Recently, the FAA announced that recreational drone pilots in the USA can request LAANC authorization to fly in controlled airspace at night. Without the blurb I would have taken it as a 24 hour news studio shot with back projection or a cut and paste layer.The other stuff is really nice though. #light_bulb I would disagree. You don't have to worry about shopping for a better lens anymore. never mind.. confirmed from others that F19 is indeed the one that is excluded on this lens! It disagrees completely with the definition that you give! You won't get the excessive background blurr -- which for the beginning photographer may actually be a good thing. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. Dear Trevor, Great for portraits. No telephoto lens I tested, nor my TSAPO65Q, was suitable for use with a DSLR "clear glass" modified to include deep red and IR. Also, the lens can only be operated when aperture is set to 22, wondering how I could use F2. Lenses with extreme sharpness and bokeh tend to be heavy. Focal length is great. Perhaps you have seen the photos of masterful Russian portrait photographers such as Elena Shumilova or Anka Zhuravleva. Add To Cart. I got mine for $60.00 on Craigslist but seen them on eBay for $100 and less all the time. While they provide a very large flat field we noticed some CA. Samyang 135mm F/2 ED UMC Review (Camera Labs), Does a F/2.0 lens become F/2.8 when used on a crop sensor camera? Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. Proper composition, light and retouching are much prefferable to crazy gooey bokeh. The best ones listed below serve well with a one stop reduction, and some require two or even three stops. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. For comparison, no other lens I know of would earn more than 8/10. It's gross, all is a matter of balance and the perfect one, given you want sharp and fuzzy elements in your picture, is in the blend, and the way details seems to disappear gracefully (while keeping a level of readability). BirdDog P240 40X NDI PTZ Camera. Chris referred to the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM as 'a little gem'! 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. After the first exposure in M mode, the camera throws an error saying Error please press the shutter button again. (purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 Let's unbox, review and test this lens to find out why it is one of the best bang for your buck deals in astrophotography! They seem to be really good for NB work. Adam007,"a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels"No thanks. There is some controversy about the use of UV filters, but I found that a good UV filter significantly improves contrast, sharpens small star images, and reduces chromatic aberration. 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. Thanks to you I got a Rokinon 14mm f2.8 and a 24mm f 1.4 and am considering this lens at the moment, but wonder how it compares to the Canon 135 mm f/2. 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. I had one question that i cant seem to find an answer to.. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. 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. The downsides of this configuration are that shooting wide open can make focusing difficult. The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. I've recently started using 135 and 200mm lenses from the 1970s with my mono CCD and they've proven very useful for imaging large emission nebulae. Although your target audience is beginning DSLR imagers, much of your advice also applies to using lenses with CCD cameras. Add To Cart. The image below was captured using a DSLR and 135mm lens on the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. AF ring feels loose compared to my other L lenses. http://www.idyll.com/laneysat In the middle of the OM System lineup, the OM-5 promises yesterday's top-tier performance in a lighter, more compact body. In fact, a light-weight 200/2.8 seems more interesting to own (e.g., the Minolta 200/2.8). In an effort to save money, Id like to start using a Canon 80D that we already own to start picking targets and imaging. Literally it means "blur" so you could just as well use the dictionary definition below the top match from Google search: Bokeh - the visual quality of the out-of-focus areas of a photographic image, especially as rendered by a particular lens. Seems to me that with your gallery and website of images you should refrain from passing judgment on who is and isn't a photography master. Can I assume that this article applies only to full frame & not to micro four thirds? And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? On FF I use this lens for both tight portraits and landscape shots. Any good ones apart from the Big Boys. Zoom lenses are entirely unsuitable for astrophotography due to prominent aberrations of every kind. Imaging Resource 1998 - 2023. The image shown below covers 4.96 x 5.98 degrees in the constellation Cassiopeia. This has several advantages from less demanding tracking accuracy, to being able to use a lower ISO setting. 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. 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). 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. The aesthetic quality of the blur in the out-of-focus parts of the image are buttery smooth and soft. It is a heavy lens. This free website's biggest source of support is when you use these links, especially these directly to it at Adorama or at Amazon, when you get anything, regardless of the country in which you live. This lens is very sharp, corner to corner wide open. Why take a step back from 250 to sit between the RedCat and the 24-105? I typically shoot with Canon lenses, but the potential for low light photography (whether thats astrophotography or the ability to film at dusk) caught my interest. 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. Which is the better buy? Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! 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. 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. Great looking lens, if you ever saw it from the front. 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. 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. Unfortunately, standard photography lenses are generally poorly corrected for CA at the red end of the spectrum, relying on the human eye's poorer resolution in red than green or blue. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. So now your 42Mpix A7rII is only a 10.5Mpix. (AVX). The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. Of the old teles I've had, Nikon's 400mm f/3.5 was decent, Olympus's 300mm f/4.5 was good (it had a precursor to ED glass) Pentax's 300mm Takumar was TERRIBLE, Pentax's 500mm was terrible, Nikon's 135 f/2.8 Q was ok, and Sigma's 400mm f/5.6 "apo" was satisfactory. Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! At 135mm, you can get really creative about the object or objects you shoot and where you position them within the frame. I am no stranger to the full manual control of this lens, for both aperture and focus. 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. "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. 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 . 