Hello all,

 

I'm thinking about upgrading to a Sony a6700 rig specifically for the advanced AF functions and high-framerate it offers, which could come in very useful for shooting videos of planktonic critters, especially in blackwater / bonfire type settings. So small, erratic and fast, high contrast 😄  
 A situation where pretty much anything will be better than what I currently use, which is manual focus at 30fps...

 

This is where the Sony a6700 comes in,  being something of a hotrod with a lot (too much?) under the hood for video.
But alas - lens options are very limited, especially for macro, and even more so for fast AF macro lenses, the ultimate info/spec killer being fast AF macro lenses supporting high-framerate (120fps) video with good AF performance...
Phew...

 

The Sony G 90mm sounds good (the G series has AF optimised for video according to Sony propaganda) and is even stabilised, but it's a 135mm equivalent on an APS-C sensor, with a long MFD, so too tight and tricky to use for my purposes, a 50mm or 60mm macro lens being ideal.

The native Sony FE macro 50mm, however is definitely not an option, dead in the water for macro video due to poor AF performance (see here)

This leaves us with the unstabilised Zeiss Touit 50mm, which is a nice lens, but offers very little info / feedack on how well autofocus (the lens does have a linear motor) actually performs for video with a6700.

 

Enter the Nikon 60mm macro ?

Looking into blackwater data here and elsewhere, it seems some photographers are succesfully using the famous Nikon 60mm macro (AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED, to be polite) with an adaptor on Sony cameras - the most common adaptor cited being the MonsterAdapter Nikon F to Sony E mount adaptor (I think 2 versions are out now)

 

However, it is very unclear if this adaptor does support AF in video mode, and if it actually does, how fast it is for handling tracking AF used for video...

It is also unclear whether said adaptor would work for a scenario like Sony aF6700 > monsteradapter > Nikon 60mm (in a Nauticam N100 macro port?), and even less so for shooting video.
 

Today, I contacted a Japanese MonsterAdapter dealer who told me the Nikon F to Sony E mount adapter supported still images only, and is not compatible with video recording.
I do not know if this is true in practice, where things can be a little different than on paper. I'm waiting on an answer from MonsterAdapter themselves.

But it would be really nice to have some experienced-based user-feedback on the subject, from people who have used/are using monster adapters, so I'll try to centralise monsteradapter data for video use.

 

***

 

Has anyone on the forum ever shot video with monster (or similar) adapters? Did AF work, and if so, to what extent?

 

thanks in advance for your input!

 

cheers

ben

Edited November 25, 2024Nov 25 by bghazzal

@bghazzal The specs and capabilities of the A6700 are great, but it seems you are having to resort to chewing gum and gaffer tape to make this work.

11 hours ago, bghazzal said:

 

This leaves us with the unstabilised Zeiss Touit 50mm, which is a nice lens, but offers very little info / feedack on how well autofocus (the lens does have a linear motor) actually performs for video with a6700.
 

Today, I contacted a Japanese MonsterAdapter dealer who told me the Nikon F to Sony E mount adapter supported still images only, and is not compatible with video recording.

 

Have you discarded the Sony 30 mm macro? it's not a great lens but it might be the most convenient solution on an APSC.
Zeiss works very well for photos, for video I can't give you feedback, a friend of mine used it this year on an A1 and it was very good. We are talking about a Zeiss optic, qualitatively they have few rivals
I read on Monster's site that it is not compatible for video, only for photos

 

9 minutes ago, Giancarlo M. said:

Have you discarded the Sony 30 mm macro? it's not a great lens but it might be the most convenient solution on an APSC.

 

I thought the same but I'm afraid it would have the same problem as the Lumix 30mm M43: too short minimum focus distance...

This lens has a MFD of 95mm from sensor plane. The lens is 56mm long. Add 10 or 20mm for the port and you end up focusing on the glass to get 1:1. 

Despite everything (it is a very old lens) it seems that with firmware updates it has AF optimized for video. At least according to the Sony datasheets. However, I don't think it is possible to add diopters.

It would take someone who has used it.

 

6 hours ago, humu9679 said:

@bghazzal The specs and capabilities of the A6700 are great, but it seems you are having to resort to chewing gum and gaffer tape to make this work.

Thanks for the reality check - yes, you're right - the main issue issue is that macro + fast video AF is a very uncommon combination (other than for insect, especially flying insect fanatics) - for standard macro MF or backbutton focus AF works perfectly fine.

The adapter was a bad idea from the start, and it's been confirmed it doesn't work for video.
 

4 hours ago, Giancarlo M. said:

 

Have you discarded the Sony 30 mm macro? it's not a great lens but it might be the most convenient solution on an APSC.
Zeiss works very well for photos, for video I can't give you feedback, a friend of mine used it this year on an A1 and it was very good. We are talking about a Zeiss optic, qualitatively they have few rivals
I read on Monster's site that it is not compatible for video, only for photos

 

Thanks - the Sony 30mm macro actually one of the remaining contenders for this, video AF should work well according to the description, despite its age - the issue is working distance, especially with diopters - on average i was shooting at 80mm FF equivalent, so this is quite a gap, but I don't think diopter use will be an option with it.
 

the Zeiss Touit 50mm I would need to test - it is by far the best choice overall, and video AF is supported on paper, but I've also ready users describing it as working in steps which is problematic for video. I need to check on land first.

It's been confirmed that the adapter doesn't support video, so at least this is clear!
 

4 hours ago, Davide DB said:

 

I thought the same but I'm afraid it would have the same problem as the Lumix 30mm M43: too short minimum focus distance...

This lens has a MFD of 95mm from sensor plane. The lens is 56mm long. Add 10 or 20mm for the port and you end up focusing on the glass to get 1:1. 

Despite everything (it is a very old lens) it seems that with firmware updates it has AF optimized for video. At least according to the Sony datasheets. However, I don't think it is possible to add diopters.

It would take someone who has used it.

 

Yes, this an issue as I would need to use diopters with it.

 

With the Nikon 60mm adapter solution gone (as well as the Sony FE50mm macro, which has dismal AF for stills and video, I can see the following options for shooting macro on Sony, with relatively fast video AF

Non macro lens + diopters

- new Sony 16-50 kit lens (E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS II )
advantages: OSS, AF optimised for video, cheap, flexible for non-macro shooting, Nauticam port solution given (SE1650-PZ + N85 Macro Port 40 with Knob), light so easy rig won't be nose heavy
disadvantages: not a macro lens, I would need to use diopters (which I have) to make working distance acceptable, but it will not achieve 1:1 magnification - image quality (debatable for video)

Macro lenses

- Sony macro 30 (E 30mm F3.5 Macro )
advantages, macro lens, optimised for video according to Sony, cheap, light so easy rig won't be nose heavy
disadvantages: working distance issues (very tight, making diopter use very difficult, maybe impossible), no OSS

- Zeiss Touit 50 (ZEISS Touit 2.8/50M )
advantages best focal length, macro lens, Nautical port solution given (N85 Extension Ring 30 + N85 Macro Port 45 )
disadvantages: video AF performance unknown - documentation does mention video AF support, but does it work well? no OSS, price (but still acceptable)
by far the most solid option, IF video AF works well enough...

- Sony 90 (FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS )

advantages: macro lens, video optimised G series which should work very well with Sony's latest AF, OSS
disadvantages: focal length (135mm equivalent on APS-C!) makes it near unuseable for this application, long MFD, high price tag, long/heavy lens which will need a lot of work to compensate for a balanced, non-nose heavy kit

21 minutes ago, bghazzal said:

- new Sony 16-50 kit lens (E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS II )
advantages: OSS, AF optimised for video, cheap, flexible for non-macro shooting, Nauticam port solution given

- Zeiss Touit 50 (ZEISS Touit 2.8/50M )
advantages best focal length, macro lens, Nautical port solution given (N85 Extension Ring 30 + N85 Macro Port 45 )
disadvantages: video AF performance unknown - documentation does mention video AF support, but does it work well? no OSS, price (but still acceptable)
by far the most solid option, IF video AF works well enough...

- Sony 90 (FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS )

advantages: macro lens, video optimised G series which should work very well with Sony's latest AF, OSS
disadvantages: focal length (135mm equivalent on APS-C!) makes it near unuseable for this application, long MFD, high price tag, long/heavy lens which will need a lot of work to compensate for a balanced, non-nose heavy kit

 

You can use the N85 port 45 with the older 16-50 kit lens, then add the 30mm extension to use the Zeiss 50 macro. That's my plan. The old and new 16-50mm lenses don't have great reputations optically, but I think they do the job at the price point they sell for.

