canon 135mm f2 astrophotography

Same thing as people mistake "shallow DOF" to blurry background. Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. 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. Smooth but contrasty. There is no agreement about what Bokeh means. Seems like a great lens. So I sold it for nearly what I bought it for and chalked it up to a learning experience. 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! Often need f2.2 to f2.8 to gain sufficient DOF for human subjects. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. Great looking lens, if you ever saw it from the front. I've owned nice SLR gear since 1976, and am normally a wide angle shooter this is my favorite lens, of all time. Yes, she's isolated. Oh and it's stabilised. While some people LOVE the bokeh circles (first photo), others hate them and consider them a distraction.The 50mm f/1.8 is hardly a lens to talk about. I almost bought one, but couldn't manage that focal length and DoF with moving subjects and manual focus. Micael Widell is a photography enthusiast based in Stockholm, Sweden. I do not presume to further decorate the universe, and perceive them for what they are: interference. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. Another thing that makes people go "wow" over the 135mm F2 lens design is the bokeh, which can be so creamy that distant backgrounds almost render as gradients. Check them out for yourself! For example, the legendary Canon 85mm F1.2L weighs in at 1025g, and the Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art isn't too light either at 1130g. 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. 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). You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. Focal length is great. The other one is the inevitable and persistent regret that, because of chromatic aberration, the full 75mm aperture of this beautiful lens can not be used in full visible spectrum photography. Before I go any further, Id like to share a photo from Gabriel Millou of the Andromeda Galaxy using a Canon 1300D. 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. Bokeh is buttery smooth, best you can get from a 135mm. Not rude at all, a fair comment. if you really want to get the best gym photos that can be taken, use it and enjoy what you will see. Tiring. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. It's terrible. 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. She's cold? 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. Great for portraits. 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. 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. image quality wise it is by far one the sharpest lenses ive ever used. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. There's literally no story!#6: Purple Flower.The isolation works because it's the only color. 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. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). Along with improvements in telescope mounts, camera technology, filters, and digital image processing, these have allowed amateurs to produce astrophotographs of nearly professional quality. There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. He's better than I am on BS, I got to give him that. 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. If you want the best value possible for your money, and can survive without autofocus, buy the Samyang. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 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. Required fields are marked *. It has no chromatic aberration, and no hint of star deformities in the corners. By the way, I still enjoy using my very sharp Sears 135mm, PKA mount lens. The 135mm focal length is absolutely perfect for the Heart and Soul Nebulae if youre using a crop sensor DSLR camera. Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. #light_bulb I would disagree. Also type the lens you are interested in into the search window on Astrobin to see examples shot with that lens. don't get me wrong; this lens will take great photos, but the 'flatness' i was getting in my photos nearly had me give up 25 years of hobby photography. Here's what I see from the photographs:#1: Woman in traffic. Standards have risen in recent years. And yet this review is on front page of DPReview prompting me to go and buy this lens -- so surely it must be a professional , well grounded review, right? 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. 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. Many students just wanted to take better snapshots of family, vacation, pets, etc. These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. You might never need another lens in the overlapping range at 135mm there isn't much difference between the separation afforded by f/2 vs f/2.8, and the latest 70-200s are plenty sharp. My questions, for deep sky pics, should I get the 135mm lens or the RedCat 51 APO 250mm f/4.9 which you mentioned here as well? 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. BTW, the 300-mm Tele-Tessar you describe -- what camera was it made for? 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. 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. Another drawback is the focal length. 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. Image quality, weight and value for money. As it is it is earns a 9. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. I got this lens because of portraiture. Many lenses lose their appeal after time, but not this one. Robert. Some people do not like this and consider Bokeh to refer only to the rendering of out of focus points of light. When stopped down to 37mm, at F5.4, it also produces perfect, small and round star images across the entire field. The inset picture is a magnified view of the bottom right corner of the frame. Not only does the Rokinon 135 add additional reach, but I can also now shoot at F/2, instead of F/4 on the Canon. Backwards compatible (film). Aperture ring. On FF I use this lens for both tight portraits and landscape shots. And they like circles (no ellipses or polygons) and smooth colour (no hard edges, no onion rings). One of them is simplicity: A clear, simple subject that constitutes a shape, standing out and contrasting against a calm and simple background. I bought a Fotasy Minolta MD->EOSM adapter off ebay for $11, and then for about $20 each on craigs list really sharp, well built Minolta MC 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, and 135mm f2.8 lenses that turned out to be great for astrophotography. Flip on through what we found, and see how the lens performs in the real world in our sample gallery. They were not however designed to be bokeh monsters though that was just a side effect of making them fast and people bought them for speed with bokeh being the afterthought so not Bokeh for the sake of Bokeh as he said. Otherwise this lens is absolutely incredible. IS would also help outside with wind. How good this lens overall and how sharp and color-free? 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. Agreed. Tamron has announced its 11-20mm F2.8 Di III-A RXD ultra-wide angle zoom will be made available for Fujifilm X-mount. Not heavy like the white tele-zooms. This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. I loved the Nikon 80-400G for a year, or so, and then found everything with it wrong, and got rid of it. Thanks, The downsides of this configuration are that shooting wide open can make focusing difficult. This way you get both lenses with only one! My first photo of the night sky is of Comet NEOWISE, however I know its not the best photo I could capture. 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. 10/10 (Editor's Choice) Check Price. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. The lens shows a very slight pincushion distortion, but it's well under 0.1% of frame height, an excellent performance by any measure. 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 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. Depth of field at f/2 on the 135 is so shallow that I usually shot it stopped down to f/2.8 or f/4 anyway. Just like the above samples, most are just bad. 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. AF is accurate and very fast. This seems to be the norm for telephotos. Just not useful if you already have traditional focal lengths. All content, design, and layout are Copyright 19982023 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. She doesn't look like she is there. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. This is so annoying that I intend to replace the Canon lens cap with a Tamron cap. 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. Add To Cart. Canon EF 135mm f/2 L USM (72mm filters, 0.9m/3' close-focus, 25.0 oz./708g, about $1,035.) Optics quality, sharp,very special picture, sharpness, clarity, weight, fast, accurate AF (fringe benefit of f/2), price, no IS, makes you regret buying any zoom lenses, compact, very sharp wide open, good color contrast, bokeh, this is the lens. never mind.. confirmed from others that F19 is indeed the one that is excluded on this lens! Still, all things considered, I prize this lens very highly and can not imagine giving it up. 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. However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. I have the Canon 135 f/2 and loved it from day one. This is one of my all time favourites. My point is that we must never lose the joy of photography. I am not really looking at buying anything else, though. Now I have only the Nikon but I can try to take a photo of the same subject fully open 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). This lens is one of canons finest lenses i have ever used. Pleiades (M45) Orion Nebula (M42) Carina Nebula (shown below) North American Nebula; Heart and Soul Nebula (IC 1805 / IC 1848) It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. (And cost less too). (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 The aperture ring is marked with each f-stop, and you need to manually click through F/2 F/22 and watch the blades do their work. 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area The lens hood is removable (and reversible), which makes packing the Rokinon 135mm away into the included lens pouch possible. Helps me as a beginner a lot Explore the sky, try frame some targets and see what works well with your DSLR and lens combination. How about the sigma 50mm f1.4 Art? The lens is available on eBay for around $200. I rarely shoot static landscapes or posed, composed images. With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. If experience has taught me anything, its that the practical, pain-free equipment that gets the most use under the stars. I was expecting a lot more of an article that says "the best telephoto lenses for astrophotography". Another lens to consider at this focal length (at maximum zoom) is the Rokinon 135mm F/2. I have used and still use the 135MM F/2 l lens. Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. A lot of lenses today are better than anything money could buy in 1980. Also, as creative as the wide-field 135mm focal length is, its not practical for smaller DSOs and most galaxies. I was blown away when I loaded the photos into my computer. However, I find the process tedious, and prefer single, manually guided, long exposures which seem to have deeper colors. The image below was captured using a DSLR and 135mm lens on the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. however i started to realise how every subject might actually be a cardboard cutout being photographed. Im so new to all of this so thank you for your insightful and educational posts. What's it got and what's it like to use? Given the spot on DPR front page, lots of 'what-lens-should-I-buy' newbies will be spending their money on this one. I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. 