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. I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. Interesting. Beware others critical comments here about how flat these images look, the author has chosen specific topics and viewpoints to highlight f2 with this lens, so see the wow review for what it is please and the negative comments need placing in context. $218.00 for 7 days. Lior, I have done a lot of reading on modern zoom lenses. Thats quite a jump from 135mm, so the camera body you use with this lens may change the types of targets you shoot. CAs: a little in the OOF area - not disturbing anyway. I have used and still use the 135MM F/2 l lens. Released only weeks apart, the Sony 50mm F1.4 GM and Sigma F1.4 DG DN Art are clear competitors. I have the Canon EF 135mm, f2L USM. You may need to refocus your subject as the temperature changes throughout the night. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. Olympus 4x Optical Zoom f/2 Lens; 25-100mm (35mm Equivalent) Show More. As if absolutely clueless Youtube instructors who have no idea what they are talking about weren't enough. Jordan's twin brother Gordon is back to review the cinema-focused Canon EOS R5 C! 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). I bought my lens in mint condition for $350 from Japan, but I see that some retailers are asking significantly more. Colour and contrast is great. Please send your photos of the Andromeda galaxy. And they like circles (no ellipses or polygons) and smooth colour (no hard edges, no onion rings). During the frigid months of winter, my motivation to spend over an hour setting up my complete deep-sky imaging rig dwindles. Micael Widell is a photography enthusiast based in Stockholm, Sweden. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. The Olympus Zuiko 180/2.8 and 100/2.8 impressed me in the 1980s, but in the digital era they are not so sharp. If canon puts an IS on this lens, it would be perfect! 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. Amazing for portraits, easily fast enough for indoor sports. I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. 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. The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. I disagree. Especially for beginning astrophotographers, who should first invest most of their finances into a good telescope mount, telephoto lenses are an excellent and affordable solution. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. 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. In excellent condition, this lens retails for around $200. Thanks.. I hear great things about the Canon 200/2.8 L but do not have one. The only reason i sell this lens is because of versatility. I loved the Nikon 80-400G for a year, or so, and then found everything with it wrong, and got rid of it. It focuses within a blink of an eye, instantly. Hate these presumptuous kinds of articles and headlines. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 Still, all things considered, I prize this lens very highly and can not imagine giving it up. A promising start, no doubt, but not a master yet! You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! The OP admits he limited experience with lenses other than what he has. Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. One of Canon's best lenses for a reasonable price. It's a technical review about a couple of lens attributes. Youll never have to worry about losing your position just by touching the lens, but you can always tape the position down to be sure. This thing is a beast in comparison. Same thing as people mistake "shallow DOF" to blurry background. On a full frame body, I rely upon this lens and it does not disappoint. IS would also help outside with wind. Its nice to have the F/2. Thanks Gary! Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. Crazy fast AF! And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). 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). You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. This brings me to my question. 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. Both the 135 and 200mm Canon l lenses are winners IMHO. If you can afford it buy this lens, you will love it. But the Rokinon f/2 version fits into a different market. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. Agreed. I like fast lenses, and my Nikkor 105DC is my favourite. Because it's an L-series lens by Canon, you can be sure that the image quality and performance of the 24-105mm meet the demanding aspects of astrophotography such as focus and star quality. And as this article clearly shows, no amount of blurr will make a poorly composed photo good. If you shoot things in motion on a Canon body, and need some reach without massive bulk, this is the one I recommend. Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. Yes the Samyang is good and yes there are lenses with bad bokeh. Manually focusing a lens for astrophotography is nothing new, but the manual aperture ring adjustments may feel a little strange at first. It must not be confused with the much cheaper SMC Takumar, often deceptively advertised as SMC Pentax Takumar, which has the M42 camera thread, and is plagued with unextinguishable blue chromatic aberration. Chromatic aberration is almost eliminated in narrowband, so lenses with that problem may be fine performers. 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). I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. thank you for that great review and also the explanations. 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! 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. +1 for the 135mm lens. If you aren't completely set on the 135mm, the 200mm f/2.8L is a fantastic lens and i think its less expensive than the 135mm f/2L. here are some links to some pics taken with the lens: This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop . I found with the 70-200 made me lazy. These were just a tad less sharp at the corners than their Canon competition, but certainly extremely sharp all over the field if closed down one stop or even half a stop. I love this lens, The Sharpest Lens available for Eos cameras IMO If this was used to shoot video you would think that the first image was using a green screen. :). I mainly use for head shot photography. I cant decide whether to clean it up in processing or let it be. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed February 4th, 2010 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. The one and only 300mm lens I tested is the Zeiss Tele-Tessar 300mm F4. I'm not a fan of the large hood. Wonderful image quality, lots of detail, contrasty, subject separation, fast and accurate AF, bright viewfinder, solid construction, unobtrusive in use, No weather sealing, makes all my other lenses look poor (even the 'L' zooms that, when I first got them, imagined could hardly be improved on). (purchased for $900). In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. 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. At under 900USD, it's a steal. Orion nebula shot with Canon T3i and Rokinon 135mm @ F2.0 150 shots with dark bias and flats stacked and edited. The combination of a wide aperture and very little light lost in transmission makes very high shutter speeds possible. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. The 135 f/2 is not perfect. I just wish this lens had IS for low light and portraits with flash. But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? Many lenses lose their appeal after time, but not this one. Love the shot of the blue anemone, which also displays nice bokeh, and blur! Star parties or dark sky excursions are another great time to use a camera lens in place of the telescope. The 135mm f2 is by all accounts one of their better and more reliable lenses however I believe the chance of a defective lens is lower with the Canon. A lot of us have been saying this for years. Sharpness, contrast and the natural vignetting on full-frame cameras is awesome! Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected.