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. Holiday Savings $50 . And you can even crop a 135 efl with today's sensors should you actually need it. 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. f2, very sharp, virtually without CAs, contrast, colour, lightwight, buildings. Trully sharp accross whole frame from f2 on 5d. With an effective focal length of roughly 216mm when coupled with a Canon crop sensor body, the field of view is nearly identical to the one youd find on a full-frame camera with a 200mm telephoto lens. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 Besides lack of IS, the only major issue I have with this lens is flare. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. Contrasty, saturated, nice colours. Required fields are marked *. Sharp wide open, wonderful bokeh, fast AF in dark conditions. 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. 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. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. p.s. 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. (purchased for $900). Sometimes though, we stumble upon a great lens design which is strong in all three. Imaging Resource 1998 - 2023. As you'd expect though, distortion and light falloff are both higher with a full-frame image circle, but perhaps not as much as you'd normally expect. As rest you do just by cropping or stitching. A quick question, I have a Sony a6300 mirrorless camera which is great but the sensor is very close behind the mount. Lior, I have done a lot of reading on modern zoom lenses. Check them out for yourself! After the first exposure in M mode, the camera throws an error saying Error please press the shutter button again. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. I therefore reduce the aperture at the front end of the lens (as an aperture stop) by screwing in a series of step-down rings into the filter thread. Now I wonder why people are never happy even on 3rd day of a new year :) Come on guys just think "Micael Widell" was working over holiday period to publish this free article ;). 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. Crazy fast AF! Amazing sharpness wide open at F2.0 and the focus ring is nice and firm not tight you don't really need to tape it down for astrophotography. At under 900USD, it's a steal. 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. Now - THAT's a lens everyone should have ;). The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. $399 00. Canon's 700-200 zooms have IS and are weather sealed two features that the 135 f/2 lacks. 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. Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. If 135mm f2 works for you, then fine. For that I would investigate alternatives just to make sure. After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. 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. Personally, I can't stand these circles, and I see them as VERY distracting.Lots of fads come and go, and this is just another one of these fads that some photographers are obsessed with. This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. Its nice to have the F/2. Stick to Andromeda, and skip the Whirlpool. Digital Cameras & Digital Camera Kits | Camera Gear | B&H DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! Not another article that promotes portraits shot with wide open lens and out of focus highlights in the background. This leaves you with a buttery bokeh and an object in perfect focus. I had of course heard that this lens is supposed to be very sharp, but I had never before had such a full blown "wow" experience when reviewing the sharpness of a lens. Really like the large focusing ring. Great question Scott I think it depends on the image. These lenses go about as close as you could get without a dedicated macro lens. There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. Are you really using 135 a lot? When stopped down to 49mm it really is indistinguishable from an APO, except it shows red chromatic aberration with modified cameras even with the UV/IR block or CLS-CCD filter. Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. 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 . (purchased for $900), reviewed December 14th, 2006 Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. One of the prime examples of such a design is the "nifty fifty"the 50mm F1.8 lens construction that many lens manufacturers provide. When attached to a DSLR camera with a full frame sensor, the lens offers a massive 15.5 x 10.6 field of view, or 18.8 across the diagonal. If you have pictures taken using the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens, please feel free to share your results in the comments section (links to Astrobin, Flickr or your personal gallery are fine). What is it like shooting with one today? you can see here a lot of photos mostly shot with the f/4 version. Often need f2.2 to f2.8 to gain sufficient DOF for human subjects. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. canon 135mm f2 astrophotography - fullpackcanva.com 135mm f2 vs 200 f2.8 primes? - Beginning Deep Sky Imaging - Cloudy Nights Click on following link to view images I wanted to add my experience with some lenses that I thought worthy of being considered too, and some of the equipment that I have used. I seems many people he are confused about the meaning of the word. I put quotes around the ones that are written on the lens. Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. As I posted on the Petapixel variant of this article, cropping a 85/1.4 shot to a 135mm-equivalent FoV gives you approx. Yes there's bokeh. My copy has very stiff manual focus though and is quite heavy. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. Thomas, I do have no experience with the Canon lens you mentioned but zoom lenses have limitations concerning aberrations while providing more flexibility.The Nikkor 70-200/4 that I like as a travel lens is a very good performer but the Zeiss 135/2 APO is in a different league. I cant seem to find this documented anywhere. Not rude at all, a fair comment. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. Most small refracting telescopes start in the 300 to 400 mm focal length range, and even these are classed as widefield telescopes. It is really thanks to another commentator pointing out something that finally makes sense out of this mess: This article is by someone who just got his first first telephoto ever, and is writing about how he feels when he is trying it out. When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly. You get what you get.#4: Cat in Underbrush.That's pretty good.#5: Woman with Blanket.It's like a snapshot. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. Moreover if we have a serendipitous moment regarding a new (or used) lens, that's a good thing. Nice article for beginners.It's all in the eyes of the beholder. You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. And because you can shoot between F/2 and F/4, plenty of light reaches the sensor in a relatively short exposure. 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. The 200f2.8 L is excellent - I am using it right now. Very sharp even at f2, build quality, price, weight, autofocus is fast, bokeh, No IS, flare, autofocus isn't quite as consistent as some newer lenses, focus speed, image quality, predictability, Image quality, build like a tank, focus ring, weight. The extremes are 2 and 22. However, all the reviews were made by nature and sports photographers, and I would like to find out more about their performance in astrophotography. Several functions may not work. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. As the reader reviews below testify, this is an absolutely stellar lens, probably one of the sharpest and most distortion-free that Canon makes. Theres no image stabilization on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 either, but thats a non-issue for amateur astrophotographers. Also, the newer and much more expensive 200mm F4 SMC Pentax with the K mount is decisively inferior, showing small but annoying red chromatic aberration. It's tiny compared to almost everything else in the 85-135 range, and used properly, it can produce results that hold up to my DC (all other factors being equal such as subject distance, f-stop, lighting, etc.). The following image was captured by Eric Cauble using the Samyang branded version of this lens. Probably you could get a very similar image with a 85mm 1.8. i also have the 300mm f4.5 non ED nikkor which is quite nice . I just got the Samyang version of this lens and used it with my Canon 3ti on a Skywatcher Star Adventurer. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . You're sour grapes man, you wish it were you who wrote the article. #light_bulb I would disagree. I am no stranger to the full manual control of this lens, for both aperture and focus. I do not use burst mode, but the lens would produce movie-like frames. If you have a more appropriate portrait lens like an 85, 90 or 100, the 135 does not bring you very much. There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. however i started to realise how every subject might actually be a cardboard cutout being photographed. Heh, it's amazing how far Samyang has come since this article (I'm loving their 45 & 75 f1.8), and kinda amusing that they ended up delivering exactly what you asked for Kinda reminds me of that article by Roger Cicala about how long lens development takes. 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). Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM Lens Review - The-Digital-Picture.com I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. The full extent of the relationship between Rokinon and Samyang is unknown to me, but the packaging on my lens says Technology by Samyang Optics. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. For some reason Samyang makes lenses nobody is asking for. If you want the best possible image quality, and you must have autofocus, and you don't care if it is a bit heavy (maybe you need it for studio use), buy the Sigma. 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. It is a heavy lens. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. This is great news if you like to photograph small things up close. My copy is 12-years-old and still delivers at over 75 weddings a year. The few occasions I use a 135 FL usually are landscape shots (where I have no use for f2) and childrens playing (where I need zoom and fast af). Of course, when it comes to astrophotography, this can create some challenges as well. 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. Flip on through what we found, and see how the lens performs in the real world in our sample gallery. After weeks with a production Fujifilm X-T5, Chris and Jordan have some final thoughts. parts of your main subject extend beyond the DOF range it will never look flat. 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). Diffraction from the cheap EF-s kit zoom lens was uneven. From my purchase research, I found a consensus that stopping down optimizes sharpness but the diaphragm will make nine diffraction spikes when stopped down. 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. Creamy smooth bokeh. Yes, it is about the same as 85mm f/1.4 blur factor is 60mm, while 135mm f/2 blur factor is 67mm. (Dpreview), Use the 500 Rule to find the Perfect Exposure Length for Astrophotography, Use a DSLR Ha Filter for Astrophotography, AstroBackyard | Astrophotography Tips and Tutorials2023, Optical Construction: 11 Glass elements in 7 Groups. Image quality, weight and value for money. I enjoied the use of this lens many years before the DSLR. Tiring. The lenses I listed are certainly not the ONLY exceptional lenses made over the years. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. 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. I need fast auto-focus, predictable focus lock and natural, vibrant color rendition. Were those taken with the Canon telephotos you spoke of, and the full spectrum modified camera and the clip in filter? I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! I have a vintage Nikon135mm f/2.8 AI-s which produces virtually the same bokeh and weighs a quarter of this or any other 135mm AF lens. The 135 f/2 is not perfect. Olympus 4x Optical Zoom f/2 Lens; 25-100mm (35mm Equivalent) Show More. Great looking lens, if you ever saw it from the front. You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. "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. Meanwhile the ol' Canon 135/2 is still commanding a higher than average price on the used market (70%+ of MSRP isn't common), I guess the low weight and super easy resale have almost made it a high end commodity. A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively Tamron has announced its 11-20mm F2.8 Di III-A RXD ultra-wide angle zoom will be made available for Fujifilm X-mount. Over the last ten to fifteen years excellent apochromatic telescopes have become available for visual use and photography. Image quality is great, it is tack-sharp wide-open even though for partraiture, a little bit of softness is needed. I bought it for its bokeh. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. fast, sharp wide open, excellent bokeh, value for money, very fast, sharp, gorgeous background blur, world class lens. As you know, camera lenses come in varying focal lengths, apertures, and optical quality. You just panned the subject for his photos and then turn around and needle thematic for looking into Ericsson. My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. One very popular lens for bokeh fiends is the Canon 85mm F1.2it can produce extremely creamy out of focus backgrounds. 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. Hey Trevor, great article! So I feel I'm being cheated. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. http://www.radiantlite.com/2009/01/canon-135mm-f2l-usm-mini-review.html Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. Magical images, great AF, great close focusing abilities. if you compare images taken with this lens to those from a 105mm f1.8 ais or a cosina 125mm and you'll see what i mean. When coupled with my Canon DSLR camera, the entire system weighs just over 3 pounds. I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. In this new review, I focus exclusively on the unprecedented Samyang 135mm f/2, which is primarily designed for portrait and wildlife. But for many of us, somewhere in between, are plenty of short to mid-tele lenses that will deliver solid service (in terms of subject separation) without carrying around still another kilo for the sake of more blur. 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. Overall, spectacular lens. Canon EF 135mm f/2 L USM (72mm filters, 0.9m/3' close-focus, 25.0 oz./708g, about $1,035.) The F/2.0 maximum aperture of the Rokinon 135mm lens offers a chance to collect a serious amount of signal in a single shot. Using a Canon EF 24-105mm Lens for Astrophotography - AstroBackyard This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. An h-alpha filter would still be useful for your D500, but much more so if it were modified! Geometric distortion is lower than one would expect, at 0.15% pincushion maximum, with an average of 0.07%. A series of such images can be digitally stacked to produce excellent results. Jordan has a simple fix camera manufacturers could implement to improve their video autofocus. To actually learn to compose the photos so that the background complements the image instead of being something that must be blurred away.
Aew Revolution 2022 Rumors, Articles C
Aew Revolution 2022 Rumors, Articles C