values lens, so if you are like me, you should definitely check for older lens. You can find high performing lens from the 80s at low price on Ebay. You could definitely check for some Takumars; I heard great things about the 28 f/3.5 and 35 f/3.5. Also, I have and like the Pentax-M SMC 28 f/2.8; it is really compact and a great value, since it can be bought between 20-100$, though it isn't the sharpest lens I have seen.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 22, 2013)

I hope Canon releases some more pancake size lenses in 20mm - 30mm range ... 15mm would of course be even more awesome.


----------



## traveller (Mar 22, 2013)

It would certainly be possible for Canon to produce compact wide angle primes in EF-S mount, provided that you were willing to accept some performance compromises. Pentax produce the DA 15mm f/4 ED AL Limited; DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited; DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited & DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited as their pancake prime set for APS-C DSLRs. Canon may even have a slight design advantage, if one considerers the original definition and purpose of the EF-S mount (_Short_-back focus - i.e. the rear element of the lens can be closer to the image sensor than for a standard EF mount lens; see http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=2544 for more details). 

The only reason that I can see for Canon not producing such lenses is as stated by others above; Canon believes that the demographic for APS-C camera users is EF-S zoom lenses for entry level users and the "more pixels on target" users who use the longer EF mount telephoto zooms and primes. Canon seem to think that introducing the new 24mm & 28mm f/2.8 and 40mm f/2.8 alongside the 6D, will encourage the enthusiasts who want wide angle and are still using the 60D - 7D models, to upgrade to full frame. I believe that they have underestimated how many serious enthusiast are out there who are unable or unwilling to spend multiple thousand of (insert currency) to upgrade to full frame. It is no wonder that these people are constantly on forums such as this, complaining about the lack of 60D and 7D replacements and how Canon seems to have forgotten them. 

Just in case you think I'm a Canon basher, Nikon are just as bad in this respect (except for the new D7100 -but where's the D400?). Check out Thom Hogan's blog; the lack of wide angle F mount "DX" (i.e. APS-C) primes is a constant complaint; he has responded by replacing his DX kit with an Olympus OM-D EM-5 based system. The downside of this is either requiring two separate systems (expensive), or losing your excellent Canon long lens options and DSLR performance. 

Come on Canon, the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM is the one aspect of that system that draws praise; surely an EF-S mount version is not beyond reason? If that is a success, how about an EF-S 15mm f/2.8 as well?


----------



## Zlatko (Mar 22, 2013)

Act444 said:


> Hmm...how about the new 24 and 28mm 2.8 IS lenses?



That's what I would do. They are a little big for the little SL1, but still not very big as lenses go. Ideally there will be some EF-S primes that will be smaller and a better match for the SL1. An SL1 with a 24/2.8 IS will total about $1,300, same as a Fuji X100S with fixed 23/2 lens.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 22, 2013)

traveller said:


> Come on Canon, the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM is the one aspect of that system that draws praise; surely an EF-S mount version is not beyond reason? If that is a success, how about an EF-S 15mm f/2.8 as well?


+1


----------



## moreorless (Mar 23, 2013)

mb66energy said:


> I don't see wide angle primes in pan cake format for EF/EF-S mount because the flange distance doesn't allow very small lenses with high quality. You have to use a retrofocus design which needs negative lenses in front of positive groups and therefore consumes space. A very contrasty, sharp and distortion free lens like a f/4.0 25mm seems possible with perhaps 30mm length. But nothing more.
> 
> One existing pancake like lens is the Color Skopar of Voigtlander:
> * NO AF
> ...



Some of Pentax's limated primes manage to be very small dispite being retrofocal and having AF.

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/662-pentax21f32

I'm guessing you might need to make an SLR lens slower to get it down to the same size but if your looking at a cheaper EF-S lens f2.8 is probabley fast enough.

I wouldnt be supprized if the SL1 was devolped pretty quickly, faster maybe than any more compact lenses for it could be. The new 18-55mm while actually larger than the previous lens does at least offer things like fulltime manual focusing, a focus ring and a non rotating front element, makes for a smaller alternative to the likes of the 17-85mm, 15-85mm and 18-135mm if you want those things and not the range.


----------



## elflord (Mar 23, 2013)

kubelik said:


> I'm actually pretty excited about the announcement of the SL1. price-wise and function-wise it seems very competitive against m4/3 cameras which I've been considering for a while for a back-up/casual camera.



