NEW Sony 16-35 F4 PZ G Lens

[Phil Rudin 461]

16 hours ago, TmxDiver said:

@Phil Rudin Thanks for the update, Phil. I just took a quick look at the Nauticam N100 port chart and didn't see this lens listed. What port did you use it with (if you were using Nauticam) when you had the S&S correction lens attached? I'm assuming one of the N100-N120 ports?

- brett

 

Hi Brett,

I used the 16-35 PZ lens with a Marelux housing for the Sony A7 IV, 230mm dome and 50mm port extension. The 50mm extension for the 230mm and 40mm extension for the 180mm are listed on the marelux.jp port charts.

With a Nauticam housing with N100-N120 35.5 extension II mt best guess would be a 30mm extension with the 230mm port and 20mm with 180mm. I would not expect great corners with either of the 180mm ports shooting stills. My experience has been that the S&S correction lens does not work well with ports smaller than 230mm, I no longer have a 200mm port but I would expect it to work a bit better than 180mm. The Ikelite "eight inch compact port" with S&S does not work well at all. 

Nauticam Sony port chart was recently updated June 2 2022 i believe so I would not expect the PZ lens to hit the chart any time soon. If you contact Nauticam direct they may have a port extension suggestion.  

[TmxDiver 41]

3 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

Hi Brett,

I used the 16-35 PZ lens with a Marelux housing for the Sony A7 IV, 230mm dome and 50mm port extension. The 50mm extension for the 230mm and 40mm extension for the 180mm are listed on the marelux.jp port charts.

With a Nauticam housing with N100-N120 35.5 extension II mt best guess would be a 30mm extension with the 230mm port and 20mm with 180mm. I would not expect great corners with either of the 180mm ports shooting stills. My experience has been that the S&S correction lens does not work well with ports smaller than 230mm, I no longer have a 200mm port but I would expect it to work a bit better than 180mm. The Ikelite "eight inch compact port" with S&S does not work well at all. 

Nauticam Sony port chart was recently updated June 2 2022 i believe so I would not expect the PZ lens to hit the chart any time soon. If you contact Nauticam direct they may have a port extension suggestion.  

Perfect, thanks for the detailed answer @Phil Rudin.

[Phil Rudin 461]

Adam has ask me in two posts for some photos using the 16-35mm F/ PZ lens and I assume what is of interest is how sharp/soft the corners are.

This for me is a mind numbing process that I have done on many occasions using a Backdrop on loan from Reef Photo & Video. The end result is that you see into the corners using a flat surface and then evaluate the corner sharpness at given F/numbers. 

Since I believe this is a waist of my time because the end result is nothing like it will be in the real world I decided to do a pool test while I had covid the past weeks since I didn't have much else to do.

For me an excellent image will stand out regardless of corner sharpness, corners are just an added plus. Since many here obsess on corners I have tried to make this simple by just shooting the end of the pool.

Sony A7 IV camera, the PZ lens, Marelux MX-A7IV housing, 230mm port, 50mm extension.

Images.

Leaf is the 35mm end at F/13 no S&S conversion lens.

The pool wall at 16mm.

Both images 100% plus crop upper right corner of the pool wall with no sharping added. 

First crop is without the S&S conversion lens at 16mm, F/13, ISO-500, 1/640th sec. #1751.

Second crop is with the S&S conversion lens at 16mm F/8, ISO-500, 1/640th. 

On my monitor where I have a full high res view it is clear that with the S&S correction lens can give usable corners starting at F/8, by F/16 and beyond to F/22 corners sharpness fall off fast. This is not the case above water and image quality improves as you go from F/8 to F/14.

