This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. Excellent build quality, fast auto focus, and its fast. How's that for an endorsement? Released only weeks apart, the Sony 50mm F1.4 GM and Sigma F1.4 DG DN Art are clear competitors. I think the readers would welcome contributions from other members' experiences. Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. Sme of the wide field are. 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. The Canon is about as sharp as the Samyang, but it has some very slight chromatic aberration. By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. parts of your main subject extend beyond the DOF range it will never look flat. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " However, all the reviews were made by nature and sports photographers, and I would like to find out more about their performance in astrophotography. Another drawback is the focal length. :). You currently have javascript disabled. If You can not, buy Canon EF 85/1.8, which delivers quite similar results. It is so sharp it makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. As it is it is earns a 9. Samyang 85mm f1.83. Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. They're heavy, and expensive, but you can carry one lens instead of three, and can vary the compression and field of view to a significant degree - from nearly normal, to long portrait focal lengths. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. Unfortunately I haven't more the Canon lens. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. This way you get both lenses with only one! But I sold it and went back to using a 70-200 (alongside a 24-70). My first photo of the night sky is of Comet NEOWISE, however I know its not the best photo I could capture. 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. You may need to refocus your subject as the temperature changes throughout the night. Must have if you're serious about portraits. These lenses go about as close as you could get without a dedicated macro lens. Still, all things considered, I prize this lens very highly and can not imagine giving it up. Smooth but contrasty. Let's dig in. 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. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. PRICE. Thanks for the fine article and the thought you put into it. (purchased for $899), reviewed March 19th, 2012 BirdDog P240 40X NDI PTZ Camera. 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area I got this lens because of portraiture. Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. Rokinon FE14M-C Lens. Can't argue with your reasoning, Juksu, about the framing of the article, but just stopping by to say I really liked that cat picture, am shopping for a new smartphone, struck that this type of photo is in another league - all newbie observations, of course, which sort of supports your thoughts that an article like this would be better framed as a "Love this new long lens stuff" sort of thing. For those of you that like to pixel-peep, have a look at the single image frame captured using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. Most small refracting telescopes start in the 300 to 400 mm focal length range, and even these are classed as widefield telescopes. When I got home and loaded the photo into Lightroom I was blown away by two things. I really wanted to use, and like, a 135mm f2 lens so I bought the Canon version. 135mm and 200mm lenses are suitable for wide angle star-field views, and comet and asteroid hunting, while 300mm lenses serve very well for the Andromeda galaxy, large emission nebulae, open clusters, and even larger globular clusters. (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. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. 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. Backwards compatible (film). IQ will rival any other lens. 10/10 (Editor's Choice) Check Price. Generally, prime lenses have a reputation for being slightly sharper, and I have found that to be true whether I am shooting a nebula or a Scarlet Tanager. Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. Lenses with extreme sharpness and bokeh tend to be heavy. My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. 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. That is kind of the point I am trying to make -- These pictures are really not in another league. People mistake "Bokeh" to blurry background, what is very very common mistake. Because it manage to do so. Can I assume that this article applies only to full frame & not to micro four thirds? Could use a few updates. Nevertheless, it performs excellently on most star fields, and is too cheap not to acquire. They are by nature designed to compromise by magnification and distance, and are therefore not optically optimized at any single setting. I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. Contrasty but not harsh. This lens has only two drawbacks. Available in other Styles, Configurations & Kits. Nice article for beginners.It's all in the eyes of the beholder. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. The lens shows a very slight pincushion distortion, but it's well under 0.1% of frame height, an excellent performance by any measure. Today I want to talk about another such lens design: The 135mm F2 lens. When I was on my way home after purchasing my first 135mm lens (the Samyang/Rokinon one) I took a few quick snapshots just to try out the lens. (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 The Japanese word "bokeh" can be translated into English as "blur". I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. I've owned nice SLR gear since 1976, and am normally a wide angle shooter this is my favorite lens, of all time. This new, affordable wide zoom for L-mount is capable of some excellent landscapes. You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. Tiring. About 3 hours of exposures split between Narrowband, Broadband and short exposure shots to make an HDR image. I'll walk you through all this inc. Include the Carl Zeiss in your research though, it might be an interesting lens for you, even if it is a bit pricey for what you get. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. But do some experimenting before you decide. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 Its actually kind of neat to watch! This is a very practical way to plan your next astrophotography project, and especially handy when using a wide field lens like the Rokinon 135mm F/2. The inset picture is a magnified view of the bottom right corner of the frame. It requires the Contax-EOS adapter for attachment to the camera. Big F-value.Light. f1.4 was a necessisty rather than a creative luxury. I purchased this lens for the purposes of wide-field deep-sky astrophotography from my light-polluted backyard (shown below), and when traveling to a dark sky site. Although if Bokeh and sharpness is your thing and you can live with MF the Laowa 105mm f/2 Smooth Trans Focus (STF) is amazing. The 135mm F2 lens design is truly special, and in this article (and the video I made), I want to try to convince you as well. Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! its useful to keep in mind these bokeh circles are the result of light sources bright lamps from autos Christmas lights streetlamps etc and are seriously overused in articles on lenses with strong subject\ backround seperations, they approach parody in the way they characterise subject separation, for most purposes and in most portrait situations its less highlight dominant backrounds that grace a photo. In the right hands this lens really does have "magic pixie dust", as a friend once described. This thing is a beast in comparison. The reason the 135mm lens was that it was the longest lens that would focus with a Leica rangefinder. Just not useful if you already have traditional focal lengths. The sigma 150mm f2.8 tests very well, zeiss 135mm apo sonnar, and leica 180mm f3.5 apo all proven performers on star tests. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. It turns out that this. The 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.2 is another story.While the 135mm f/2, in general, is a good lens, there are lots of lenses other than the 135 f/2 that will produce a very smoothly blurred background, including zoom lenses.It sounds like Micael is new to photography.Just my impression from this article. Already wide open this lens produce some high quality photos. f2, very sharp, virtually without CAs, contrast, colour, lightwight, buildings. Far from being a generic run-of-the-mill image hosting website, it was created and is still operated by an astrophotographer, and boasts features that are very specific to astrophotography. Typical L construction. I shoot it wide open 90% of the time. (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) This summer I'm going to try the lenses out for LRGB images to see how they perform. 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. You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. Some people may disagree with the vignetting being a good thing or not, but thats a matter of taste I guess. 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 thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. modest cost for "L" series, wonderful optics and fast speed, nitpicking, but not a circular aperature and no weather sealing. If you don't like that article that's your right as a member. $449.00. This lens is available for several camera mounts, including Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Samsung, and Fuji. Hey Trevor, great article! Technical Specifications Looking for specific info? You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. If you are a Nikon user, of course have a look at the Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC and compare it to the other lenses mentioned in this article. I just got the Samyang version of this lens and used it with my Canon 3ti on a Skywatcher Star Adventurer. Also, when shooting the heart nebula, is the sky tracker a must or not required? There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. If You can afford it, buy it! It seems lazy to me. Even if the background is very close to your subject, somehow the optical construction in the 135mm lens will still manage to separate the background beautifully. 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. 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. I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. With no general agreement about what Bokeh is it is little wonder that there is so much argument and disagreement. for sample photos and video tour, This is simply the best Canon prime lens that I have tested. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. AF ring feels loose compared to my other L lenses. The 135mm f2.8 in particular can take amazing photos of the brighter deep sky objects with about 1 second time . I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. I just purchased a very lightly used Canon 200mm F2.8L II USM for $620 from a great online dealer and can't wait for an opportunity to try it out with my Astronomik CLS clip on a T4i at a dark site. thank you for that great review and also the explanations. Has a good weight to it. I cant decide whether to clean it up in processing or let it be. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. Perfect lens on the same level as CZ! "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. It is a parade of photos that should have been galled out after a boring Sunday afternoon shoot of "Think I'll bring along a camera when I walk the dog", There are so many things wrong in this 'review' -- most of all the idea that 'you' should get this lens and somehow it magically makes the duck or the cat stuck right in the center of picture a great photo! Have not used a 70-200 since. Add To Cart. Tack sharp even at wide open aperture. This leaves you with a buttery bokeh and an object in perfect focus. There is no agreement about what Bokeh means. I mainly use for head shot photography. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. So now your 42Mpix A7rII is only a 10.5Mpix. Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. I can tell you its a great performer for astro use. The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. It's bokeh is comparable to the 85mm 1.2 but IMO not as nice. It's Film Friday, so let's take a look back at the film format that gave APS-C sensors their name! Really, just an amazing lens, easily worth the $800-900 it commands on the street. 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. Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC LensCheck Price (Amazon): https://amzn.to/2MOUFeOExample Images: https://astrobackyard.com/rokinon-135mm-f2-astrophotography/I've . $399 00. I own a 135 since the film days (because you "had to have one" and could not afford much else), still have the zeiss Jena f3.5 M42 and even jumped for the zeiss f2.8 for my yashica when they were sold for next to nothing. Finally, although we don't explicitly test for it, we have to note that this lens' bokeh (rendering of out-of-focus objects) is really excellent as well. The best ones listed below serve well with a one stop reduction, and some require two or even three stops. Several functions may not work. I would like to make this work with the Nikkor 180mm ED (i.e., what I have versus what I cannot havelol). I really like how they augment my longer focal length scopes. 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. 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. Is this Nikon already, Astro modified, without need for H alpha filters or any further modifications? tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej 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. here some information (sorry only in italian) http://www.astrovale-usm/index.html Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. Besides lack of IS, the only major issue I have with this lens is flare. Chris referred to the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM as 'a little gem'! It really is about talent, creativity, and vision, not gear. All lenses mentioned below are adaptable to Canon EOS cameras with slim EOS adapters which allow the lenses to focus just slightly past infinity. One of Canon's best lenses for a reasonable price. However, they can be perfectly corrected with narrow band H-alpha or OIII filters. I am a complete amateur at photography in general and this is all new to me so thank you for all the information and videos. Ironically all the sample images in this post are painfully soft. Because of chromatic aberration, no telephoto lens can be used at full aperture. The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly.