Zeiss 12mm and 32 mm are available...Now the bad news.
- Thread starter DrKevbo
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Anthony A.
Contributor
Henrys.com
Its a local camera shop with return policy. You can also return lenses if bought at sony store. This is in Canada though. I ended up returning the z24 yesterday btw.
Its a local camera shop with return policy. You can also return lenses if bought at sony store. This is in Canada though. I ended up returning the z24 yesterday btw.
PHIL RUDIN
Contributor
Anthony,
I agree that the ziess 24mm is an expensive lens with a bit limited use as an underwater lens but to compare it to the 18-55 kit lens at 24 is a bit of a stretch. The 24mm will focus to less than six inches while the 18-55 at 24 will only get to about 9.5 inches. This may not seen like a big deal but it can be if you want to fill the frame with your subject. The Ziess 32mm only focuses to 37cm/1.21' and has an AOV of 48 degrees V. the 64 degrees at six inches for the 24mm. I doubt the 32mm lens will even focus behind the 4.33 port without adding a closeup (+4 diopter or so) lens. While the 32mm will be a fine top side lens it will be of little use underwater. The Ziess 12mm at $1200.00 should be the best W/A choice for NEX but it will require an as yet to be announced custom port because of its size. The best bet for W/A use with NEX at this time is still the 10-18mm zoom.
Phil Rudin
I agree that the ziess 24mm is an expensive lens with a bit limited use as an underwater lens but to compare it to the 18-55 kit lens at 24 is a bit of a stretch. The 24mm will focus to less than six inches while the 18-55 at 24 will only get to about 9.5 inches. This may not seen like a big deal but it can be if you want to fill the frame with your subject. The Ziess 32mm only focuses to 37cm/1.21' and has an AOV of 48 degrees V. the 64 degrees at six inches for the 24mm. I doubt the 32mm lens will even focus behind the 4.33 port without adding a closeup (+4 diopter or so) lens. While the 32mm will be a fine top side lens it will be of little use underwater. The Ziess 12mm at $1200.00 should be the best W/A choice for NEX but it will require an as yet to be announced custom port because of its size. The best bet for W/A use with NEX at this time is still the 10-18mm zoom.
Phil Rudin
Anthony A.
Contributor
Absolutely agree with you. I should have stated that my comparisons were for topside only and not really focused on macro. Im a wide angle/large pelagics shooter and rarely do macro so i guess i wasnt even considering the z24 close focus distance. And as for the z32, yes its for topside only.... i doubt it will be of any use underwater. Im going to try out the sigma 19 with my 4.33 dome port on my next dive trip. If its a letdown, i think the z12 will warrant the added expense (and i'll sell my 4.33 dome).
Marshmellow
Contributor
Anthony,
Thanks for your comparisons of the Z24 and 18-55 kit. Many pro photographers have given the kit praise (both UW and surface) and I think it's been given an unfair bad rap, as mine is pretty sharp. Perhaps there is inconsistency in the batches manufactured? What I like about my 18-55 kit/Port 72 with the new Nauticam swing mount, is the single dive versatility it offers, going from 18 to 55 to SM (with an Aquatica +10 diopter (sometimes stacked on a +5 FIT). Of course, for the best macro sharpness, I'm looking forward to the Zeiss 50mm Touit (hoping it'll fit the current port configurations), but will miss the kit lens versatility when using it. Hopefully the rumors of either a HQ Sony G or Zeiss medium range close focus zoom in the 16-80 or 16-105 range will surface in the near future to add to the single dive versatility.
As to WA, I'd be greatly interested in your testing the 20mm with the Sony WA & FE converters. While I agree with comments that the 10-18 is the best current WA lens (and expensive), it must also be used with the pricey new 7" port. No expensive WA upgrades warrant a purchase from me because I do limited WA. Especially since, , like you, I already own the 4.33 port, 16mm and both converters. I'd like to see what the result of the 20mm would be with these converters in the 4.33 before purchasing the lens, as the 20mm is pretty pricy compared to the S19mm. Hopefully it'll be much sharper, especially in the corners (Japanese lens tests at least indicate so). If it's a considerable improvement over the 16, I'll keep the converters and 4.33, all of which are tiny for traveling. If you don't get to it, maybe I'll order it from Amazon to do the test because they have a very good customer satisfaction return policy. I just returned to Tucson from the Philippines so it may be a while before I can do underwater tests in a real dive situation, but surface tests might suffice.
The way things are going with the NEX lenses, Nauticam will have to come up with some sort of 2 port system that will work with interchangeable ports, perhaps from their SLR line, as a solution for NEX. This would give us a lot of flexibility to experiment with different lens and adapter combinations. Whether they're working on something to soon be released, who knows for sure? Rest assured it will be pricey
I'm hoping a medium zoom will be released with the supposed NEX7n or 8 release (whatever they're gong to call it), as a upgrade to the current kit. If we're lucky, the body will have the same form factor (some rumors say yes, others no) so we may even have the ability to upgrade the body for our current housing should we choose. Hopefully the longer lens will work with Port 72 or 4" semi-dome and one of their mini-port extension rings. If the lens actually end up having a 105 reach, then the 4" semi-dome port would be a good choice because it also has a swing mount allowing use of all of the dome for wider angle when swung out of the way. I only chose the flat Port 72 due to it's better macro capability with the kit since it only goes to 55mm.
Either way, the current 7 is a great camera and the housing is outstanding with it's ergonomic controls, high resolution sensor, etc...well worth the wait for glass in my opinion. I print big so MP counts a lot to me.
Cheers, Marshall
Thanks for your comparisons of the Z24 and 18-55 kit. Many pro photographers have given the kit praise (both UW and surface) and I think it's been given an unfair bad rap, as mine is pretty sharp. Perhaps there is inconsistency in the batches manufactured? What I like about my 18-55 kit/Port 72 with the new Nauticam swing mount, is the single dive versatility it offers, going from 18 to 55 to SM (with an Aquatica +10 diopter (sometimes stacked on a +5 FIT). Of course, for the best macro sharpness, I'm looking forward to the Zeiss 50mm Touit (hoping it'll fit the current port configurations), but will miss the kit lens versatility when using it. Hopefully the rumors of either a HQ Sony G or Zeiss medium range close focus zoom in the 16-80 or 16-105 range will surface in the near future to add to the single dive versatility.
As to WA, I'd be greatly interested in your testing the 20mm with the Sony WA & FE converters. While I agree with comments that the 10-18 is the best current WA lens (and expensive), it must also be used with the pricey new 7" port. No expensive WA upgrades warrant a purchase from me because I do limited WA. Especially since, , like you, I already own the 4.33 port, 16mm and both converters. I'd like to see what the result of the 20mm would be with these converters in the 4.33 before purchasing the lens, as the 20mm is pretty pricy compared to the S19mm. Hopefully it'll be much sharper, especially in the corners (Japanese lens tests at least indicate so). If it's a considerable improvement over the 16, I'll keep the converters and 4.33, all of which are tiny for traveling. If you don't get to it, maybe I'll order it from Amazon to do the test because they have a very good customer satisfaction return policy. I just returned to Tucson from the Philippines so it may be a while before I can do underwater tests in a real dive situation, but surface tests might suffice.
The way things are going with the NEX lenses, Nauticam will have to come up with some sort of 2 port system that will work with interchangeable ports, perhaps from their SLR line, as a solution for NEX. This would give us a lot of flexibility to experiment with different lens and adapter combinations. Whether they're working on something to soon be released, who knows for sure? Rest assured it will be pricey
I'm hoping a medium zoom will be released with the supposed NEX7n or 8 release (whatever they're gong to call it), as a upgrade to the current kit. If we're lucky, the body will have the same form factor (some rumors say yes, others no) so we may even have the ability to upgrade the body for our current housing should we choose. Hopefully the longer lens will work with Port 72 or 4" semi-dome and one of their mini-port extension rings. If the lens actually end up having a 105 reach, then the 4" semi-dome port would be a good choice because it also has a swing mount allowing use of all of the dome for wider angle when swung out of the way. I only chose the flat Port 72 due to it's better macro capability with the kit since it only goes to 55mm.
