Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. So now your 42Mpix A7rII is only a 10.5Mpix. Let's the games begin! The California Nebula. PRICE. Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? Moreover if we have a serendipitous moment regarding a new (or used) lens, that's a good thing. Several days ago another member posted a stunning telephoto image of the Snake Nebula, Barnard 72, taken with a Canon lens which costs $12,000. Well, after lugging that lens around for years, I'm experimenting with adding the 135L back to my kit. This criticism refers to rare cases when your main subject matter is flat and completely inside the limited DOF range while the rest of the image is outside. These lenses go about as close as you could get without a dedicated macro lens. The size (3.2 x 4.4"/82.5 x 112mm) and weight (1.7 lb/750g) (and color) of this lens are not imposing - you probably won't get much attent But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. Exposure uniformity (vignetting) is also really excellent, reaching a maximum of 1/4 EV (on a camera with an APS-C size sensor) at f/2, and dropping to well under 1/10 EV at f/2.8 and above. I have only owned my 135mm for less then a year, but already it is one of my top three most used and most fun lenses. If canon puts an IS on this lens, it would be perfect! It's terrible. Take care not to confuse this lens with the 200mm F4 SMC Takumar 6x7 which has a different optical configuration, and which I have never tested. The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. Canon 60Da DSLR and Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L2 lens at 135mm, f/3.2. No one yet mentioned a zoom lens, I had an opportunity to test my Canon 24-105L f/4 on M31 Andromeda Galaxy and received wonderful results with Canon 60D unmoded, I set it to 105mm, No vignatting, slight coma on the corners and no false color on bright stars. The best of them, Nikon's 70-200E, is just as sharp all but the very best primes - ie, already too sharp for most portrait work. Not rude at all, a fair comment. Many students just wanted to take better snapshots of family, vacation, pets, etc. Also, the lens can only be operated when aperture is set to 22, wondering how I could use F2. 85 Is a different story, my 85 gets used a lot. It requires the Contax-EOS adapter for attachment to the camera. RATING. Samyang 135 f/2 astrophotography gallery Below some pictures I made using Samyang 135 lens with QHY163 mono camera and iOptron Smart EQ Pro mount. The 135 is lighter, but that's its only advantage. Also, as creative as the wide-field 135mm focal length is, its not practical for smaller DSOs and most galaxies. The only reason i sell this lens is because of versatility. Dear Trevor, Now I have only the Nikon but I can try to take a photo of the same subject fully open You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. For example, a friend recently recommended Pentax 6x7 prime lenses which were designed for a large format flat field, and are also adaptable to the EOS system. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/284303834/. It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. It's not a bad lens, probably a great one, even if it doesn't seems really as sharp as a basic 85mm f/1.8 (used at f/2.8) , but it's a bad idea to work wide open if you don't need to. Prime lenses are typically lighter as they do not need the additional glass and mechanics required to zoom at varying magnifications. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). in the rain. The Nikon D810A, however, is modified for astrophotography out of the box. With weather sealing this would be a 10. Sme of the wide field are. The extent of this influence lies mainly in photographer's perception and creativity.As all arts photography may serve given needs due to numerous reasons with the resulting integrity of the work not necessarily suggesting art.The photographic gear (from lens cleaning tissues up to s/w) is just the tool(s) of a photographer in order to produce its work. The reason the 135mm lens was that it was the longest lens that would focus with a Leica rangefinder. Defocus control enables the photographer to use an aperture of f/4 for the subject and to adjust the amount of background blur or the amount of foreground blur. Star parties or dark sky excursions are another great time to use a camera lens in place of the telescope. Fantastic IQ & Bokeh. Really like the large focusing ring. You currently have javascript disabled. If 135mm f2 works for you, then fine. . But even better BOKEH is the SAL-135F2.8F4.5 STF (Smooth Trans Focus ) which has even better BOKEH, albeit a manual focus lens. For some objects a reflection can take away from the photo because it covers interesting details of the object (Think Alnitak in the Horsehead Nebula). It is NOT extremely sharp wide open, it often requires massive AF adjustment on DLSRs (sometimes beyond what the body allows as micro-adjustment) and AF is not reliable enough to consistently ensure sharp focus at full aperture. How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? No rubber sealing against the camera body tend to give me the creeps when shooting in the wet. This thing is a beast in comparison. Jordan's twin brother Gordon is back to review the cinema-focused Canon EOS R5 C! We were very impressed with X-T5's 40-megapixel APS-C sensor, check out some full resolution images! Not too heavy. But for me, the reason to get this lens is the Bokeh and DOF control. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. I just wish this lens had IS for low light and portraits with flash. Sometimes though, we stumble upon a great lens design which is strong in all three. SharpStar Askar ACL200 200-mm f/4 astrographic telephoto lens, Astrotrac 360 tracking platform first impression, FIELD TEST: CARL ZEISS APOCHROMATIC & SHARPEST (CZAS) BINOVIEWER, Deus_Ex_Mamiya and Michael Covington like this. 30-35% diameter reduction is usually necessary on "good" lenses. The version I have has the mount for Canon EOS camera bodies, but there are several different lens mounts available on Amazon. I owned this lens for a long time, then traded it for the 70-200 2.8IS II. (purchased for $970), reviewed March 17th, 2011 Yes, she's isolated. But do some experimenting before you decide. Excellent color and saturation, a virtually perfect lens. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. One is its size and weight, which requires a sturdy support on the telescope. If I got this lens, would it make more sense long term to get the Canon mount with a E mount adaptor so I could fit it more easily to a dedicated astro camera later? My tests on it are described on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens135.html, i have never been a prime lens fan, just seems to leave you feeling trapped in a single dimension. Shoot shiny metal at a wide aperture and you'll see some very extreme purple fringing. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC lens. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. But I would argue that a 135mm F2 lens produces even greater bokeh, thanks to the long focal length that compresses the background far more than the 85mm lens. This lens is one of canons finest lenses i have ever used. Whereas quality apochromats can be corrected with broad band filters, such as the Astronomik UV/IR cut filter or the CLS-CCD filter, telephoto lenses can not. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. But you just know that there is the professionalism that is lacking here -- and the writer's Instagram page confirms that. We revisit a classic DPReviewTV episode in which Chris Niccolls and Jordan Drake shoot a few rolls of Fujifilm's Acros 100 II, and a few frames on the X-T3 in Acros film simulation, to find out. And it's not the one problem from my L lenses very sad =(, My favourite lens, hands down. In the past, Ive covered a number of different lenses, from the Sigma 24mm F/1.4 to the Canon EF 300mm F/4L. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. No telephoto lens I tested, nor my TSAPO65Q, was suitable for use with a DSLR "clear glass" modified to include deep red and IR. I would! Voting ends March 8, 2023. Im a newbie at astro.. and photography in general really! My goal for this article was to show some great example photos and share some ideas for projects this lens is a good fit for. Canon 135mm is a great lens. Still, all things considered, I prize this lens very highly and can not imagine giving it up. @juksu - you're such a hypocrite. You will get perfectly round star images if you use an aperture stop in front of the lens made of a series of filter thread step-down rings. Just plain black plastic (no interior felt as in newer lens hoods). I know this is a very old article but I was re reading as I mulled over this very point (85/1.4 vs 135/1.8) and I've gotta point out this math is all wrong First off 85->135 is a 1.6x crop and a 1.6x crop will yield 16MP on 42MP bodies (42 / (1.6x1.6) ), ~20MP on the A1, and ~24MP on the A7R IV. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. It is harder work than using a zoom lens, and some shots I just cannot get at all (cannot get close enough, or far enough way) but the shots I do get are so much nicer looking than I get with any other lens that for me and my goals it is a fair trade off. Both the 135 and 200mm Canon l lenses are winners IMHO. This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. I put quotes around the ones that are written on the lens. It's kinda curious how topsy turvy things have gotten since this article, just 4 years later, I think 135mm is possibly more niche than ever yet Samyang finally delivered an AF version of this concept at a lighter weight for E mount, but also at a higher price. here are some links to some pics taken with the lens: I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. Is it possible to get good results on a Baader filter modifed Canon 450D and a good telephoto lens, or do I need to get a good APO? As if absolutely clueless Youtube instructors who have no idea what they are talking about weren't enough. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. I do not presume to further decorate the universe, and perceive them for what they are: interference. I bought this lens after reading your great review for my Nikon D5300. Latter looks quite professional.. Its nice to have the F/2. Olympus 75mm f1.82. I'm not a fan of the large hood. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. I disagree. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. Since Eric was so generous to share his images with me, I had to include his photo of the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex as well. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. Barney and Chris have been shooting the new Sony 50mm F1.4 GM, and we have a bunch of full resolution samples for you to peruse. The Samyang 135mm F/2 easily lives up to its hype and should be near the top of your list of purchases if you are new or experienced in the field of astrophotography. Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! Don't know what the young man uses as his camera, and if he has tried to keep the noise under control, or even tried to focus on the eyes of the mallard, or the cat (their eyes are not truly in focus). The image shown below covers 4.96 x 5.98 degrees in the constellation Cassiopeia. My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. D8XX cameras, subject isolation and quality of bokeh.Zoom lenses can not hold a candle to such primes. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. Lenses with extreme sharpness and bokeh tend to be heavy. (cont. Fast focus, Super sharp, Well built, Awesome for low light. No more inside shooting with flash! Interesting that ancient, low-tech (no ED glass, no special coatings) non-apo telephotos could produce decent results compared to something modern. The interest of a f/1.4 is to be able to be perfect at f/2.8, while a f/1.8 or f/2 might need to be on f/4 to have the same sharpeness and overall IQ.They are not meant to be used wide open, except in rare moments. I dont mean to be rude, but I fail to see any photographic comparison or test to display the quality of this lens against others, concerning coma or anything else, except considerations on the manual focusing, its shape and ergonomic. It seems they are now quite comparable in quality to prime lenses. There are times that making no comment at all is far more telling than posting negative - and sometimes offensive - ad hominem attacks on the author for daring to show some enthusiasm. [emailprotected]. Samyang should definitely make 135 f2 with the same optical formula and AF for Sony EFF and also Nikon F plus Canon EF mount if possible. Optics quality, sharp,very special picture, sharpness, clarity, weight, fast, accurate AF (fringe benefit of f/2), price, no IS, makes you regret buying any zoom lenses, compact, very sharp wide open, good color contrast, bokeh, this is the lens. I would be careful with the Nikon 135 f/2 DC (I have one). I guess thats where practice will come in handy. (purchased for $900), reviewed November 2nd, 2015 The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. It may be superfluous to add, but it can't do any harm, that in astrophotography all shutter control must be done with a wired or wireless electrical shutter release swith. I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. Of course, when it comes to astrophotography, this can create some challenges as well. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. Theres no image stabilization on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 either, but thats a non-issue for amateur astrophotographers. However, as I have no actual experience with the Baader filter, I would suggest that you consult other members on the particular APO - Baader filter combination you have in mind. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. Write your own user review for this lens. So whats so great about shooting at 135mm anyway? I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. In the middle of the OM System lineup, the OM-5 promises yesterday's top-tier performance in a lighter, more compact body. I need fast auto-focus, predictable focus lock and natural, vibrant color rendition. The next 200mm lens of excellent quality is the 200mm F4 Nikkor F which requires the Nikon F to EOS adapter. Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. If You can afford it, buy it! Its a trade-off, and one that seems to surface time and time again in this hobby. In an effort to save money, Id like to start using a Canon 80D that we already own to start picking targets and imaging. With a rounded 9-blade diaphragm, shallow depth of field imaging will be rendered with pleasing out-of-focus highlights. As you'd expect from a premium prime lens, both maximum and average chromatic aberration is very low across the aperture range, with the maximum CA on the order of 0.02% of frame height regardless of aperture. Yeah I agree that the sentiment that they were designed to be used stopped down is wrong as they were designed to be used wide open because they had to be for speed (my point above). When you buy a lens with fantastic sharpness and image quality at all apertures, you typically expect it to cost $1,200 on up. We have come to accept that most lenses are strong in only one or two of these three factors, that I personally focus on when researching lenses to buy. I find 400gm as the tolerable weight limit for a lens on my panasonic gx85, and I am guessing following telephoto lenses would satisfy the itch to get good bokeh shots, 1. This image of NGC 7000 was done at F/4 at iso 800 with a Canon 20D mod. Will this ever get old? EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 Im so new to all of this so thank you for your insightful and educational posts. Seems like a great lens. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. This lens is available on Amazon for most camera bodies. They just wanted to increase their joy from photography. The sigma 150mm f2.8 tests very well, zeiss 135mm apo sonnar, and leica 180mm f3.5 apo all proven performers on star tests. Besides, adding IS would mean adding extra elements and that would very likely reduce the image quality. For portraits and with a high MP body I'd be more inclined than ever to just go 85mm, and for other uses it's hard to pass up the zooms' versatility, but I still there's still room for 135s in some kits and some formats. Can I assume that this article applies only to full frame & not to micro four thirds? Oh and it's stabilised. Cost. Testing on an EOS-5D, we see that it's sharpness is almost as good wide open in the corners as on the EOS-20D with its smaller sensor. The lens is so crisp that the diaphragm blade pattern is visible on point light sources shot at large aperature. Now we have to read this kind of ignorant misinformation on DPR articles. You're right, but a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels I bought put to use! I mainly use for head shot photography. never mind.. confirmed from others that F19 is indeed the one that is excluded on this lens! This includes everything from the rich star fields of Sagittarius, to a complete look at the Andromeda Galaxy. Pentax seems to have put more emphasis than others on keeping the resolution uniform all over the field. Also Nikon DC 135mm f/2 is a great lens, a little better than 135mm Canon Typical L construction. Focus throw. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.No disagreement here. (purchased for $899), reviewed December 9th, 2006 #light_bulb I would disagree. My questions, for deep sky pics, should I get the 135mm lens or the RedCat 51 APO 250mm f/4.9 which you mentioned here as well? Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. @juksu - you're such a liar. I bought it for its bokeh. Never before (nor after) have I seen a lens with this level of sharpness wide open. Required fields are marked *. Since i am totally new in this field, i would like to start with astrophotography but using my existing camera (Fuji XT-30). At f/32, it's pretty soft, but less so than a lot of lenses at that aperture. If you don't like that article that's your right as a member. This makes me feel I shall take the Zeiss 85F1.8 off my A6000 or maybe NOT, it's just another hype article about "A" lens. Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! it is crisp, fast, and awsome. "That is why when SLRs came along the 200mm became the big seller and the 135 was largely forgotten"Did you notice that this 135mm F2 lens on an APS-C camera is more or less equivalent to a 200mm F2.8 lens on an FF camera ?So this lens can be seen as the 200mm F2.8 lens for APS-C camera users. Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. Colour and contrast is great. The only thing that could possibly make this better would be to add IS. I got this lens because of portraiture. I shoot dozens of weddings every year but the 135mm stayed in my bag a majority of the time; I just didn't find myself needing to use it. I recommend the author change the title of his article from "The Best Telephoto Lenses." to "Some Inexpensive Telephoto Lenses I Have Tested" The original title generates a claim and expectation in the reader that his article can't support that leads to reader frustration and just more questions; why didn't you test this one or do this etc. don't get me wrong; this lens will take great photos, but the 'flatness' i was getting in my photos nearly had me give up 25 years of hobby photography. (purchased for $900), reviewed December 4th, 2006 Stuff I used to take the photos in this video:- The Canon 135mm f2 lens: https://amzn.to/346Paz7- Sony A7III Camera: https://amzn.to/2xM776q- Sony Grip exten. The foolproof image seems to be more a case of how a bright fuzzy cluttered moving background can completely detach from the offset dark subject matter and overwhelm it. Nothing else like it and the reason the two DC lenses have remained in production since they were introduced in 1993. https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1180017085/photos/3721717/bokeh. When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly. The shot of the cat could certainly be improved through cropping, though. Best lens for portraiture I've ever tried. It disagrees completely with the definition that you give! Stuff I used to take the photos. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. +1 for the 135mm lens. The 135 f/2 is not perfect. This is so annoying that I intend to replace the Canon lens cap with a Tamron cap. Which is the better buy? I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. If the title had been: "Testing My First Telephoto and LOVING IT!!!!!!!. Tiring. http://www.idyll.com/135. Not heavy like the white tele-zooms. Just place your subject against a distant background, and half of the job is done. As you can see, the magnification of the lens used will dictate the type of projects you shoot. No, Mr. But again i am just at the beginning and i also do not want to use now a telescope. The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. I was blown away when I loaded the photos into my computer. There is no doubt that the 135L deserves it excellent reputation for image quality. Just like the above samples, most are just bad. $581.00 for 7 days. The one and only 300mm lens I tested is the Zeiss Tele-Tessar 300mm F4. As I posted on the Petapixel variant of this article, cropping a 85/1.4 shot to a 135mm-equivalent FoV gives you approx. And yet this review is on front page of DPReview prompting me to go and buy this lens -- so surely it must be a professional , well grounded review, right? I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. Equipment used was an astromodified Canon 700D, Samyang 135mm f2, SkyTech Triband filter, Star Adventurer 2i, ZWO mini finder with ASI120MM, guiding with PHD2 and polar alignment using sharpcap. The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. thanks for the tiring patronising lecture and then agreeing with me. However, when my Canon "L" lenses are used at f8 they are all very sharp and the 135L does not blow the others away. BTW, the 300-mm Tele-Tessar you describe -- what camera was it made for? When all that was available were APS-C crop cameras a 85mm lens provided a near equivalent view angle to the 135mm on a full frame camera. The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. Any good ones apart from the Big Boys. The image below highlights the creative freedom this lens provides. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC is one of the most affordable and practical lenses for astrophotography on the market. Sure, if you scroll through his page there are quite a few lens tests on starshttps://www.flickr.chotos/ytoropin/, Community Forum Software by IP.BoardLicensed to: Cloudy Nights, Article: The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography, This is not recommended for shared computers, Review of Explore Scientific First Light 8, COUNTING SUNSPOTS WITH A $10 OPTICAL TUBE ASSEMBLY, Hubble Optics 14 inch Dobsonian - Part 2: The SiTech GoTo system, iStar Opticals Phantom FCL 140-6.5 review. From the moment I reviewed the first sub-exposure on the display screen of my camera, I feel in love with the mid-range magnification of a 135mm lens. Of course headline central sharpness is great, that is what grabs headlines, always shot at f2: any 135mm lens is going to give similar results. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. Its a joy to work with every time. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. Seems to me that Michael is pretty new to using long telephoto lenses, he writes that the Samyang is the first he has owned. Testing on an EOS-5D, we see that it's sharpness is almost as good wide open in the corners as on the EOS-20D with its smaller sensor. A lot of us have been saying this for years. I think youll find that this lens is behind some of the most amazing wide-field astrophotography images online! To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. $218.00 for 7 days. Focal length is great. Excellent build quality, fast auto focus, and its fast. Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. And in their task to get that blurry background, they most often throw their main subject out of focus and/or to focus for anything else in the photograph that would make it, and end results are just "gear porn". So, let's see where it falls short of perfection: lebanon school board election results, julie harris dreher, brenda gantt cornbread dressing recipe,