Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

sony 6300/6500 with zeiss 16/70, anybody


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Antoņito s

Antoņito s

    Starfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 24 October 2017 - 01:31 AM

Hi again, i,m still in process of dressing my 6300 in Nauticma or Fantasea.

I have the 16/50 kit lens, i would use it with wet lenses.

But probably I ,ll buy the zeiss 16/70 F4 wich my wife will use as a second body in receptions (we are photografers) and I have see there is option for this lens in Nauticam, with a 7" dome.

Anybody can tell us something about this combination?

How wide is it at 16?

Does it need a diopter lens for focusing and have better corners?

Thanks, Antonio



#2 MarkD

MarkD

    Lionfish

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Location:Cardiff, Wales, UK

Posted 25 October 2017 - 04:04 AM

Hi Antonio,

The Zeiss 16/70 is a great travel lens and although a little bulkier, it is far better optically than the 16/50 PZ. My family and I have used both lenses extensively with A6000 and A6500.

The Z 16/70 works fine behind a 7" dome. We use a Zen glass dome. It doesn't require a diopter and the corners are OK with the usual caveat of the need to stop down when using a dome (at least f8 to f11 depending on your personal sharpness standards).

The 16/70 range underwater on an APS-C camera is a bit of a Jack of all trades but master of none. As a rectilinear lens, at 16mm underwater, it is not very wide but still fine for reefscapes etc. although a fisheye lens would allow you to get a lot closer and provide more dramatic perspectives. This focal length range does work well for medium to large size fish portraiture and for catching the more shy large pelagics. The greatest drawback of this lens underwater is that it doesn't focus close. Unlike say the Sigma 17/70 macro on a cropped sensor DSLR, this lens just doesn't cut it for macro or anything small, so full utilisation of the versatility of the zoom range is negated.

Although I haven't tried it, the Nauticam WWL-1 wide angle conversion lens is said to work very well in front of the kit 16/50 PZ and flat port and provides full zoom through and up to 130 degrees angle of view. The sharpness is apparently remarkably good despite the limited optical quality of the kit lens.

Mark



#3 Antoņito s

Antoņito s

    Starfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 05:51 AM

Thanks a lot Mark !!

Macro is not really what I like.

My wife and me are photografers and she use 6300 + 16/70 as a backap to 610 + 24/70 2.8.

So I have both lenses: 16/50 and 16/70

We only make one dive travel (25 dives + - ) a year and I had tought that only 16/70 in nauticam would be a easier sistem to travel.

Other option would be Fantasea with 16/50 and Inon UWL 100. also is cheaper including a vacuum sistem.

Would decided in Febrary, there is a dive show in Madrid and I would like to touch Fantasea before decided.

Again Mark, thanks and have a fine blue, Antonio



#4 Barmaglot

Barmaglot

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 01:46 AM

This may be of interest to you - Meikon is, apparently, working on a new housing for Sony A6xxx series, this time with interchangeable ports:

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BaqfvabHTUB/

 

At their stated target price of $277, with probably $199 more for a dome port, you could get a housing, a port, and the Sony 10-18mm lens for less than a Nauticam housing alone.



#5 MarkD

MarkD

    Lionfish

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Location:Cardiff, Wales, UK

Posted 26 October 2017 - 04:36 AM

I have no knowledge of the usability, reliability and durability of Meikon housings, but the cost is of course going to be a lot less than for the excellent Nauticam ones. I agree that the Sony 10-18 is a fairly affordable lens that delivers pretty good results together with a degree of flexibility, and it is what my daughter uses for much of her underwater wide-angle work when she isn't using a fisheye. In my opinion it would be a better option than the Z 16/70 for most wide angle work because of its much wider field of view and ability to focus on subjects close to the dome, but of course the OP already has the Z 16/70. Incidentally the Sony 10/18 also works well behind a 7" dome port on the Nauticam system. The 10/18 is a bit too wide for fish portraits apart from the very big or perhaps some bottom dwellers that allow you to get very close. It all comes down to what type of shots you are looking for.

 

Of course Ikelite also already produce a plastic interchangeable port/lens housing for the A6300 that is substantially cheaper than the Nauticam system: http://www.divephoto...kelite-housing/

 

When I changed from an Ikelite system to a Nauticam system a few years ago, the improvement in ergonomics and pleasure of use was quite considerable.



#6 Barmaglot

Barmaglot

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 01:44 AM

I don't have any experience with the ergonomics of Nauticam or Ikelite housings, although the 'rectangular box with buttons' shape of the latter does look quite awkward, but I do have the current-gen Meikon/SeaFrogs housing for A6xxx series, and the only thing I could fault it for, ergonomics-wise, is that the four-way controller doesn't work quite right in air (it functions perfectly underwater). It is lacking in features - fixed port with limited lens compatibility, no provisions for the EVF - but the forthcoming housing is supposed to address those, while keeping the low price point. Yes, Ikelite is cheaper than Nauticam, but between the housing, dome port, extension tube and zoom gear, it's still over $1500 - more than Meikon housing and SEL1018 lens together, for probably worse results (assuming Meikon housing does come to market and doesn't turn out to be a dog for whatever reason).



#7 Antoņito s

Antoņito s

    Starfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 30 October 2017 - 07:34 AM

many things to think about before buying, thanks to all

...