canon 135mm f2 astrophotography
The North America Nebula captured using the 135mm lens with a clip-in Ha filter. Often need f2.2 to f2.8 to gain sufficient DOF for human subjects. 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. Beautiful portrait lens. (purchased for $900), reviewed November 2nd, 2015 Now i have the f2.8 version, and while the resolution is better it s under no circumstance as good as the f/4 one. You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. Sigma 105/2.8 DG EX Macro (very sharp at infinity) One of them is simplicity: A clear, simple subject that constitutes a shape, standing out and contrasting against a calm and simple background. I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. 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. (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) Hi Thomas As far as I know, the Nikon D500 is not modified for astrophotography out of the box (it includes a built in IR cut filter that blocks much of the 656nm wavelength). Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. Orion nebula shot with Canon T3i and Rokinon 135mm @ F2.0 150 shots with dark bias and flats stacked and edited. if you really want to get the best gym photos that can be taken, use it and enjoy what you will see. It's a trade off. Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. Flip on through what we found, and see how the lens performs in the real world in our sample gallery. Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. Let's dig in. You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. As the reader reviews below testify, this is an absolutely stellar lens, probably one of the sharpest and most distortion-free that Canon makes. And as this article clearly shows, no amount of blurr will make a poorly composed photo good. Amazing colours, contrast, bokeh, everything! Trully sharp accross whole frame from f2 on 5d. The Andromeda Galaxy using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens. I just love the lightning fast & accurate focus of this lens. So now your 42Mpix A7rII is only a 10.5Mpix. Jordan's twin brother Gordon is back to review the cinema-focused Canon EOS R5 C! But again i am just at the beginning and i also do not want to use now a telescope. Here is a short list of great astrophotography targets to shoot at 135mm with this lens: Below, is an incredible example of the types of projects possible with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 lens. BTW, the 300-mm Tele-Tessar you describe -- what camera was it made for? The focuser adjustment ring on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is excellent, but fine-tuning your critical focus on a bright star at F/2 will take some trial and error to get right. Just plain black plastic (no interior felt as in newer lens hoods). Sure, the Nifty 50 is an incredible value (and a LOT cheaper), but the 135mm puts you within range of some of the best astrophotography targets in the night sky. And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? In my test, nikon have the same color correction than Canon and same sharpness. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. Does the bright star reflection bother you? This is a stunning lens, clearly one of the very best lenses that Canon produces, this is in the same world class as the 35 1.4, 85 1.2 L lenses. f/2! Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. 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. This has several advantages from less demanding tracking accuracy, to being able to use a lower ISO setting. For this reason, a combination of a good light pollution filter, and the use of flat calibration frames are recommended. See the full-size version on Astrobin. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. The Rokinon website lists this lens as being useful for portraiture photography, and most telephoto applications. I have the Sony SaL 135F1.8 Zeiss Lens and think that is excellent. Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. Selecting between it and the 200mm Takumar was not an easy choice but, in the end, I chose the Takumar because it seemed to have slightly better contrast. This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop . Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. I do not think telephoto lenses would be suitable for use with your modified camera. Show some humility and don't troll. Yes, each can produce different results (And that's why I keep and use several different lenses), but my point is that sharpness or bokeh are not the only factors for portraits -- sometimes it just comes down to convenience or price! Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. Olympus 75mm f1.82. in the rain. The best 200mm lens is precisely the older 200mm F4 SMC Takumar, which comes with the M42 camera thread, and requires the M42-EOS adapter. Simple fact is the Samyang 135/2 is a remarkably good lens for the price, and it offers a set of optical characteristics that typically cost 2-4x more. A Bargain, very competively priced Focus end stop. So.. its like there is one F stop not being used by the lens..how do you know what click is for what F stop?? Bottom line, this is just an outstanding lens by any measure, one that makes clear why you'd want to pay the freight for expensive prime glass. When i just judge by the indicator line as i click through, it seems like its 19 that gets skipped wondering if there is anything more definite? Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! Because of some residual chromatic aberration even with the aperture stop, the best focus lies not where the star image is the smallest, but rather just slightly away from infinity, at the point where the star image barely begins to enlarge. Most of these APOs have F ratios around 6.5, and are unable to comprehend in their field of view large celestial objects such as the Andromeda galaxy, the North America nebula, and comets. The full name of this lens is the Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC, with ED standing for extra-low dispersion, and UMC referring to the ultra multi-coated optics. Definetely the most sharpest lens which I have ever seen. There is no doubt that the 135L deserves it excellent reputation for image quality. 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. Not too heavy. I haven't seen compassion with the excellent Zeiss lens you quote (That BTW costs at least 3.5-4 times, yet a good comparison as similar to Zeiss, Samyang believes in providing the exceptional Image Quality, with Manual focus) but compare with Canon's L 135mm F2.0, that by many reviews, is considered as one the best Canon lenses ever made (Not . It could really use an update to its coatings. My copy is 12-years-old and still delivers at over 75 weddings a year. Just not useful if you already have traditional focal lengths. Oh and it's stabilised. https://www.dpreview.com/news/7777572944/video-using-the-5-700-canon-200mm-f2-on-the-new-sony-a7r-iii, DPReview TV: We share our 2021 predictions while freezing our asses off, Video: Here's how Adobe Lightroom Mobile works on the Zeiss ZX1, DPReview TV: How to set up Sony's 'Real-Time' autofocus tracking, 7Artisans releases a $195 35mm F5.6 golden pancake lens for Leica M mount cameras, OM System M. Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro Sample Gallery, Fujifilm X-T5 production sample gallery (DPReview TV), DPReview TV: Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM Review, DPReview TV: Sony 50mm F1.4 GM vs Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG DN Art, The best cameras for family and friends photos in 2022, Best affordable cameras for sports and action in 2022. A lot of us have been saying this for years. It is sharp but somehow not that analytic way as a macro lens. So I feel I'm being cheated. Fast focus, Super sharp, Well built, Awesome for low light. I was expecting a lot more of an article that says "the best telephoto lenses for astrophotography". 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. To prevent damage to the lens finish, apply nylon acorn nuts (or cap nuts) to the tips of the retaining ring's three alignment screws. I do know, however, that I can take an equally framed photo I've shot with my Canon kit lens, both zoomed to 100% I run circles around this guy. Canon's 700-200 zooms have IS and are weather sealed two features that the 135 f/2 lacks. I cant wait to try this lens out during the winter months on some wide-field targets in Orion. I have used and still use the 135MM F/2 l lens. Have you ever come across this phenomena? . I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. Sometimes though, we stumble upon a great lens design which is strong in all three. Part of it might be that they were designed for film photography and modern digital sensor are far more demanding in terms of optical quality. Just like the above samples, most are just bad. But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. In an effort to save money, Id like to start using a Canon 80D that we already own to start picking targets and imaging. I enjoied the use of this lens many years before the DSLR. In this review, however, I am using the lens on a crop sensor (APS-C) Canon EOS 60Da, which puts the field of view at 12.4 degrees. If you're using or are looking to buy the Samyang or Rokinon 135mm F/2, please let me know what you're imaging with it or any questions you may have in the comment section below. In this buying guide weve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. I should mention that I have only tested this full-frame lens using my astrophotography DSLRs, all of which are crop-sensor camera bodies. But you just know that there is the professionalism that is lacking here -- and the writer's Instagram page confirms that. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. But you are talking more than 2x crop (cut half by width and height) and that leaves you to twice smaller resolution == quarter of the Mpix count.So now your 42Mpix A7rII is only a 10.5Mpix. That's why I really enjoy shooting portraits with it. We always expect to see some drop in performance (particularly corner sharpness) when we move from testing on a sub-frame to a full-frame camera, but the 135mm f/2L turned in a really remarkable performance even at full-frame. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. Some reviewers have listed lack of IS as a "Con". 