Zeiss-Sony 16-70mm E-mount NEX Zoom is Finally Here!

[Marshmellow]

OKAY, NOW THE BIG NEWS! The new Sony/Zeiss 16-70 lens has been announced and I have mine on pre-order at Amazon at $998. They're to be released in mid-Sept. I checked the specs on DPREVIEW and this lens will most likely work for the Nauticam mini-port system. It will be very close though: The lens has a diameter of 67mm and a length of 75. In comparison, the 18-55 has a 63mm width by 60mm length. The Sony 10-18 on the other hand is 70mm wide which is why they had to make a custom thinner port to squeeze it in because the standard mini-port maximum ID is 70mm. The zoom gear on my 18-55 is made of very thin metal, around .5 to.75 mm thick. So depending on how the gear connects the the zoom collar, Nauticam most likely will be able to use it in a normal mini port like Port 72 with a 20mm extension which they currently produce. This would be nice because it will keep the costs down for us Port 72 owners. In addition, I'm sure they'll also make a custom port to better utilize the 16mm and maximize the optics of the lens. In which case I would think they will make two versions, one flat port for higher magnification like they did with Port 72 and perhaps a semi-dome like the 4" dome they made for the 18-55. The fact that they pulled it off with the 10-18 and made a zoom gear to fit tells me they can do it with the Z16-70 with no problems. This is going to be a very nice single dive versatile lens with the use of wet diopters.

Soon the Zeiss 50mm macro will also be released, scheduled for October or soon after.

From what I can tell from some photos taken in the Netherlands, the zoom has good close focus capabilities. Specs list it at a 13" close focus range. Yet some of these photos appearing almost macro?

See for yourself: 19 picture`s A3000 & ZEISS16-70 F4 - Dyxum forums - Page 1 The Bokeh is quite nice too.

Lens Specs: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/0...power-zoom-and-black-version-50mm-f1-8-e-moun

Us NEX users are finally getting our glass

Cheers,

Marshall

 

[Anthony A.]

Im pretty excited for this lens because it has OSS. Without it, i would pass. I hope nauticam gives us a port quickly.

 

[Marshmellow]

Really, you would pass? Since we're using flash at high shutter speeds OSS doesn't really play much of a role. Perhaps for video and balancing natural light shots with the flash. On the surface, for a general carry-around lens, OSS definitely will be needed and an added benefit. In super-macro I believe the trend is to turn OSS off? Maybe I'm wrong on that one. Okay, Phil, time to chime in

Nauticam amazes me how quickly they turn equipment out. I mean the NA-NEX7 was available before the camera was released. I wouldn't be surprised if it's not already in the works. I'm just hoping it'll work with an extension in my Port 72 since I bought the pricy swing mount, but either way is okay with me. I'm just so happy it's finally here. The 70mm gives a longer reach, so I wouldn't mind upgrading to a semi-port model like the current 4". However, once one goes to the dome port, you lose the 25% magnification factor, but gain in wide angle to optimize for the 16 end of the lens.

 

[alien]

I am excited but will wait and see if they produce a port for it. I am more excited about the macro 50mm. Love the 24mm lens on land best glass
Sad they will stop making the NEX7

13 inches is not really close focus for the zoom lens

 

[Marshmellow]

Alien,

I didn't think 13" was all that close either, but when you look at the photos the guy in the Neatherlands took of the insects, I figured he was using a close up lens, but no mention of such?
19 picture`s A3000 & ZEISS16-70 F4 - Dyxum forums - Page 1

The 16-70 will be more or less similar to using the 18-55 with a little more reach in both directions and considerably sharper.

Hopefully Zeiss will break from it's usual tradition and make it a 1:1 macro (rather than 1:2) and narrow enough to fit the ports.

There were rumors the NEX7 replacement would be the same form factor, but than I've heard there will be minor changes. In which case it won't work in our housing. I guess the positive side of this will be NEX7 bodies will drop drastically in price so we can have an affordable back-up.

Since I don't do much wide angle, I'll probably stick with the 4.33 port, Sony converters and see if I can't bump the sharpness up by using them with the 20mm rather than the 16. I did some testing with this combination, but haven't had the time to put it all together and post the results.

Maybe time to send Chris Parsons an email and see if he can shed some light on development of ports around these new lenses.