But that's why it's not really competitive against m4/3 cameras -- even with the reduced form factor, it still has the extra thickness because it's using a mount with a longer flange distance. 

That said, Canon's wide non-L primes are pretty tiny (among Canon's smallest lenses) and optically quite decent (the 35mm f/2 and the 28mm f/2.8)


----------



## crasher8 (Mar 23, 2013)

My choices would be

Sigma 35 1.4
Canon 24/28/35 IS primes.
Canon 85 1.8/Canon 100 f/2

None of these are huge and all are very good to excellent


----------



## funkboy (Mar 23, 2013)

kubelik said:


> funkboy, it's funny that you mention the nifty 50's focus ring turning too easily, one of the few things that annoys me about my 50mm f/1.4 is that the manual focus ring is very gritty and often snags



That's strange; when I had a 50mm f/1.4 USM the focus ring was decently damped & smooth. Maybe you should have it serviced?


----------



## sdsr (Mar 23, 2013)

It does seem pointless to make a small camera and not provide any comparably small, high quality lenses (even if with FF, the biggest, heaviest component is often the lenses, not the body you attach them to). It would be nice if Canon decided to make some small primes that look even half as nice as Pentax's smaller primes do (especially if they work better; e.g. the Pentax 40mm pancake is in a completely different class aesthetically from Canon's, but it doesn't make better images and doesn't focus as accurately...). But until now, at least, Canon doesn't seem interested in APSC primes, regardless of size and weight. And won't the target market for this camera also want zooms? That's where micro 4/3 has a huge advantage - not only does it have an impressive array of small, light, top-quality primes, but most of the zooms are small and light too.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 23, 2013)

crasher8 said:


> My choices would be
> 
> Sigma 35 1.4
> Canon 24/28/35 IS primes.
> ...



Wouldn't you include the 40 2.8 ?


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 23, 2013)

funkboy said:


> kubelik said:
> 
> 
> > funkboy, it's funny that you mention the nifty 50's focus ring turning too easily, one of the few things that annoys me about my 50mm f/1.4 is that the manual focus ring is very gritty and often snags
> ...




Yes what kubelik describes is the classic symptom of the very delicate mechanism in the 50 1.4 being broken - but it still works - in a fashion.


----------



## axtstern (Mar 23, 2013)

Me usually going for the cheap old 2nd Hand solutions would advice :
Sigma 14mm 3.5
was already good value second Hand and will now drop more in Price with the art line replacement ant portas.

Sigma 30mm 1.4 
really small, old school lens, not sure if the electronic works with anything newer than 60d

Canon 85mm 1.8 
for midrange

Canon 200mm 2.8 L
for longrange, not really small but way smaller than the 70 200 zooms

The complete range costs 2nd Hand arround 1200 Euro

regards


----------



## willis (Mar 23, 2013)

How about pancakes?
Like 40mm F/2.8 or Voightländer 20mm F/3.5


----------



## Sella174 (Mar 26, 2013)

Given the way Canon has "crippled" the 100D down to "entry-level" specifications, I do not think we can expect any EF-S primes. Canon should have brought these primes out years ago, basically as soon as they went with APS-C - in order to replace the 50mm f/1.8 as a "first prime" for budding photographers. They didn't, as they reason that that part of the market only wants zoom lenses (although the "higher" demographic is also primarily into zooms ... 16-35mm, 24-70mm, 24-105mm, 70-200mm, 100-400mm, etc.)

Canon has, in my opinion, created a bit of a problem for themselves with the 100D. It is definitely a camera with the sole purpose of preventing current "users" not to buy m4/3, as once you go there it's lost business for Canon. Yet, bringing out EF-S primes will keep people, as they grow photographically, in the APS-C segment. This bites into their "full-frame" business, with its inflated price tag, as "full-frame" basically loses a lot of its appeal - because you get the same from EF-S (and currently from m4/3).

Canon sees APS-C as (1) a method of selling cheap DSLR's to the masses, and (b) an "upgrade path" towards their expensive "full-frame" offerings. The new 100D makes it obvious that they are losing serious ground on point (1) to m4/3 and other "mirrorless" systems. Yet if they make EF-S a serious form-factor with dedicated primes and decent tele-photo lenses, then they lose on point (2).

Canon, just like Pentax, has not kept up with their market.