  

 

[PiotrPL 0]

Will follow to see more in this topic. Maybe any chance of comparison with SIGMA 16-28mm F2.8 because 16-35 PZ is crazy expensive

[Phil Rudin 461]

The Sigma is not a lens I have access too but you may want to consider that unlike the $1200.00 Sony lens the $900.00 (pricing in my area) Sigma lens will require a zoom gear. At this time no such zoom gear is listed on the Nauticam port chart or on the Marelux port chart for the A7 IV housing I used for these photos. Gears if and when released will run in the $160.00 to around $300.00 range depending on your housing brand. This significantly reduces the cost differences. 

The Sigma is also about 15mm longer than the Sony which will likely require a longer port extension which may also up the total price. 

 

[PiotrPL 0]

On 7/18/2022 at 5:32 PM, Phil Rudin said:

The Sigma is not a lens I have access too but you may want to consider that unlike the $1200.00 Sony lens the $900.00 (pricing in my area) Sigma lens will require a zoom gear. At this time no such zoom gear is listed on the Nauticam port chart or on the Marelux port chart for the A7 IV housing I used for these photos. Gears if and when released will run in the $160.00 to around $300.00 range depending on your housing brand. This significantly reduces the cost differences. 

The Sigma is also about 15mm longer than the Sony which will likely require a longer port extension which may also up the total price. 

 

I just received new Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 lens and good news is it is possible to use zoom gear from standard kit 28-70mm 3.5-5.6 OSS lens. Maybe in few weeks I will be able to get it underwater. Nauticam code for it is SE2870-Z

Fits quite good, not perfect but should be enough. Greetings from Poland

Edited July 28, 2022 by PiotrPL

[serpentara 6]

On 7/13/2022 at 1:59 AM, adamhanlon said:

@serpentara

Thank you for sharing the links. 

It looks like a challenging photographic environment, and I would guess that you were shooting with pretty open apertures? 

Could you share your settings?

 

1/80, F8 ISO800-3200 depending on the shot. 

[Phil Rudin 461]

On 7/28/2022 at 7:19 AM, PiotrPL said:

I just received new Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 lens and good news is it is possible to use zoom gear from standard kit 28-70mm 3.5-5.6 OSS lens. Maybe in few weeks I will be able to get it underwater. Nauticam code for it is SE2870-Z

Fits quite good, not perfect but should be enough. Greetings from Poland

Again I am sure the Sigma lens is a quite good, at least above water but I don't see it as a bargain. The Sigma lens and Nauticam gear combined cost more than the Sony lens and cover less of a zoom range which may or mat not be an issue. The F/2.8 difference will mean little underwater underwater. Another excellent lens in this range is the Tamron 17-28mm F/2.8 which Nauticam supports with zoom and focus gears. 

[PiotrPL 0]

2 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

Again I am sure the Sigma lens is a quite good, at least above water but I don't see it as a bargain. The Sigma lens and Nauticam gear combined cost more than the Sony lens and cover less of a zoom range which may or mat not be an issue. The F/2.8 difference will mean little underwater underwater. Another excellent lens in this range is the Tamron 17-28mm F/2.8 which Nauticam supports with zoom and focus gears. 

BTW Sony need a zoom gear as well with older body like mine A7RII were you can't attach buttons to control zoom electronically.

Edited August 2, 2022 by PiotrPL

[Phil Rudin 461]

Yes I already pointed out on the first page that it only works with newer cameras like the A-1 and A7 IV. Will be interesting to see it this can be corrected for older models with a firmware update. 

Again Marelux is the only manufacturer I know of at this time that makes a focus and zoom gear for the Sony FE PZ 16-35mm F/4.

[serpentara 6]

On 7/13/2022 at 3:49 PM, Phil Rudin said:

Adam has ask me in two posts for some photos using the 16-35mm F/ PZ lens and I assume what is of interest is how sharp/soft the corners are.

This for me is a mind numbing process that I have done on many occasions using a Backdrop on loan from Reef Photo & Video. The end result is that you see into the corners using a flat surface and then evaluate the corner sharpness at given F/numbers. 

Since I believe this is a waist of my time because the end result is nothing like it will be in the real world I decided to do a pool test while I had covid the past weeks since I didn't have much else to do.

For me an excellent image will stand out regardless of corner sharpness, corners are just an added plus. Since many here obsess on corners I have tried to make this simple by just shooting the end of the pool.

Sony A7 IV camera, the PZ lens, Marelux MX-A7IV housing, 230mm port, 50mm extension.

Images.

Leaf is the 35mm end at F/13 no S&S conversion lens.

The pool wall at 16mm.

Both images 100% plus crop upper right corner of the pool wall with no sharping added. 

First crop is without the S&S conversion lens at 16mm, F/13, ISO-500, 1/640th sec. #1751.

Second crop is with the S&S conversion lens at 16mm F/8, ISO-500, 1/640th. 

On my monitor where I have a full high res view it is clear that with the S&S correction lens can give usable corners starting at F/8, by F/16 and beyond to F/22 corners sharpness fall off fast. This is not the case above water and image quality improves as you go from F/8 to F/14.

  

 

Thanks for your feedback. Very encouraging to learn about the Sea & Sea lens!  Are you using the 77mm lens with a stepup/step down ring? The bigger lens?

What made you pick the 50mm extension tube? My housing manufacturer (EasyDive) suggested using a 30mm tube on their port.

[Phil Rudin 461]

The extension is from the Marelux port charts. Different housing manufactures will require different extensions.

The lens Sony FE PZ 16-35mm F/4 has a 72mm thread so I use a 72 to 77mm step-up ring. 

[Phil Rudin 461]

Nauticam has now updated the port charts for the 16-35 PZ lens lens with zoom gear SFE 1635-Z. Best results (*) are with the N120 35/ 35 II extension and the 250mm dome, cam also be used with 180mm 8.5" and 230mm.

I was pleasantly surprised to see that because of the smaller size of this lens can be used with WACP-1. This requires the N120 10/10 II extension and zoom through from 28 to 35 that gives you 130 to 109 degrees of coverage.

All other 16-35's from Sony and I believe all other manufactures only work with the WACP-2 but with fuller zoom through. 

[lylefk 5]

Any thoughts on this lens underwater performance versus the Sony 16-35gm? There's supposed to be a new version of the gm coming, kind of waiting for that before making a final decision but this lens is very tempting.

[DavidLloyd 1]

I took the plunge about a month ago, grabbed this lens and zoom gear for my Isotta housing. I have been swapping between the 14mm f1.8 Sony GM, 20mm f1.8 Sony G and 17-28 f2.8 Tamron. The 14mm is fantastic, but can simply be a little too wide at times. The 20mm if i had to have 1 and only 1 prime, would be my pick. Then came the Tamron, which wasn't good, but wasn't bad. The corners were a little too soft for my liking on the wider side. I didn't realise how much of a difference the extra zoom to 35mm would make until now...

Enter the Sony 16-35 G PZ. This this is awesome! I actually prefer the electronic zoom, but I'm happy to try new things. As i didn't need a super fast lens and travel a lot, the f4 wasn't an issue for me, so there was no way I was going to spend the extra $ on the GM or wait for the new one, knowing it'll be f2.8 and probably over $3k... Anywho! If you're looking for a new wide angle to solve lives problems and don't mind an f4 lens, then it's well worth getting (in my opinion). On a side note, I've used this lens for both portrait and wedding work and of course landscapes and its awesome.

I've attached a few images both tight and wide to show how things look on a clear day on the reef. Just a quick LR edit on these.

[BobbyV 5]

@DavidLloyd Nice pictures above. Mind me asking what dome/port combination you're using with the 16-35 PZ?

[DavidLloyd 1]

@BobbyV using an 8” acrylic dome Port with a 60mm extension ring.

[BobbyV 5]

2 hours ago, DavidLloyd said:

@BobbyV using an 8” acrylic dome Port with a 60mm extension ring.

Thanks David! How are you finding the corner sharpness, etc? Not sure if the above images are cropped, but if not, it's looking pretty good. I've been pondering a similar setup (I already own the 16-35) or the 28-60 with the WAPC. I would appreciate the ability to do over-unders with the dome which isn't possible with WAPC 1 and C

[fruehaufsteher2 19]

@DavidLloyd thanks a lot! Do you have any pics that show both ends of the zoom range? Does the widest end look like fisheye? How close can you focus?

[Interceptor121 769]

This lens has a minimum working distance of 28cm and at the same time is really small 

The combination means that it needs an extremely large radius port to work properly

Unfortunately the Nauticam 250 wide angle port has a very small angle of view of 103 degrees so there is not really anything out there that would fit this lens well

A port with 16 cm radius which is what this lens needs and you would be looking at a 40cm port a bit overwhelming

[Phil Rudin 461]

1 hour ago, fruehaufsteher2 said:

@DavidLloyd thanks a lot! Do you have any pics that show both ends of the zoom range? Does the widest end look like fisheye? How close can you focus?

Three un-cropped images of Roman, the split is at 16mm shot at F/4, with sunglasses 35mm at F/11 and the vertical is 16mm at F/11. These are taken with the Sony A-1 in a Marelux housing with the recommended 50 mm's of extension and a 230mm dome port. I was also using the S&S 77mm lens with a 72 to 77mm step-up ring. You can see the S&S mounted on the PZ lens in the silver Marelux MX-A74 and with the 230mm port on the green A-1 housing.

I also used the lens with the 305mm (12 inch) Matty Smith port and I would be hard pressed to see much of a gain in IQ however it helps in other ways when shooting the splits for which it was intended. 

I own both the 16-35 PZ and the Tamron 17-28mm F/2.8 talked about in another thread by 121 for use with a 180 or 230mm port my pick would be the Tamron.

 

 

Edited March 25 by Phil Rudin

[fruehaufsteher2 19]

26 minutes ago, Phil Rudin said:

Three un-cropped images of Roman, the split is at 16mm shot at F/4, with sunglasses 35mm at F/11 and the vertical is 16mm at F/11. These are taken with the Sony A-1 in a Marelux housing with the recommended 50 mm's of extension and a 230mm dome port. I was also using the S&S 77mm lens with a 72 to 77mm step-up ring. You can see the S&S mounted on the PZ lens in the silver Marelux MX-A74 and with the 230mm port on the green A-1 housing.

I also used the lens with the 305mm (12 inch) Matty Smith port and I would be hard pressed to see much of a gain in IQ however it helps in other ways when shooting the splits for which it was intended. I

Thanks so much, now I think, I remember! 
 

Unfortunately I mixed inches up with cm and thought that he used a quite small dome. But now more than ever I understand the quality and usability of the 28-60 with WACP-C. 
 

I‘ll stay with my system. 

[Phil Rudin 461]

3 minutes ago, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Thanks so much, now I think, I remember! 
 

Unfortunately I mixed inches up with cm and thought that he used a quite small dome. But now more than ever I understand the quality and usability of the 28-60 with WACP-C. 
 

I‘ll stay with my system. 

I agree that the 28-60 and the WACP-C are quite good despite the notion by some that because a lens marketed as a "kit" lens that it can't be good.

[dhaas 36]

Just received my National Geographic and the last page inside has a shot by Cristina Mittermeir who I believe is a Sony Ambassador.

Photographed in Galapagos it says shot with a Sony A1 and 28-60mm lens and I'd bet some WACP additional lens. That combination appears to be good enough for this high standards publication!

Apologies for the quick iPhone capture of the page....

In print it looks great

Edited March 25 by dhaas

[Architeuthis 156]

12 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

I own both the 16-35 PZ and the Tamron 17-28mm F/2.8 talked about in another thread by 121 for use with a 180 or 230mm port my pick would be the Tamron.

 

A little off-topic, but did you test the Tamron with the Sea&Sea corrrection lens (230 and 180 ports)?

 

Thanks, Wolfgang