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. Test Notes 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). thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. 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. 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.'. 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 liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly. 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 want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. Well saturated but neutral. Focus are dead on with my Fullframe or APS system. I know taste is subjective, but it seems to me that some people have become obsessed with blur and bokeh. With no general agreement about what Bokeh is it is little wonder that there is so much argument and disagreement. This photo was captured with the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens using a UV/IR cut filter and a QHY168C dedicated astronomy camera. Thus the enthusiasm has a valid basis but may not be suitable for all shooting conditions. I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. The closest Ive been to the 135mm range is 105mm on my Canon 24-105 zoom. (cont. Samyang 85mm f1.83. Over the years, I have tried more than two dozen telephoto lenses, until I finally found three or four perfect solutions. Bye Hey! When stopped down to 37mm, F5.4, it is almost identical to the Takumar except that on highly enlarged images it shows a hint of coma in the distant corners. You're right, but a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels I bought put to use! I have a Nikon d 500. I hear great things about the Canon 200/2.8 L but do not have one. Build quality: excellent. Built quality is wonderful, focus ring is well-damped. I dont mean to be rude, but I fail to see any photographic comparison or test to display the quality of this lens against others, concerning coma or anything else, except considerations on the manual focusing, its shape and ergonomic. Latter looks quite professional.. thanks for the tiring patronising lecture and then agreeing with me. In 3 months I got loosy focus ring. It would not surprise me if modern lenses were useable at full aperture. The lens has 14 stops when turning the aperture. The extremes are 2 and 22. I owned this lens for a long time, then traded it for the 70-200 2.8IS II. If the title had been: "Testing My First Telephoto and LOVING IT!!!!!!!. The 5D's larger pixels also make chromatic aberration somewhat lower at most apertures. I use it for everything, landscapes, townscapes, interesting detail, portraits. 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. Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. I have just acquired my astrophotography set up thanks to all your videos and doing some research. It's a technical review about a couple of lens attributes. This is the EF-M series version. It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. But first, there are several general rules which must be understood. An update to the Mini 11, the new camera adds parallax correction capabilities, automatic flash control and a multi-function twist lens. Probably you could get a very similar image with a 85mm 1.8. For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. My work requires auto-focus. In the middle of the OM System lineup, the OM-5 promises yesterday's top-tier performance in a lighter, more compact body. The 135L is half the weight of the 70-200 2.8IS. Round one of polls are now open, pick your winners and share your voice. 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. 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. fast, sharp wide open, excellent bokeh, value for money, very fast, sharp, gorgeous background blur, world class lens. 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. 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. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC. The lens hood is not petal-shaped, which is great news for those using this lens for astrophotography. f/2! (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 (purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 (purchased for $900). 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. Crazy fast AF! He has quite a breadth photos many of which are quite good. Available Monday. Astrophotography is one of the ultimate tests of lens quality, as long exposure photography of deep-sky objects in space can highlight issues that are hidden during daytime photography. 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! CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. They account for much of the disagreement that we see on-line (but not for the rudeness and viciousness of some of it). From my experience, the toughest test on a lense is its ability to function wide open. Yes there's bokeh. Seems to me that Michael is pretty new to using long telephoto lenses, he writes that the Samyang is the first he has owned. Be careful with the focus. Will I be able to capture the heart nebula with the lens youre talking about or would I need to modify my camera as well? AHAB. 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!

Carrie Kathleen Crowell, Woven Basket With Handles, Brendan Healy Swansea, Danielle Avitable Wedding, Allison 2500 Transmission Fluid Capacity, Articles C