Sony rumors new 70 - 200

The new Sony 70 - 200m f4.0 macro lens has been announced and will be available soon: https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/officially-announced-new-sony-a6700-and-70-200mm-gii-lens/

The good news is that it is a macro lens with 0.5x magnification throughout the zoom range, it is compatible with 1.4x and 2.0x TCs (providing even 1:1 with 2x TC) and it has internal focusing. The not so good news it that it extends when zooming (in or out?). Depending on how much it extends upon zooming, it may be a very good lens for UW or totally unusable...

Wolfgang

According to the specs here the Minimum Focus Distance is 0.86-1.38' (0.26-0.42m): https://www.adorama.com/iso7020042.html?utm_source=rflaid67085&utm_medium=affiliate

In the Petapixel review an extended lens is shown (at what focal length?). The extension looks hughe and seems to exclude the lens from using it in a planport: https://petapixel.com/2023/07/12/sony-70-200mm-f-4-macro-g-oss-ii-review-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/

Wolfgang

In my experience, adapting a general-purpose lens for a special purpose application will never match a lens that was specifically designed for that purpose. If it is something you are occasionally interested in but don't want to spend a lot of money on then this is not a problem but if macro photography is important to you then I would recommend to get a proper macro lens.

Regarding lens length and close-focus; for a simple single-lens system to get 1:1 reproduction the distance between object and focal plane is 4 times the focal length. It is more complex for multi-element macro lenses, and with internal focussing they often cheat by reducing the focal length to achieve close-focus, but you can't have a long-focal length macro lens and have it being compact at the same time.

Here is another review of the lens: https://dustinabbott.net/2023/07/sony-fe-70-200mm-f4-macro-g-oss-ii-review/

It says "...the new lens (by my measurement) is 150mm (5.9″) retracted, though it extends to about 205mm (8″) when zoomed to 200mm.  ..."

So the lens is 205mm long at 200mm and retracts 55mm upon zooming out to 70mm. This may work together with a flatport, although not ideal (it seems more important that the lens front is close to the portglass at 200mm than at 70mm). Assuming that the focus distance at 70mm focal length is 260mm (at 0.5x), there is still 260-150 = 110mm distance from the front element of the lens and 110-55 = 45mm distance from the front of the planport at 0.5x and 70mm focal length. May work...

Together with TC's and diopters (in case they work and give good results) this lens MAY be very versatile for UW use. The diameter of the lens is 82mm (compared to 79mm diameter of the Sony 90mm macro lens that is 130.5mm long) - so it should fit into the N100 105 macroport plus N100 extensions; 205-130.5 = 74,5mm would be the optimum extension (30mm, 40mm and 50mm are currently available from Nauticam))...

=> I hope someone will test this lens out for UW usability and report. Otherwise I see myself sooner or later investing the money and test it out by myself (but it may be a big disappointment - so I prefer someone else tests it)...

Wolfgang

I would not race to use it. The minimum focus is still quite long - and that is the minimum. It will leave you shooting through more water than ideal much of the time.

Also telephoto lens image quality is not usually optimised around close focus performance - which is where you would use it mostly underwater. So image quality will likely be noticeably inferior to a dedicated macro lens.

I’ve not see a photo showing how much it will extend as it zooms, but the more it expands the more difficult it will be to use with a flat port (as it may see the sides of the port when at its shortest length). And also because the lens will often be well inside the port that will likely also cause issues with how it works with any wet close up lenses outside the housing. 

I think that the diameter of the lens and all the switches behind the zoom ring will make it a challenge to make a zoom gear work well. And if a zoom gear was made it would likely be complex and expensive as a result. Also if some people want to use an extension tube to bring the focus range closer this would have to be accounted for with the zoom gear positioning - and different people might have different preferences, complicating the matter. 

That said, the whole idea of using a 70-200mm with either and extension tube or a permanent close up lens (inside the housing) has been tried a few times down the years, but has never really taken off. But I think it is one that we should always be on the lookout for - especially if there was ever a 50-150mm full frame zoom lens, as at 70mm you are already starting with a pretty tight view. I remember James pretty successfully adapting a 70-200mm on one a Wetpixel Philippines trip, using the Canon 500D close up lens (inside the housing) to adjust the focal range:

https://wetpixel.com/articles/2892

The Nikon Z 70-200mm also has good close focus and might also be worth exploring in this regard, and is also internal zooming.

Thanks - great info...

The lens is 55mm longer at 200mm compared to 70mm. This together with max. 0.5x magnification seems to make it less desirable for UW...

Wolfgang

I had a go with the lens today. It is smaller than it looks in photos which is nice. The macro capability is impressive too, both at 70 and at 200mm.

This photo shows magnification at minimum focus of a subject of known size (a Sony viewfinder). The lens achieved almost identical subject magnification at both ends of the range:

The lens is pretty small, smaller than I expected from the photos of it, but it does extend a long way when zooming. I think that the lens would be pretty useable at 70mm underwater. Perhaps this might be its best function - take it as a topside lens and use it as a 70mm macro (one capable of going down to 1:2 magnification) underwater. Zooming it underwater I think would be troublesome given how much it expands. 

Hi Alex,

Do you think it will vignette at 70mm when in a port long enough to allow full extention at 200mm or are you simply reluctant to dive with such a long 'bazooka' port?

I'm a m43 shooter so this lens doesn't apply to me but for shy smaller fish it would be nice to have the 200mm so you can keep a bit of distance. Starting at 70mm and then zooming in may also make it easier to find your subject.

@Alex_Mustard

Thanks for the view(s) of the lens.

One question: given the 90mm hunts a bit (like during a blackwater dive) any thoughts on the applicability of this lens (left at 70mm) used as a macro lens for a modern Sony body (A7RV for example)?

The 90mm is fine for most scenarios, but it's god-awful for blackwater (and a few other edge scenarios). Someone recently suggested the 50mm lens as an alternative - it's a slow. Thoughts on this as a 70mm macro lens?

Thank you ahead of time for any opinion you may offer up...

18 hours ago, Glasseye Snapper said:

Hi Alex,

Do you think it will vignette at 70mm when in a port long enough to allow full extention at 200mm or are you simply reluctant to dive with such a long 'bazooka' port?

I'm a m43 shooter so this lens doesn't apply to me but for shy smaller fish it would be nice to have the 200mm so you can keep a bit of distance. Starting at 70mm and then zooming in may also make it easier to find your subject.

I think with a very large diameter port it would be OK. But I think it would see the sides of quite a few ports with such a large extension. 

Alex

1 hour ago, oneyellowtang said:

@Alex_Mustard

Thanks for the view(s) of the lens.

One question: given the 90mm hunts a bit (like during a blackwater dive) any thoughts on the applicability of this lens (left at 70mm) used as a macro lens for a modern Sony body (A7RV for example)?

The 90mm is fine for most scenarios, but it's god-awful for blackwater (and a few other edge scenarios). Someone recently suggested the 50mm lens as an alternative - it's a slow. Thoughts on this as a 70mm macro lens?

Thank you ahead of time for any opinion you may offer up...

I am very happy with the 90mm for blackwater shooting. I prefer how it focuses using it with my Sony compared to using the Nikon D850 and 60mm. Although I have a dedicated blackwater trip until the end of the year (to Crystal Blue) to make a final decision on it - but so far, very good. 

I can't see the 70-200 f/4 focusing better than a 90mm when used for very close focus work. I think it would hunt much more.

Sony make the 50mm macro and Sigma make a 70mm macro. I've not shot either underwater, but both are extend as they focus lenses - and don't ooze quality nor are inundated with rave reviews!

I am very happy using the Nikon 60mm as my macro alternative for now. I like that I can use it both with a macro port and the Nauticam 4" curved port. I've not had diving where I have needed recently, but will use it without hesitation when I do. (there is a recording of a talk I gave last week - coming out on my Youtube channel at the end of the month where I show the setup and images).

I am considering looking at a native lens for a wider macro option. I was considering the 40mm f/2.5 lens with a close up lens on it (or AF extension tube), to bring the focus closer and gain more magnification. But I think the 60mm pretty much covers me.

Which leaves me looking for a longer macro lens... I recently chatted with a Sigma rep about prospective lenses from them. It was a very informal chat, but he said that there was a very low possibility of a Sigma fisheye for mirrorless (which is a pity), but hinted that the Sigma 150mm for mirrorless "would fill an obvious gap in the market". So fingers crossed for that. 

Alex

@Alex_Mustard

Thank you for your response...

We *must* be doing something incorrect (or more likely not doing something we should be) because the A7RV with the 90mm was absolutely atrocious trying to focus on any semi-transparent subjects on the BW dive we recently did in Raja Ampat. For squids, etc. it was fine, but for any of the jelles (are fast moving smaller things) it was mostly unusable.

Both the D850 +60mm and D500 +60mm don't seem to have this issue. Having done ~dozen BW dives w/one of these combinations, the A7RV was a let down for BW, but great to use for W/A imaging reef scenes, schools of fish, mantas, etc.

What secret incantations (or methods) are you using to get the A7RV & 90mm to focus quick enough for BW?

BTW - we'll be at Crystal Blue at the very end of the year (after your workshop). Looking foward to hearing how it goes...

Following. I've had some fair success with the 90mm on an A7C, but my BW count is still fairly low. Not sure if it's just a perception, but it seems like AF is actually a bit faster if the range selector is set to the full range, not just .2-.5m. 

@RVbldr

The tip of shooting with range selector on full range is something we've tried as well - it is slightly faster.

Given the jelly image is exactly what we've been struggling to capture (with the A7RV + 90mm) how fast did your camera achieve focus to get this image? Was is <1 sec. or a little longer? 

With patience we can definitely get decent images, but it's sigificantly more work than either of our DSLRs shooting the same subjects (BW dive).


 

27 minutes ago, oneyellowtang said:

@RVbldr

The tip of shooting with range selector on full range is something we've tried as well - it is slightly faster.

Given the jelly image is exactly what we've been struggling to capture (with the A7RV + 90mm) how fast did your camera achieve focus to get this image? Was is <1 sec. or a little longer? 

With patience we can definitely get decent images, but it's sigificantly more work than either of our DSLRs shooting the same subjects (BW dive).


 

I suspect you might need a deep dive into AF settings on your camera.  For example does your camera stop down while focusing or focus wide open?  On the A7R-II for example phase detect is not available past f9 due to the lens stopping down when focusing.   I would guess for B-W AF you would want phase detect AF available and want to be focusing with the lens wide open. 

I am not sure whether this information is accurate, but "dth29" claims in the tread linked below, that the new 70-200 suffers from enormous focus breathing in the macro mode and has an effective focal length of only 93mm at 0.5x and nominal 200mm...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4719608

=> In case he/she is right, this lens is out of consideration for me...

Wolfgang

2 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

I suspect you might need a deep dive into AF settings on your camera.  For example does your camera stop down while focusing or focus wide open?  On the A7R-II for example phase detect is not available past f9 due to the lens stopping down when focusing.   I would guess for B-W AF you would want phase detect AF available and want to be focusing with the lens wide open. 

I cannot comment on black water AF of the A7R5, but have now a little experience with my A7R5 (mostly with Metabones/Canon 8-15; Metabones/Canon 100mm IS macro and Sony 90mm macro (+/- SMC-1) from about 5 weeks of diving vacations and some immersions in lakes at home...

In summary I must say that AF is sometimes very good, but sometimes it struggles. Working o.k., but not really better compared to my former EM1-II camera (that had already very good AF). When I purchased the camera, I expected much more from AF...

=> I suspect the problem is that there are too many settings and it is very difficult, almost a secret science, to adjust them all to give perfect performance UW...

In order to keep the overview, I have prepared an excel sheet with all the settings of my A7R5 (see attachment)A7R5_settings.xlsx. I think there might be people interested to compare these settings to theirs (and hopefully comment and correct them). Together we might find out what the best UW settings for this camera are...

Wolfgang

A closer look at the specifications of the Sony 90mm macro lens and the new Sony 70-200mm "macro" lens shows that the actual working distances (WD; from front element to object) are 15 cm at 1x magnification for the 90mm macro lens, compared to 21,6 cm at 0.5x magnification for the new 70-200mm lens at 200mm (taking 149mm + 55mm extension for the length of the lens):

=> I conclude that the WDs at 0.5x are very similar for both lenses and the nominal longer focal length of the 200mm zoom lens does not bring any advantage, with respect to the distance to shy critters (just disadvantages as the lens is bigger, it extents upon zooming  and native magnification is smaller (0.5x on a FF sensor is not really much macro))...

=> I will not further consider this lens for UW use. Better to wait for a dedicated macro lens with longer focal distance (maybe Sigma will produce one in the future, as Alex hopes)...

Wolfgang

2 hours ago, Architeuthis said:

=> I will not further consider this lens for UW use. Better to wait for a dedicated macro lens with longer focal distance (maybe Sigma will produce one in the future, as Alex hopes)...

If you want longer focal distance, why not use, say, Sigma 180mm via Metabones?