 

[markdrayton]

Hi Marshmellow,
The macro pictures on that site you link are crops, not using the full APC frame or diopter. Not sure by how much, but pics still look nice, sharp and contrasty and we should be able to achieve at least similar or hopefully better underwater with a good macro wet lens. One thing I haven't been able to establish from the specifications is change in length with focus and zoom. Is the given length a maximum at 70mm (obviously important re extensions and use of a wet lens)? Similarly is it internal focus?

The radial tolerances to fit in the port 72 will be tight. That will also depend on how well centred the Nauticam housing port aperture is in relation to the camera body. I'm guessing that tolerance has to be pretty good for the focus/zoom gear on the housing to mesh with the lens gear.

Mark

PS I have just found this image. It seems to extend a lot on zooming.
http://www.magezinepublishing.com/e...70mm-NEX-E-Mount-OSS-f4-Lens-7_1376993059.jpg

 

[Marshmellow]

Hey Mark,

Crops! well that answers the conundrum of why the looked like a macro shot. I thought maybe there might be a macro setting on the lens like they have on the Olympus zoom. Pictures looked great cropped and the bokeh was so smooth.

No, the 70mm is the length of the lens before extending. I would think it is internal focus like the 18-55 kit. Being a 16-70, I assume it'll have a bit longer length fully extended than the 18-55, depending on lens design. Given the 18-55 kit runs from 60-82mm fully extended, I think the 16-70 will be somewhere in the 70-120mm range or more looking at the photo. Edward Lai made the 10-18 work under extreme tolerances because the 10-18 has the same OD as the standard Mini-port ID: 70mm. Pretty amazing he pulled it off and with a zoom gear. The 16-70 has 3mm more to work with at 67mm, so I'm confident Nauticam will produce a working port and zoom gear without shaving the Mini Port's standard ID. Hopefully Port 72 will work with a 20mm extension, a 10 & 20mm. Using the 20mm mini-extension to bring to a port length of around 105mm. This may work for the long end, but may vignette a little at 16, since Port 72 was designed for 18mm WA, not 16, but if the lens throw is shorter than the 18-55, it just might work at both ends of the lens. I'm sure they'll make custom ports to maximize the lens. The zoom gear is independent of the port , so we can try it in Port 72 & 20Ext. If it needs more space we could use the remaining shorter extension, but then we're probably getting close to the cost of the new port? All logical speculation, who knows? I think we'll hear something shortly after the zoom is released in mid-september.

 

[markdrayton]

Hey Mark,

Crops! well that answers the conundrum of why the looked like a macro shot. I thought maybe there might be a macro setting on the lens like they have on the Olympus zoom. Pictures looked great cropped and the bokeh was so smooth.

No, the 70mm is the length of the lens before extending. I would think it is internal focus like the 18-55 kit. Being a 16-70, I assume it'll have a bit longer length fully extended than the 18-55, depending on lens design. Given the 18-55 kit runs from 60-82mm fully extended, I think the 16-70 will be somewhere in the 70-120mm range or more looking at the photo. Edward Lai made the 10-18 work under extreme tolerances because the 10-18 has the same OD as the standard Mini-port ID: 70mm. Pretty amazing he pulled it off and with a zoom gear. The 16-70 has 3mm more to work with at 67mm, so I'm confident Nauticam will produce a working port and zoom gear without shaving the Mini Port's standard ID. Hopefully Port 72 will work with a 20mm extension, a 10 & 20mm. Using the 20mm mini-extension to bring to a port length of around 105mm. This may work for the long end, but may vignette a little at 16, since Port 72 was designed for 18mm WA, not 16, but if the lens throw is shorter than the 18-55, it just might work at both ends of the lens. I'm sure they'll make custom ports to maximize the lens. The zoom gear is independent of the port , so we can try it in Port 72 & 20Ext. If it needs more space we could use the remaining shorter extension, but then we're probably getting close to the cost of the new port? All logical speculation, who knows? I think we'll hear something shortly after the zoom is released in mid-september.

Yes, hopefully all will become clear very soon - sooner than the 50mm macro it appears. Looking at that photo I even wonder if 40mm of extension will be needed. I'll see if our UK Nauticam guru can find out anything about Naticam plans for the zoom lens. It does sound as though it will be a good and versatile lens above water and with a bit of luck, maybe below!