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. It always happens to me with Samyang, it makes good glasses, fast and sharp, I want to have them, but they are not comfortable to use, not in Sony E, their focus is not precise, and they are not "so" cheap. As in all arts the client's likes influence the result up to a point. Moreover if we have a serendipitous moment regarding a new (or used) lens, that's a good thing. One way to combat potential soft images and chasing perfect focus all night is to stop the lens down to F/2.8 or even F/4. However, stepping outside to polar align a small star tracker and attach a DSLR and lens is quick and painless. Only con I can think of, and that may be a big one depending on how you plan to use the lens is the lack of weather sealing. I've done comparisons between my brand-new Samyang 85/1.4 and the old big Apollo 135/1.8 lens I had lying around, and the shots were for all practical purposes identical (exept, obviously, for the pixel count once cropped). IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. (purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 Micael Widell is a photography enthusiast based in Stockholm, Sweden. Some noteworthy targets to try. This lens is available on Amazon for most camera bodies. I have used the canon 70-200 f2.8L ii and also the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 L with excellent results. There was no reason to test any other because, when stopped down to 49mm, F6.1, this lens is simply perfect, comparable to any APO on the market. The aperture range of this lens is F/2 to F/22, with 9 diaphragm blades (aperture blades) that work in harmony to set your f-stop. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ $449.00. If the telescope mount is precisely aligned to the celestial north pole, unguided exposures of one to two minutes are possible. I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. Proper composition, light and retouching are much prefferable to crazy gooey bokeh. Why would I want a 135/2.0 lens when I have a 135/1.8? thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. Ive spent a handful of nights testing this lens in my Bortle Scale Class 6/7 backyard, and my results live up to the hype it gets in terms of astrophotography performance. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. Weight. [emailprotected]. It improves slightly stopped down. We were surprised by just how much difference there was between these AI-powered image enlargers. For my purposes, this is a spectacular lens. (AVX). 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. This way the focus will favor the red light which is more objectionable within a star image than a bit of blue. I stopped reading after the part where someone I don't know told me I "should" be doing something. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. What's it got and what's it like to use? The lens shows a very slight pincushion distortion, but it's well under 0.1% of frame height, an excellent performance by any measure. Although this lens feels solid, it is rather light when compared to a telescope. The Precious - sharp images, fast focus, perfect weight, reference-quality build. 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. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. Available 03/21/23. It is worth of it's price?Any links to astrophotos with this lens?Thanks. If you shoot things in motion on a Canon body, and need some reach without massive bulk, this is the one I recommend. That is kind of the point I am trying to make -- These pictures are really not in another league. For some reason Samyang makes lenses nobody is asking for. I use it to photograph highschool basketball in poor light. (purchased for $700), reviewed June 13th, 2009 The 200f2.8 L is excellent - I am using it right now. They account for much of the disagreement that we see on-line (but not for the rudeness and viciousness of some of it). Since i am totally new in this field, i would like to start with astrophotography but using my existing camera (Fuji XT-30). So I sold it for nearly what I bought it for and chalked it up to a learning experience. But you couldn't have because you don't know even as much as this guy. It seems lazy to me. Ive captured a lot of deep-sky astrophotography targets from the northern hemisphere, but Im usually in too deep to capture an entire region of space at once. Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. SIx months on from buying it this has become my favourite lens ever, beating my previous favourite (Leica's 4th version of the 35mm Summicron for its M-series rangefinders). Colour and contrast is great. Robert. Another lens to consider at this focal length (at maximum zoom) is the Rokinon 135mm F/2. (For Nikon users there's the new 105mm too.). http://johncarnessali.com/camera-lens-tests/5109, After reading too many long, and arduous threads pertaining to the new Zeiss 135, I felt compelled to share my perspective on the wonderful Canon 135. This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 (purchased for $899), reviewed December 9th, 2006 IQ will rival any other lens. Yes, she's isolated. Bye f1.4 was a necessisty rather than a creative luxury. If you have a more appropriate portrait lens like an 85, 90 or 100, the 135 does not bring you very much. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed February 4th, 2010 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.
Capodichino Italy Homes For Rent,
How Much Did Evander Holyfield Pay For His House,
Can You Buy Alcohol On Sunday In Paducah, Ky,
Jupiter In 2nd House For Sagittarius Ascendant,
Articles C
