Hello Guys,

I'm looking for advice: i want to use the Z8 with the Z105 - can one still use the F-Mount Port 18702 (F-Mount Macro Port 87) or does one need the 18708 (Macro Port 80) as Nauticam suggests in its Portchart? I still have a 18702 of my old system and can see that there is a liitle space (should be 7 mm) from the front of the lens. I can use it - but would it be a problem if i want to use the MFO1 near future? Has anybody tried that? Or do i have to bite the bullet and get the other Port (Macro Port 80)?

Cheers
Michael

And additional question for the MFO-Users: do you screw it in the Port thread or does it make sense to get a bayonett mount for it? Even with the older Port? Or wouldn't the distance to the lens fit no more?

I assume you have tried it out for fit, I would expect the macro lens to work fine as is without accessories, vignetting seems unlikely with that sort of focal length. The power of a diopter generally reduces if it is mounted further from the lens, so magnification would drop a little, whether it introduces other issues is hard to predict. If you already have the lens you can always try it out before buying a new port.

The port designation indicates the nominal port length 87 vs 80 as you saw with the Z lens having around 7mm gap comapred to the F mount 105mm. Looking at the port chart if you happened to have a Macro port 60 you should be able to add a 20mm tube to get the equivalent of the macro port80. The port chart actually lists the macro port 60 plus a 30mm tube for F mount 105mm - which would leave about a 3mm gap. For that combo they show the same magnification and working distance for use with an SMC-2 on both macro port 87 and the Macro port 60 plus 30mm extension. You are looking at a 7mm gap versus a 3mm gap which doesn't seem like it will change things much.

There's some discussion on the MFO mounting in the thread about using the full or reduced range on the 90mm Sony macro, discussing an adapter that comes with the lens to screw it in.

1 hour ago, Michael said:

And additional question for the MFO-Users: do you screw it in the Port thread or does it make sense to get a bayonett mount for it? Even with the older Port? Or wouldn't the distance to the lens fit no more?

The MFO comes with a mounting ring that allows you to screw it directly to the port. I used that method a couple of days ago and found that it leaves a pretty big bubble of air between the glass. I had to unscrew and remove it underwater to clear the bubble. I was still near the surface and it is possible the bubble might clear at greater depth. I've used it a few other times and didn't notice a problem but also didn't check as they were night dives.

A flip adapter is probably a better way to use the MFO-1.

Of course, Z-mount 105mm and F-mount FTZ + 105mm are physically different in length.

The port I use is a different brand, but the length is different. The left side in the picture is a 105mm port for F mount and the right side is a 105mm port for Z mount.

I also used the Z105mm macro lens for the F mount port at first, but with the diopter, there is a loss of magnification due to a small few millimeters difference.

I eventually changed it to a Z-mount 105mm port.

For your information, the port I use is so tight that it is impossible to physically mount the lens even if the filter is mounted on the front of the lens.

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by Edy PARK

48 minutes ago, Edy PARK said:

Of course, Z-mount 105mm and F-mount FTZ + 105mm are physically different in length.

The port I use is a different brand, but the length is different. The left side in the picture is a 105mm port for F mount and the right side is a 105mm port for Z mount.

I also used the Z105mm macro lens for the F mount port at first, but with the diopter, there is a loss of magnification due to a small few millimeters difference.

I eventually changed it to a Z-mount 105mm port.

For your information, the port I use is so tight that it is impossible to physically mount the lens even if the filter is mounted on the front of the lens.

What is your take on the 105mm AF-S vs Z mount lens options? I have stuck with my AF-S mount lens on the Z8 and continue to be very happy with the focus speed and image quality.

Is there is a compelling reason to get the Z mount? I have a 60mm+20mm port already, so I'd just need the lens.

9 hours ago, Dave_Hicks said:

What is your take on the 105mm AF-S vs Z mount lens options? I have stuck with my AF-S mount lens on the Z8 and continue to be very happy with the focus speed and image quality.

Is there is a compelling reason to get the Z mount? I have a 60mm+20mm port already, so I'd just need the lens.

I'm using a rather old z7,z6 Gen 1 camera body, so I'm sure your new advanced product, the Z8 camera body, and the Z105mm you use will be different.

I changed from F-mount to Z-mount because there was little difference between the results and the filming process between the old and old D800 and the first generation Z6/Z7.

The Z 105mm at my level is a very small difference from the F mount.

1. I'm sure it's different for each diopter product, but I think it's focused about 1cm closer to the diopter I use, but this is my sense and I didn't measure it by numerical value.

2. When AF is driven, the sound is low, and it's soft. It doesn't rattle like F Mount.

3. There are a lot of upgraded Zmount 105mm reviews on land, but it was hard for me to feel the difference underwater.

4. Although the bokeh has become a little creamy, the difference is so slight that it needs to be cropped at least 150%.

5. The physical size of the lens is similar. It's a little longer because of the ftz adapter, and there is no advantage in weight or traveling. I always carry the ftz because I use 8-15 fisheye lenses.

6. The af speed is similar. However, this is based on my old z7 body. I expect it to be different on the latest advanced model z8 camera body.