Mark

 

[Marshmellow]

Mark,

Yes, I think you're correct, it'll probably take around 40mm of extension to make it work on Port 72. Rather than buy 2 extensions, I'll wait for the custom port, then sell my 18-55 and Port 72 (It' also used on the Olympus side). There's a slight possibility my new swing mount for Port 72 will work on the new port if it has the same design, but longer barrel. I guess time will tell and given Nuaticam's commitment to the NEX platform, I think we'll be hearing something sooner, then later. After all, Edward did keep his word and made a custom rare port for the Canon 60mm macro to work with NEX. Which is great, because should the Z50 end up being a 1:2 macro, rather than 1:1, ( or be too wide for the ports) we have the choice of using the Canon 60mm with it's slightly longer reach and manual focus. The cost of the new macro port and lens will be less than the Z50 by itself. Plus, Inon makes an interesting long macro fish-eye lens called the UFL-MR130, specifically designed for use with the Canon 60 macro. Unfortunately, it's quite expensive, but used one's may show up and it gives us NEX users some more choice for creative photography and video on the APS-C platform. Given the cost of the upcoming Zeiss, I may just go for the Canon macro instead for this reason and because it's 10mm longer with 1:1 ratio. Anyone who has a UFL-MR130 for sale at a reasonable cost, please let me now.

Keep me posted on what your UK Nauticam guru comes up with. Plus, Chris Parsons on this end usually is pretty good at keeping us informed in the US.

Happy diving,

Marshall

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

Some things you may want to consider regarding the 16-70 zoom and a macro choice.

The 16-70 zoom would be my lens of choice for most of my travel photography needs and for studio or model shoots. A one size fits all lens for underwater use if not quite the same. A port for this lens is going to need to be wide enough so that when the lens is sitting back in the port at the 16mm end it will not vignette. The Olympus 12-50 zoom, same AOV at 12mm as at 16mm on the APS-C sensor does not telescope in and out and it still needed a custom Nauticam port. Because of the vignetting issue with the 12-50 the port needed a 77mm thread and flip adapter not to vignette. So think how much wider the opening will need to be when the lens is sitting back in the port. If the port has a flat lens you will start loosing image quality at around 20-24mm. So you take a $1000.00 lens and degrade it on the wide end with the flat port. If a port is used with a dome, like the Nauticam four inch port you retain the 16mm AOV lost with the flat port and loose the narrower AOV on the 70mm end which already does not focus close enough for U/W work. At this point you would end up with an image of about 1:6 at max magnification. So a great lens for fish portraits and subjects from say 5-6 inches or larger but not so hot for macro/closeup. Even with a +10 closeup lens you are still only in the 1:3 range.

Regarding the macro lens choice, as you say Edward a fan of Canon has a custom port for the excellent Canon 60mm macro which does focus to 1:1 (life size on the APS-C sensor). While this lens will be less expensive than the 50 mm macro coming from Sony/Ziess it requires the $600.00 Metabones adapter and a custom port and gear. It will also need to be used by manually focusing or with very sloooow auto focus. The new 50mm on the other hand should work very well in AF and should fit into a much less expensive port without the need for a gear unless you want to manually focus.

Regarding the Inon MR130 "Bug Eye" lens it also needs a custom port and could not be used with the port designed for Canon 60 macro to NEX. To use the BugEye the port glass needs to be removed and replaced with the BugEye. The custom port is designed to do this and has a smaller than 67mm threaded port glass that is removed and the BugEye is then threaded into place, both port glass and BugEye have an O-ring to seal them into the port. This custom port is made for the Nauticam DSLR size port mount not the Mini (mirrorless) port mount and an adapter is not made to interchange the two.

For those that are not aware ZEN Underwater has port adapters for Subal type III and Sea&Sea ports. These adapters fit all of the Nauticam Mini housings and once the adapter is mounted you can install lenses like the superb Sony/Zeiss 12mm to the camera and then mount a 170, 200 or even 230mm Zen or other optical glass port, which all have a larger throat over the lens. I use the Subal type III adapter with the ZEN 100mm port for my 8mm fisheye and it works great. A verity of port extensions are also made these mounts.

If you have the means to buy Zeiss glass my my money would be on the 12mm with adapter and 170mm port for wide angle and the 50mm macro for macro/closeup even if it only goes to 1:2.

Phil Rudin