21 minutes ago, humu9679 said:

 

You can use the N85 port 45 with the older 16-50 kit lens, then add the 30mm extension to use the Zeiss 50 macro. That's my plan. The old and new 16-50mm lenses don't have great reputations optically, but I think they do the job at the price point they sell for.

Thanks for that Craig, that' s a really good plan.
I'll get the kit lens anyway to work with the camera on land, and the good thing is that new lens' AF is supposed to have optimised for video.

 

Regarding the ports, it's really good news that the Macro Port 45 works for both (I was focused on the Macro Port 40 with  with Focus/Zoom Knob, hadn't noticed the 45 worked for the kit as well.

 

So this means you would get the Nauticam Macro Port 45 with Focus/Zoom Knob + SE1650-PZ Zoom Gear for the kit lens, and just need to add the 30mm extension for the Zeiss.
And looking at the charts, the Macro Port 45 with Focus/Zoom Knob can also be used for the 30mm (with SE30-F focus gear), so that's basically 3 lenses covered with the 45 with knob, phew 😄

 

 

Edited November 26, 2024Nov 26 by bghazzal

7 minutes ago, bghazzal said:

Thanks for that Craig, that' s a really good plan.
I'll get the kit lens anyway to work with the camera on land, and the good thing is that new lens' AF is supposed to have optimised for video.

 

Regarding the ports, it's really good news that the Macro Port 45 works for both (I was focused on the Macro Port 40 with  with Focus/Zoom Knob, hadn't noticed the 45 worked for the kit as well.

 

So this means you would get the Nauticam Macro Port 45 with Focus/Zoom Knob + SE1650-PZ Zoom Gear for the kit lens, and just need to add the 30mm extension for the Zeiss.
And looking at the charts, the Macro Port 45 with Focus/Zoom Knob can also be used for the 30mm (with SE30-F focus gear), so that's basically 3 lenses covered with the 45 with knob, phew 😄

 

 

 

I have the Macro Port 45 and zoom gear. Oh, and you can use the Port 45 with the WWL-1 if you ever decide to go there. Here are photos showing an A6000 housing, port 45, flip diopter holder, CMC-1; and a camera body with the 16-50 and zoom gear.

Is that the pancake 16-50mm lens?

I thought it was smaller...

It would be nice finding a printed gear. I guess the Nauticam gear costs double the lens price 🙂

 

 

How about turning that 16-50 into a macro with a good old-fashioned extension ring? Should be cheap enough to try for video in dry-land and see whether it meets the requirements.

2 hours ago, Klaus said:

How about turning that 16-50 into a macro with a good old-fashioned extension ring? Should be cheap enough to try for video in dry-land and see whether it meets the requirements.

Good idea, but wouldn't this kill off lens AF?

@Klaus @bghazzal I think you'd lose distance focusing, and I don't think anyone is making extension tubes that communicate all the AF instructions, etc, but it's possible. You can reverse the lens, but same problem.

I don’t know about Sony, but I have a set of extension rings for M43 (« automatic version ») and these simply relay the electronic contacts between camera and lens. Autofocus works with these in place, this is for contrast detection in my camera. I am not sure if phase detection would be affected, the lens of course behaves differently with the rings in place. Stabilization is another thing that will be affected. 
Maybe these are the right ones:

https://www.ebay.de/itm/315234634623?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=707-127634-2357-0&ssspo=n6E8rvs7Qs-&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=mFg8uGCCQOC&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY
It is definitely a compromise, but these rings can be found for dirt cheap as no-name products online (at least for M43). If it does work, then it’s a lot more affordable than a Zeiss lens. 
As the saying goes: Zeiss is nice but twice the price…

I think there are a number of issues you are facing - first adapted lenses and macro are always going to be a problem, the second a lot of zooms are slow on the long end and less light means AF suffers generally.  Plus kit lenses generally don't  have the best AF a company has to offer.  Extension tubes may work, but you are back to the same situation you have when using a diopter, the focal range is relatively limited.  Adapters like the Nikon FTZ or Canon ef-R are probably less impacted and there are a number of EF or F mount short macros that may work well enough?

 

Generally short primes are pretty snappy to focus.  On my OM-1 the 30mm Panasonic is noticably snappier than the 60mm macro up to at least 0.5x.  An extension tube on a fast prime may work as well???

 

Seems like there's compromises to be made, perhaps one is to accept taking video in a crop mode with a lens that is fast to AF but not so good at min focus or perhaps a lens that only reaches 0.5x?  The difficulty in focusing seems to go as you increase magnification, particularly beyond 0.5x.  I'm wondering if the Canon STM lenses that go to 0.5x might do well enough for you under this scenario? 

 

Just some random thoughts.

I could not agree more - while I wrote that my AF still „works“, it is definitely slower than without the extension. This is of course in part because the focus is just simply more difficult to nail, and that‘s no different in MF mode. It’s always a compromise, I guess, just some solutions are cheaper to try out than others. I bought the extension tubes BECAUSE they were so cheap, and I am happy to use them (only above water so far).

It is important to know that their effect is stronger with WA lenses. If I zoom in to max. tele setting, then the final enlargement is smallest. As I zoom out to WA, I can get a much stronger enlargement but at an ever shorter working distance. This effect is quite dramatic in practice. There may be a „sweet spot“ of zoom setting and extension length for a given purpose, but you can only find out by trial and error I think. 

Thanks for all this - unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a good solution at the moment for macro video.
 

My first choice was the Zeiss Touit 50 macro, but AF support, more than price, is an issue here.

Zeiss isn't being particularly helpful, support considers macro videography (where high framerates are quite commonplace, think insect videography) to be "special applications"

 

Zeiss Touit 50mm documentation states:

 

"To achieve maximum compatibility on APS-C cameras of the Sony Alpha series with E-Mount (AF in video mode) we highly recommend using the latest Sony firmware" .

This seems to indicate the Zeiss lenses can handle video AF to a certain point, but it is difficult to know if the lens is capable of handling the Sony Alpha series latest AF - the a6700 has Sony latest tracking autofocus, which is more recent than the lens - and also, importantly, if it can support video AF at 120fps.

To which Zeiss replied:

Unfortunately we cannot guarantee that the lens will be able to support 120fps Video AF. The AF speed of Touit lenses is limited due to their design. We therefore recommend Touit lenses primarily for photo shoots and cannot make any statements about the speed for such special video applications.

 

With the monster adapter + 60mm solution now no longer an option, it seems like the only macro lens capable of handling video AF correctly is the Sony 90mm (which is a G M series lens), and maybe the Sony 30mm (optimized for video up to 120fps, but which has working distance issues, especially with necessary diopters).

 

Edited November 29, 2024Nov 29 by bghazzal

If you place the 90 mm in a flat port with 67 mm thread, you could widen the perspective (and depth of field) with something like an Inon UWL-H100 wetlens? Without the glass dome, that makes about an 0.6x for the focal length, so should get you somewhere in between the 30 and the 90. It won‘t better the IQ, but it’s not too bad either. I have a hard time distinguishing afterwards which of my images were shot with that wetlens on. There may be a more recent version by now. However, it will make the rig even more nose-heavy…
Not sure whether these air lenses (giving 0.7x) are of good enough for your purpose. 
The opposite strategy has been mentioned before (30 mm and cropping). Sounds like less hassle to me + AI upscaling can do small wonders these days.

Yes, then it is assumed that we always want to work at maximum magnification which is not always necessary or desirable.

 

Then here we are talking about video while 90% of the examples are photos. Repetita Iuvant: it is one thing to stand still in the blue (black actually 😉) for 1/250 of a second, another to stand there for 30 seconds at 1:1 magnification.

 

On 11/30/2024 at 9:10 AM, Klaus said:

If you place the 90 mm in a flat port with 67 mm thread, you could widen the perspective (and depth of field) with something like an Inon UWL-H100 wetlens? Without the glass dome, that makes about an 0.6x for the focal length, so should get you somewhere in between the 30 and the 90. It won‘t better the IQ, but it’s not too bad either. I have a hard time distinguishing afterwards which of my images were shot with that wetlens on. There may be a more recent version by now. However, it will make the rig even more nose-heavy…
Not sure whether these air lenses (giving 0.7x) are of good enough for your purpose. 
The opposite strategy has been mentioned before (30 mm and cropping). Sounds like less hassle to me + AI upscaling can do small wonders these days.

Thinking about that maybe using the 90 mm macro behind a small dome might be enough?  Losing the flat port magnification you would be equivalent to maybe about a 70mm lens behind a flat port.