Either way, the current 7 is a great camera and the housing is outstanding with it's ergonomic controls, high resolution sensor, etc...well worth the wait for glass in my opinion. I print big so MP counts a lot to me.
Cheers, Marshall
PHIL RUDIN
Contributor
Regarding the 18-55 kit lens it is clear that you get what you pay for. As an entry level lens it is as good as many "kit" type lenses and gets worse when you add more glass like a +5 or +10 closeup lens.
Also while I understand that many feel they need as many MP as they can get what is not taken into consideration by many is the need for high quality lenses. In the 16-36 MP range lens quality is a big issue. Lenses like the 16mm and 18-55 fall off fast.
To illustrate this point you may want to look at Photozone.de lens reviews. Go to the NEX lens reviews and look at the reviews for the 16 and 18-55 on both the NEX5 like 14MP and the NEX7 24MP in both cases the image quality drops when MP is increased. Adding more glass like the fisheye and W/A adapters does not make the results any better.
So it is what it is and when I talk in a review about lenses like the Sony NEX 30mm macro my point of view is that of cost V. image quality which is not bad for this lens.
As far as best choices I would still stick with the 10-18 zoom for W/A and no real winner for macro.
Phil Rudin
Also while I understand that many feel they need as many MP as they can get what is not taken into consideration by many is the need for high quality lenses. In the 16-36 MP range lens quality is a big issue. Lenses like the 16mm and 18-55 fall off fast.
To illustrate this point you may want to look at Photozone.de lens reviews. Go to the NEX lens reviews and look at the reviews for the 16 and 18-55 on both the NEX5 like 14MP and the NEX7 24MP in both cases the image quality drops when MP is increased. Adding more glass like the fisheye and W/A adapters does not make the results any better.
So it is what it is and when I talk in a review about lenses like the Sony NEX 30mm macro my point of view is that of cost V. image quality which is not bad for this lens.
As far as best choices I would still stick with the 10-18 zoom for W/A and no real winner for macro.
Phil Rudin
Marshmellow
Contributor
Phil,
Yeah, unfortunately, all good points, certainly one usually gets what they pay for. I was just saying, from my experience, that the kit lens was better than the rap it's often given. I actually stopped stacking the A+10 on the FIT+5 for the reasons you stated. Glass is certainly holding back the excellent NEX7 sensor. Hopefully, the soon to be released Z50 macro should help in that department, but as you pointed out in an earlier post, we're most likely looking at Zeiss's usual 1:2 magnification that they have on their other planar designs, rather than the more normal 1:1. This will make it seem that much shorter, perhaps not all that much more magnification than the S30M? Funny that Zeiss is being so quiet on it's specifications. I've written them asking what the width of the lens will be to see if it'll even fit our ports or any other specs they can provide. They responded saying they have no specifications available to be released to the public at this time. So, I guess we won't know until the end of the year. The f2.8 speed keeps me hopeful it'll be narrower than the 12 and 32 width and will fit our ports.
In time, when the piggy bank is full I'll get me a better WA set-up, like the 10-18 you suggest. Thankfully it's at least available and with a matching port. I was hoping the new 20mm would be a stop gap measure until then though. The results from the 16mm with converters were quite disappointing, so I'm not too hopeful the new S20 pancake with the Sony converters will make that much of a difference.
I've already took in in the shorts selling my Canon SLR rig (needed something much more compact for travel), so I'm not in position to consider another compact platform for financial reasons.
Just returned from 6 months in the Philippines, so it may be 6-8 months before I dive again. Hopefully something encouraging in glass and announcements will appear by then, otherwise I may follow your lead and go to 43.
Perhaps Nauticam will release the 2 port Canon 60mm macro port soon, giving us some decent macro options. Edward Lai said it was definitely in the works. Perhaps they're holding back to see how the Z50M pans out?
