canon 135mm f2 astrophotography canon 135mm f2 astrophotography

This is the EF-M series version. 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. Below, are a few examples of astrophotography images Ive taken with lenses of varying focal lengths. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. That means that it doesnt require a robust equatorial telescope mount as a larger, heavier telephoto lens would. Yep the speed wars in the 70's that gave us all these bokeh monsters were all about the fact that its hard to get usable images in poor lighting when your film was stuck at iso 80 (or even 400 when you were pushing it). Sony has added a full-frame 50mm F1.4 prime to its premium 'GM' range of E-mount lenses. Why take a step back from 250 to sit between the RedCat and the 24-105? To shoot indoors under typical gymnasium lighting, you often need f/2.0 or wider to get a shutter speed high enough to stop the action. Thats quite a jump from 135mm, so the camera body you use with this lens may change the types of targets you shoot. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. At f/32, it's pretty soft, but less so than a lot of lenses at that aperture. Nikon 300/4 ED IF, Sigma 50/2.8 DG Macro (not a telephoto, but good). At the other end of the aperture range though, the 5D's larger pixels actually help matters, as the softening starts later (it's very sharp even at f/16), and is noticeably lower at f/32. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 It also focuses really fast and accurate and is light. Were those taken with the Canon telephotos you spoke of, and the full spectrum modified camera and the clip in filter? Geometric distortion is lower than one would expect, at 0.15% pincushion maximum, with an average of 0.07%. It is sharp but somehow not that analytic way as a macro lens. No telephoto lens, and no apochromat, is sufficiently corrected to accomodate such a wide spectral range. the lens is built strong, very strong. This thing is a beast in comparison. Sharpness, contrast and the natural vignetting on full-frame cameras is awesome! I thought I would miss shooting at 200mm, but 135mm is long enough for most portraits and gives a decent amount of compression. The first example is good to show that you can take photos of persons in front of an ugly background without completely ruining the shot (important for people shooting events), the last one is the only one I really like (because of the color) but you could shoot this with any lens with short MFD. Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. It has no chromatic aberration, and no hint of star deformities in the corners. When you shoot a 135mm F2 lens at F2, your subject will stand out in this beautiful way, often without much work needed from you as the photographer. The finish and texture of the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is a step up from the 14mm F/2.8 I ordered a few years ago. Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. 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). 24/28mm, 50mm, 100mm, 200mm. 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. Got it! 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. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). When the aperture is stopped down to 37mm using step-down filter rings, this lens produces incredibly tiny pinpoint star images from edge to edge. I like fast lenses, and my Nikkor 105DC is my favourite. (cont. etc.. Ron. With todays huge variety of digital sensors, each with their own characteristics, in-camera and post-processing etc., much depends on the given combination of your photo gear to create a certain effect. Excellent color and saturation, a virtually perfect lens. Not another article that promotes portraits shot with wide open lens and out of focus highlights in the background. However, stepping outside to polar align a small star tracker and attach a DSLR and lens is quick and painless. This way the focus will favor the red light which is more objectionable within a star image than a bit of blue. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. When I got home and loaded the photo into Lightroom I was blown away by two things. Although your target audience is beginning DSLR imagers, much of your advice also applies to using lenses with CCD cameras. I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. This article was originally published on Micael's blog, and is being republished in full with express permission. The lens shows a very slight pincushion distortion, but it's well under 0.1% of frame height, an excellent performance by any measure. What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? To actually learn to compose the photos so that the background complements the image instead of being something that must be blurred away. That is the story.#7: Leaves.That doesn't work. It is so sharp it makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. Light falloff (vignetting) gets pretty high (0.73 EV wide open, but drops to 0.3 EV at f/2.8, and only 0.17 EV at f/4. D8XX cameras, subject isolation and quality of bokeh.Zoom lenses can not hold a candle to such primes. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. 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. I understand the optical design is quite old. I got this lens because of portraiture. You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. But you raise the exact point, that primes should be chosen with a 2x factor. A Bargain, very competively priced IS would also help outside with wind. 135 mm. A lot of lenses today are better than anything money could buy in 1980. Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. Cost. This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. 200mm Astrobin photos (not taken by me): https://www.astrobin.m USM F2.8 L II 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. There is no agreement about what Bokeh means. Hey! The Image Sensor Frame tool lets you enter in the size of your camera sensor, and focal length of your lens (or telescope) to display a frame over the star map. That's a cheap, fun date for AP. If the title had been: "Testing My First Telephoto and LOVING IT!!!!!!!. Last time I used a 135mm f2 was decades ago on a Canon F1. One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. I bought my lens in mint condition for $350 from Japan, but I see that some retailers are asking significantly more. 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. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " 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. If you must have autofocus, and care about weight, buy the Canon. Your images have a chance at remaining sharper once critical focus has been achieved, but now you have lost the extra light-gathering power you wanted. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. Rokinon lenses are made in Korea, and so is the Samyang variation. 