----------



## Random Orbits (Mar 26, 2013)

Sella174 said:


> Given the way Canon has "crippled" the 100D down to "entry-level" specifications, I do not think we can expect any EF-S primes. Canon should have brought these primes out years ago, basically as soon as they went with APS-C - in order to replace the 50mm f/1.8 as a "first prime" for budding photographers. They didn't, as they reason that that part of the market only wants zoom lenses (although the "higher" demographic is also primarily into zooms ... 16-35mm, 24-70mm, 24-105mm, 70-200mm, 100-400mm, etc.)
> 
> Canon has, in my opinion, created a bit of a problem for themselves with the 100D. It is definitely a camera with the sole purpose of preventing current "users" not to buy m4/3, as once you go there it's lost business for Canon. Yet, bringing out EF-S primes will keep people, as they grow photographically, in the APS-C segment. This bites into their "full-frame" business, with its inflated price tag, as "full-frame" basically loses a lot of its appeal - because you get the same from EF-S (and currently from m4/3).
> 
> ...



I don't think Canon is afraid of APS-C threatening full frame. For the same generation of technology, FF will win in low light/high ISO/noise and shallower DOF. Does that matter to the masses? Probably not, but it's probably why most FF users are using FF.

I also don't see much advantage for Canon to release EF-S primes. The 35/2 and 50/1.4 are fairly small and light already, and a lot of people balk at forking 1k for a EF-S lens (i.e. 17-55 f/2.8). People also want lenses that are FF compatible in case they decide to move in that direction in the future. Perhaps an EF-S 15 f/1.4 might make sense, but I don't think that there'd be a large market to make it worthwhile.


----------



## kubelik (Mar 26, 2013)

I'd argue that the 100D is not "crippled" at all, it's actually very competitive against the supposed "flagship Rebel" (Canon's own words, not mine). it's the t5i that's quite awkward as a 2013 lineup product.

given that Canon did design a 22mm f/2 STM pancake for its new M mount, I wonder how hard it would be for them to upscale it slightly and make a similar 22mm f/2 for the EF-S? anybody with optical/manufacturing experience able to weigh in on that?


----------



## funkboy (Mar 27, 2013)

kubelik said:


> given that Canon did design a 22mm f/2 STM pancake for its new M mount, I wonder how hard it would be for them to upscale it slightly and make a similar 22mm f/2 for the EF-S? anybody with optical/manufacturing experience able to weigh in on that?



They're completely different lenses. The short 18mm flange focal distance of EF-M means that 22mm doesn't need to be a retrofocus design, which is generally harder to pull off well & needs more glass. EF-S pushes the rear element of EF's normal 44mm flange focal distance back a bit to something like 38mm (hard to find the exact data), but it still has to clear the reflex mirror so there's only so much that can be done.


----------



## preppyak (Mar 27, 2013)

Random Orbits said:


> Although I see the logic in creating small wide EF-S primes, I don't know think that the market is big enough for Canon to make it a priority. It is also telling that Sigma has yet to bother maker wider fast EF-S lenses after making the 30mm f/1.4.


Well, and it's also a price thing. Creating a 30mm lens for APS-C isn't that hard from a technical perspective, whereas creating a 15mm or 20mm is tougher. Especially if you want it to do f/1.4 or f/1.8. For example, Sigma makes a 20mm f/1.8, but, it both costs a decent amount and sucks. And nobody really makes anything faster than f/2.8 once you get lower than 24mm.



traveller said:


> Come on Canon, the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM is the one aspect of that system that draws praise; surely an EF-S mount version is not beyond reason? If that is a success, how about an EF-S 15mm f/2.8 as well?


Why wait for Canon to put out a 15mm f/2.8 when Rokinon/Samyang have a perfectly useable and cheap 14mm f/2.8 lens that is great. The only advantage of the EF-S is that it might be able to use filters, but, then again Samyang prototyped a 10mm f/2,8 prime, and that couldn't use filters either.


----------



## preppyak (Mar 27, 2013)

axtstern said:


> Sigma 30mm 1.4
> really small, old school lens, not sure if the electronic works with anything newer than 60d


They actually just updated this lens, so, while not as cheap, it should work with all newer cameras.

And I'd go with the Samyang 14mm over the Sigma, but, there's also the Tokina 17mm too. Not a lot of great wide options if you are going for small


----------