Thanks for all your input.
Marshall
---------- Post added June 19th, 2013 at 09:31 PM ----------
Anthony,
Check out the below link. A guy is using Kenko's e-mount extension tubes with the Sony 50mm 1.8 in a macro port 45 with extensions and getting very good SM results from a decent working distance for macro without using wet lenses. After going to the excellent site Phil recommended (thanks Phil) for lens reviews, I was surprised to see the excellent test results for the new Sigma 60mm. It's a really sharp lens with little CA or distortion. Photozone gave it really high marks. I was wondering about using it with the Kenko tubes when I came across this guys post. Curious how it would work with Port 72 since it's longer than macro port 45. It might still need an extension ring though. Worth looking in to if it will work with our ports.
Counting the days on the Z50M though
Sony NEX Underwater Photography » Blog Archive Sony NEX Macro Super Macro Underwater Photography
Marshall
---------- Post added June 19th, 2013 at 09:35 PM ----------
Anthony,
PS. The Sigma 60 is almost exactly the same size as the kit lens. It's diameter is actually a few MM narrower, so one might be able to use the kit lens zoom gear as a focus gear with a little spacer work.
If you run tests on the 20mm w/ converters, or I do, lets share the results.
M
---------- Post added June 19th, 2013 at 09:56 PM ----------
PSS. Looking up the Nauticam port chart to find sizes, I was surprised to see it lists the promised Canon 60mm macro port for NEX as available. The port is # 36203 (EEF60 port), it uses a #36203 focus gear, and a # 25101 swing mount diopter holder. There's also a couple knob controls on the port for some kind of additional control. It's set-up for the Metabones EF lens NEX Smart Adapter II with the Canon EF-S 60mm macro lens. I'm going to contact the dealers about it, since I don't see any reference to it on a web search. maybe it hasn't been released yet, but at least it's listed on their official port chart. Thanks Edward!
Yeah, unfortunately, all good points, certainly one usually gets what they pay for. I was just saying, from my experience, that the kit lens was better than the rap it's often given. I actually stopped stacking the A+10 on the FIT+5 for the reasons you stated. Glass is certainly holding back the excellent NEX7 sensor. Hopefully, the soon to be released Z50 macro should help in that department, but as you pointed out in an earlier post, we're most likely looking at Zeiss's usual 1:2 magnification that they have on their other planar designs, rather than the more normal 1:1. This will make it seem that much shorter, perhaps not all that much more magnification than the S30M? Funny that Zeiss is being so quiet on it's specifications. I've written them asking what the width of the lens will be to see if it'll even fit our ports or any other specs they can provide. They responded saying they have no specifications available to be released to the public at this time. So, I guess we won't know until the end of the year. The f2.8 speed keeps me hopeful it'll be narrower than the 12 and 32 width and will fit our ports.
In time, when the piggy bank is full
I'll get me a better WA set-up, like the 10-18 you suggest. Thankfully it's at least available and with a matching port. I was hoping the new 20mm would be a stop gap measure until then though. The results from the 16mm with converters were quite disappointing, so I'm not too hopeful the new S20 pancake with the Sony converters will make that much of a difference.I've already took in in the shorts selling my Canon SLR rig (needed something much more compact for travel), so I'm not in position to consider another compact platform for financial reasons.
Just returned from 6 months in the Philippines, so it may be 6-8 months before I dive again. Hopefully something encouraging in glass and announcements will appear by then, otherwise I may follow your lead and go to 43.
Perhaps Nauticam will release the 2 port Canon 60mm macro port soon, giving us some decent macro options. Edward Lai said it was definitely in the works. Perhaps they're holding back to see how the Z50M pans out?
Thanks for all your input.
Marshall
---------- Post added June 19th, 2013 at 09:31 PM ----------
Anthony,
Check out the below link. A guy is using Kenko's e-mount extension tubes with the Sony 50mm 1.8 in a macro port 45 with extensions and getting very good SM results from a decent working distance for macro without using wet lenses. After going to the excellent site Phil recommended (thanks Phil) for lens reviews, I was surprised to see the excellent test results for the new Sigma 60mm. It's a really sharp lens with little CA or distortion. Photozone gave it really high marks. I was wondering about using it with the Kenko tubes when I came across this guys post. Curious how it would work with Port 72 since it's longer than macro port 45. It might still need an extension ring though. Worth looking in to if it will work with our ports.
Counting the days on the Z50M though
Sony NEX Underwater Photography » Blog Archive Sony NEX Macro Super Macro Underwater Photography
Marshall
---------- Post added June 19th, 2013 at 09:35 PM ----------
Anthony,
PS. The Sigma 60 is almost exactly the same size as the kit lens. It's diameter is actually a few MM narrower, so one might be able to use the kit lens zoom gear as a focus gear with a little spacer work.
If you run tests on the 20mm w/ converters, or I do, lets share the results.
M
---------- Post added June 19th, 2013 at 09:56 PM ----------
PSS. Looking up the Nauticam port chart to find sizes, I was surprised to see it lists the promised Canon 60mm macro port for NEX as available. The port is # 36203 (EEF60 port), it uses a #36203 focus gear, and a # 25101 swing mount diopter holder. There's also a couple knob controls on the port for some kind of additional control. It's set-up for the Metabones EF lens NEX Smart Adapter II with the Canon EF-S 60mm macro lens. I'm going to contact the dealers about it, since I don't see any reference to it on a web search. maybe it hasn't been released yet, but at least it's listed on their official port chart. Thanks Edward!
Last edited:
Marshmellow
Contributor
Update: I called around on the NEX/Canon 60 macro port #36203. While it's listed on a Nauticam port list, it's not available for sale as of yet.
2nd Update: The Sigma 60 is appears to possibly fit with stacked Kenko E-mount extension tubes (10 &16mm) in Port 72 without the need for port extensions. The tech specs and my measurements of the 18-55 kit lens (82mm length from mount to 55mm extension) show the 56mm (length) Sigma to be within 1mm of the Port 72 glass. This may give us a higher IQ, longer reach macro until Zeiss 50 becomes available and we know it works with our rigs. On paper it works out, but in real world one will have to test the combination to see if they fit and work together. I have them on order for testing and will report the results when I get them. With the lens so close to the port glass, a +5 and 10 diopters may help further with magnification. The Sigma is also 1mm narrower in diameter at the focus ring which means one might be able to jimmy rig the 18-55 kit gear to the Sigma for manual focusing using the NEX7's DMF focus mode in manual or auto should currents call for it.
M
2nd Update: The Sigma 60 is appears to possibly fit with stacked Kenko E-mount extension tubes (10 &16mm) in Port 72 without the need for port extensions. The tech specs and my measurements of the 18-55 kit lens (82mm length from mount to 55mm extension) show the 56mm (length) Sigma to be within 1mm of the Port 72 glass. This may give us a higher IQ, longer reach macro until Zeiss 50 becomes available and we know it works with our rigs. On paper it works out, but in real world one will have to test the combination to see if they fit and work together. I have them on order for testing and will report the results when I get them. With the lens so close to the port glass, a +5 and 10 diopters may help further with magnification. The Sigma is also 1mm narrower in diameter at the focus ring which means one might be able to jimmy rig the 18-55 kit gear to the Sigma for manual focusing using the NEX7's DMF focus mode in manual or auto should currents call for it.
M
PHIL RUDIN
Contributor
While I agree that the Sigma 60mm looks to be a sharp lens using extension tubes would be my last choice over closeup lenses or a tele converter.
First when you use extensions you loose from one to three stops of light which means auto focus will slow down greatly. Next the lens will only focus in a very shallow range of a few inches, so unlike using the 18-55 or Sony 30 macro you will not be able to shoot a macro shot and then focus on a subject two feet away. Last the extension tubes go between the lens and camera body which moves the manual focus ring away from the camera and the housing. As a result the gear will not reach into the housing and engage with the teeth to move the gear. As a result you will likely need a custom gear for manual focus. I still think the best choice for closer focus with this system is the use of closeup lenses with the kit lens or use of the 30 macro.
Phil Rudin
First when you use extensions you loose from one to three stops of light which means auto focus will slow down greatly. Next the lens will only focus in a very shallow range of a few inches, so unlike using the 18-55 or Sony 30 macro you will not be able to shoot a macro shot and then focus on a subject two feet away. Last the extension tubes go between the lens and camera body which moves the manual focus ring away from the camera and the housing. As a result the gear will not reach into the housing and engage with the teeth to move the gear. As a result you will likely need a custom gear for manual focus. I still think the best choice for closer focus with this system is the use of closeup lenses with the kit lens or use of the 30 macro.
Phil Rudin
Marshmellow
Contributor
Hi Phil,
Yes, I agree and all good points, most of which I more or less took into consideration. The Sigma 60 set-up would be comparable to using the Nikonos adapter with the 80mm lens and extension tubes. Combining the considerably sharper IQ of the Sigma, over the kit lens, with the possibility of a greater working distance at higher magnification would be an affordable alternative to the kit lens when wanting to work solely with super-macro, since they both use the same port and add little weight and bulk to the system. I actually measured the distances to the gear as you mentioned and it will most likely need a rubber sleeve extension or something of the sort to extend the gear out to the Sigma focus ring if one wants to use the benefits of manual DMF focus with both tubes stacked. It might work by itself with just the 10mm, but that would undermine the whole point of using this for SM.
As you know, I very much like the versatility of the kit lens, yet it has a minimum focus distance of around 10", so one has to use diopters for anything closer. The focus range and working distance is quite limiting when using them. Adding any kind of glass most likely lowers IQ even with the best close-up lens. I don't exactly know how to do the math to calculate the magnification differences, but Ive read it's the extension distance divided by the lens size to get the magnification factor. Which in this case is 26/60=.433 x the magnification factor of the S60 lens .72=.30. Looking up the 18-55mm kit lens tonight, I see it has a 1:3.3 or .33 factor so there might not be as much magnification gain here as I originally hoped. Maybe that doesn't surprise me since we're only looking at a 5mm difference between the lens. Whether the depth of field will be more or less, as compared to the diopters, I have no idea. Looking at the diver's photos who used this set-up with the Sony 50mm 1.8, I thought there was more magnification and working distance. His focus range with the Sony 50 1.8 seemed deeper too than what you suggested, and he was using dry diopters too besides the tubes.
You'll probably be correct and this will turn out to be a fun filled weekend with a trip to the post office on the following Monday. There would have to be a substantial jump in IQ and working distance over the kit for me to go down with the Sigma for versatility reasons. There are times, however, when muck diving in Anilao, when I knew super macro was all I was going to use, any added IQ and working distance benefit the Sigma might provide would be welcome in terms of resolution for the big prints I do. I seriously looked into the above mentioned Nikonos system since 80mm is considerably longer than 55/60. There was nothing on the used market at a reasonable price (the Nauticam adapter being the main issue) The Nikonos system had it's drawbacks, one being able to see your subject at operating f-stop, lens operating information, etc. and that the equipment can't be used for anything else sort of took the wind out of sails for that approach. If Sony or some third party would just give us a longer macro or mid-range zoom, I would be very happy. In time I suppose it will happen; the never ending NEX story it seems.
Given that the Canon and Zeiss macro options will dig deep into our wallets ($1,200-2,200) spending between $300 to $450 (used/new) for a higher IQ macro option that fits into our port 72 is sort of the poor man's super-macro alternative...if it works I'll let everyone know soon enough.
I suppose my curiosity and techno mind has gotten the best of me I laughed when I saw the Sigma/Kenko set-up being exactly the same length as the kit lens extended out to it's end point at 55mm (82mm) After seeing the incredible specs on Photozone.de on the Sigma 60 as compared to the kit, I figured it was worth an afternoon of play to satisfy my curiosity. Since the lens and tubes are coming from a big vender with a no questions asked return policy, it's not a financial risk to find out. It would at least provide us NEX users with some other options. LOL. If I had known the slow pace of lens development when I first got my rig, I might have considered 43, but that's the water under the bridge I now swim in
Lastly, as requested, I'm putting together some dive information for you in the Philippines, so know that it's in the works and will come shortly.
Cheers,
Marshall
Yes, I agree and all good points, most of which I more or less took into consideration. The Sigma 60 set-up would be comparable to using the Nikonos adapter with the 80mm lens and extension tubes. Combining the considerably sharper IQ of the Sigma, over the kit lens, with the possibility of a greater working distance at higher magnification would be an affordable alternative to the kit lens when wanting to work solely with super-macro, since they both use the same port and add little weight and bulk to the system. I actually measured the distances to the gear as you mentioned and it will most likely need a rubber sleeve extension or something of the sort to extend the gear out to the Sigma focus ring if one wants to use the benefits of manual DMF focus with both tubes stacked. It might work by itself with just the 10mm, but that would undermine the whole point of using this for SM.
As you know, I very much like the versatility of the kit lens, yet it has a minimum focus distance of around 10", so one has to use diopters for anything closer. The focus range and working distance is quite limiting when using them. Adding any kind of glass most likely lowers IQ even with the best close-up lens. I don't exactly know how to do the math to calculate the magnification differences, but Ive read it's the extension distance divided by the lens size to get the magnification factor. Which in this case is 26/60=.433 x the magnification factor of the S60 lens .72=.30. Looking up the 18-55mm kit lens tonight, I see it has a 1:3.3 or .33 factor so there might not be as much magnification gain here as I originally hoped. Maybe that doesn't surprise me since we're only looking at a 5mm difference between the lens. Whether the depth of field will be more or less, as compared to the diopters, I have no idea. Looking at the diver's photos who used this set-up with the Sony 50mm 1.8, I thought there was more magnification and working distance. His focus range with the Sony 50 1.8 seemed deeper too than what you suggested, and he was using dry diopters too besides the tubes.
You'll probably be correct and this will turn out to be a fun filled weekend with a trip to the post office on the following Monday. There would have to be a substantial jump in IQ and working distance over the kit for me to go down with the Sigma for versatility reasons. There are times, however, when muck diving in Anilao, when I knew super macro was all I was going to use, any added IQ and working distance benefit the Sigma might provide would be welcome in terms of resolution for the big prints I do. I seriously looked into the above mentioned Nikonos system since 80mm is considerably longer than 55/60. There was nothing on the used market at a reasonable price (the Nauticam adapter being the main issue) The Nikonos system had it's drawbacks, one being able to see your subject at operating f-stop, lens operating information, etc. and that the equipment can't be used for anything else sort of took the wind out of sails for that approach. If Sony or some third party would just give us a longer macro or mid-range zoom, I would be very happy. In time I suppose it will happen; the never ending NEX story it seems.
Given that the Canon and Zeiss macro options will dig deep into our wallets ($1,200-2,200) spending between $300 to $450 (used/new) for a higher IQ macro option that fits into our port 72 is sort of the poor man's super-macro alternative...if it works
I'll let everyone know soon enough. I suppose my curiosity and techno mind has gotten the best of me
I laughed when I saw the Sigma/Kenko set-up being exactly the same length as the kit lens extended out to it's end point at 55mm (82mm) After seeing the incredible specs on Photozone.de on the Sigma 60 as compared to the kit, I figured it was worth an afternoon of play to satisfy my curiosity. Since the lens and tubes are coming from a big vender with a no questions asked return policy, it's not a financial risk to find out. It would at least provide us NEX users with some other options. LOL. If I had known the slow pace of lens development when I first got my rig, I might have considered 43, but that's the water under the bridge I now swim in Lastly, as requested, I'm putting together some dive information for you in the Philippines, so know that it's in the works and will come shortly.
Cheers,
Marshall
Similar threads