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. I loved the Nikon 80-400G for a year, or so, and then found everything with it wrong, and got rid of it. It just doesn't get any better than this! Rokinon FE14M-C Lens. Just like the above samples, most are just bad. Backwards compatible (film). Several functions may not work. Bond, I expect you to buy! I'm thinking a modern (but expensive) Nikon 200mm f/2.0, 300mm f/4 or f/2.8 or a Borg telephoto/telescope would all be very good. "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. 45 minutes. I do not think telephoto lenses would be suitable for use with your modified camera. The logic of this article can be applied to a 200/2.8 as well. 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. Thanks Gary! I also find the other photos not very good. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed August 12th, 2009 The lens has 14 stops when turning the aperture. Its a joy to work with every time. 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. 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. I love the lens for my modified Sony a6000! With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. No more inside shooting with flash! I have just acquired my astrophotography set up thanks to all your videos and doing some research. 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. Voting ends March 8, 2023. This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop using the aperture ring at the base of the lens. Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. 135mm F2.0 The optical design includes one extra-low dispersion lens element to control chromatic aberration, contributing to sharp, color-accurate imaging, and each of its lens elements features Ultra Multi-Coating to improve light transmission and reduce ghosting and flare. The lenses I selected are all affordable prime lenses, easily available on the second-hand market, and adaptable to the EOS system. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. I hope that this post has provided some practical insight into a popular camera lens for astrophotography. When i check a F stop chart, i see 15 stops if i count the main, and the secondary ones: 2, 2.4, 2.8, 3.3, 4, 4.8, 5.6, 6.7, 8, 9.5, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22. Latter looks quite professional.. Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens. The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. To remedy this, I reduced the star size in post, and I started shooting at F/4 to really tighten things up. Explore the sky, try frame some targets and see what works well with your DSLR and lens combination. The 135mm f/2.0 ED UMC Lens for Canon EF Mount from Rokinon is a manual focus telephoto prime lens useful for portraiture and all medium telephoto applications. First of all, the background separation and the bokeh: I had photographed lots of animals in bushes before, but never before had I seen the bush melt away in the way it did with the 135mm lens. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. This lens is available for several camera mounts, including Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Samsung, and Fuji. (purchased for $970), reviewed March 17th, 2011 I'll take photo of Orion as soon as possible. A camera tracker (or star tracker) is necessary for long exposure deep-sky astrophotography, but a compact model such as the iOptron SkyTracker or Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer will do just fine. But like a glitch in the matrix, an anomaly that shouldn't exist, you can get the Samyang/Rokinon 135mm for as little as $430 brand new. Yes, because it is not f/2. Nice article for beginners.It's all in the eyes of the beholder. I have used and still use the 135MM F/2 l lens. (For Nikon users there's the new 105mm too.). Ironically all the sample images in this post are painfully soft. In my test, nikon have the same color correction than Canon and same sharpness. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens. Deserves to be in the camera hall of fame. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. The 135L is half the weight of the 70-200 2.8IS. Some reviewers have listed lack of IS as a "Con". In the past, Ive covered a number of different lenses, from the Sigma 24mm F/1.4 to the Canon EF 300mm F/4L. The Rokinon 135mm F2.0 is considered to be a full-frame lens because it can accommodate a full-frame image sensor with its 18.8-degree angle of view. here are some links to some pics taken with the lens: Olympus 4x Optical Zoom f/2 Lens; 25-100mm (35mm Equivalent) Show More. My work requires auto-focus. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. 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). never mind.. confirmed from others that F19 is indeed the one that is excluded on this lens! The lens is not weather-sealed, so you definitely dont want to leave your camera and lens (and your tracking mount!) Large hood. 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. Already wide open this lens produce some high quality photos. For some reason Samyang makes lenses nobody is asking for. But ppl should know there is much better advice in the forums. The 135 L handles this well. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). Thanks for the fine article and the thought you put into it. There are, of course, outlierssuch as the legendary unicorn lens Canon EF 200mm F2but that one isn't a great alternative unless you are cool with spending $5,700 and carrying around something about as wieldy as a fire hydrant. And if you want autofocus, I would recommend the Canon 135mm f2.0L, which is incredibly light for its performance at just 750g. Neutral yet very nice colours. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. 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. 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. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. Over the years, I have tried more than two dozen telephoto lenses, until I finally found three or four perfect solutions. 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. 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.idyll.com/135. Focus throw. From my experience, the toughest test on a lense is its ability to function wide open. Recently, the FAA announced that recreational drone pilots in the USA can request LAANC authorization to fly in controlled airspace at night. I have an old 135/2.5 Takumar that is not bad at all, for the price. The 70-200L being a much more useful lens. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . Seems to me that Michael is pretty new to using long telephoto lenses, he writes that the Samyang is the first he has owned. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. 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. 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. I bought this lens after reading your great review for my Nikon D5300. 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. If they could make 135 f2 lighter version with AF for Sony and price is slightly under Sigma 135 /1.8 and obviously Batis 135 2.8 it could sell like hotcakes. Stick to Andromeda, and skip the Whirlpool. I really like how they augment my longer focal length scopes. The California Nebula. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix) ". Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! However, I am convinced that its large aperture and fast F ratio would perform exceptionally well in three color or narrow band H-alpha and OIII photography. 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. Better than nothing I guess, would depend on how much it raises the price. reviewed August 2nd, 2017 Also, when shooting the heart nebula, is the sky tracker a must or not required? when you hold the lens in your hand you know you are holding a fine peice of optical equipment. I have done a review comparing the sharpness and quality of bokeh to the Canon 70-200 2.8. best lens, blur, sharp-super, no CA, minimal shading. Every different lens design has different "bokeh" even when the lenses are by specs same, like Canon 135mm f/2 vs Samyang 135mm f/2 are both same, but both render differently, even when both have same DOF. It is the lens I use as a reference point to compare all new lens acquisitions to after purchase to determine if they need to be returned for repair or replacement. Best lenses for astrophotography: 50, 85 and 135mm - DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging - Cloudy Nights Cloudy Nights Astrophotography and Sketching DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. 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.). CP+ 2023: Sigma has announced it is bringing its trio of DC DN APS-C prime lenses to Nikon's Z mount: its first lenses for Nikon's mirrorless system. Can I assume that this article applies only to full frame & not to micro four thirds? @ Juksu - you're pathologically clueless. By the way, I still enjoy using my very sharp Sears 135mm, PKA mount lens. Really excels as indoor sports lens on a crop camera. 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. It would seem to be a better use of a camera to first look for a suitable background, and then and only then to use bokeh. The optical design includes one extra-low dispersion (ED) lens element to control chromatic aberration, and ultra multi-coatings (UMC) to both improve light transmission and reduce flare. The spec sheet for the Rokinon 135mm F/2 boasts a number of qualities, with the ones listed below being the most important when it comes to night photography and astro. At $900 US it a relative steal. . To fit the Heart and Soul Nebulae in a single frame requires an extremely wide field of view (compared to the magnification of most telescopes). In the right hands this lens really does have "magic pixie dust", as a friend once described. From my purchase research, I found a consensus that stopping down optimizes sharpness but the diaphragm will make nine diffraction spikes when stopped down. All lenses mentioned below are adaptable to Canon EOS cameras with slim EOS adapters which allow the lenses to focus just slightly past infinity. Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. After several years off, the venerable magazine has held a public open call photo contest and selected nine finalists and one winning image for its 'Photos of the Year.'. A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively Build quality: excellent. Proper composition, light and retouching are much prefferable to crazy gooey bokeh. The reason the 135mm lens was that it was the longest lens that would focus with a Leica rangefinder. 1. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. Definitely now on my to-buy list. Images that sing. I see that many commenters did not get what this lens can do. And because you can shoot between F/2 and F/4, plenty of light reaches the sensor in a relatively short exposure. 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! With a rounded 9-blade diaphragm, shallow depth of field imaging will be rendered with pleasing out-of-focus highlights. The image shown below covers 4.96 x 5.98 degrees in the constellation Cassiopeia. The duck and cat are really the only good shots. Test Notes DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! It's just "girl" in front of blurriness.#2: Plants on a pond.It's okay. Perhaps you have seen the photos of masterful Russian portrait photographers such as Elena Shumilova or Anka Zhuravleva. (purchased for $800), reviewed March 15th, 2010 Make sure to select your camera mount when checking the price (Check current price). Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. 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. This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. There have been a lot of Tele-Tessars over the years. I read and bought it. I owned this lens for a long time, then traded it for the 70-200 2.8IS II. What I am trying to avoid is spending another $1,100 on a quality APO, and instead using my existing Nikkor 180mm ED lens with a Baader-modified Canon 450D that I just obtained. I'll walk you through all this inc. What's it got and what's it like to use? It's not the most versatile lens, but it's very great for tight portrait shoots; background blur is creamy IMO; one of the best 'bokeh' lens. As you know, camera lenses come in varying focal lengths, apertures, and optical quality. Digital sensors are roughly 5 times as sharp as 400-speed film. My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. Be careful with the focus. Why so salty? Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. 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. Even if I wanted a 135mm lens (and the 70-200mm f/2.8 is more versatile) it would be the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC lens. I think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 includes a lens hood, lens pouch, front and rear lens caps, and a 1-year Rokinon manufacturer warranty. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? You can go lower, but you have to watch your technique. It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. After the first exposure in M mode, the camera throws an error saying Error please press the shutter button again. 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. How about the sigma 50mm f1.4 Art? Canon's 700-200 zooms have IS and are weather sealed two features that the 135 f/2 lacks. 2. Super sharp from f2. Thanks.. Available 03/21/23. So, for Joe User or especially for Jane Client, one really has to look closely to see much of a difference. 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. 10/10 (Editor's Choice) Check Price. 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. The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. Thanks! Not rude at all, a fair comment. These are affordably available on eBay, and result in perfectly round star images, the way nature intended them to be. If the telescope mount is precisely aligned to the celestial north pole, unguided exposures of one to two minutes are possible. Some people do not like this and consider Bokeh to refer only to the rendering of out of focus points of light. This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur.