Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography. 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 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. Its nice to have the F/2. One of Canon's best lenses for a reasonable price. She's cold? Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. Used with a FF body the DOF can be unforgiving, but if you nail focus the results can be magnificent. when you hold the lens in your hand you know you are holding a fine peice of optical equipment. Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. 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. 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. Yuri toropin tests a bunch of lenses on Flickr which is a great source. Lior, I have done a lot of reading on modern zoom lenses. 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. 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. 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. 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 ;). Build quality: excellent. I just wish this lens had IS for low light and portraits with flash. Second of all, the incredible sharpness of the photo: I have owned many lenses, most of which I bought because they were supposed to have world-class sharpness, but the Samyang 135mm still stands out to me. Now, I have to admit that up to this point, it sounds a little too good to be true. Pentax seems to have put more emphasis than others on keeping the resolution uniform all over the field. As in all arts the client's likes influence the result up to a point. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ MCovington, my Zeiss 300/4 is the full thickness barrel version, made in West Germany, serial number 5990836. The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. 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. As you know, camera lenses come in varying focal lengths, apertures, and optical quality. you can see here a lot of photos mostly shot with the f/4 version. Seems like a great lens. 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. Excellent color and saturation, a virtually perfect lens. 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. Im a newbie at astro.. and photography in general really! We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 Focus are dead on with my Fullframe or APS system. I really like how they augment my longer focal length scopes. Its a joy to work with every time. "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. Which is the better buy? The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. Thanks for the fine article and the thought you put into it. This leaves you with a buttery bokeh and an object in perfect focus. The closest Ive been to the 135mm range is 105mm on my Canon 24-105 zoom. If you want the best value possible for your money, and can survive without autofocus, buy the Samyang. I have the Sony SaL 135F1.8 Zeiss Lens and think that is excellent. The duck and cat are really the only good shots. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. (purchased for $860), reviewed March 9th, 2017 Be careful with the focus. 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. Samyang 135mm f2, 100mm f2.8, and asperical 16mm f2.8. 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. 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. Barney and Chris have been shooting the new Sony 50mm F1.4 GM, and we have a bunch of full resolution samples for you to peruse. If you shoot things in motion on a Canon body, and need some reach without massive bulk, this is the one I recommend. I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. Great for portraits. Nice image, andysea. Stuff I used to take the photos. 1. I see that many commenters did not get what this lens can do. To me it is a dead spot between 85 and 200. Geometric distortion is lower than one would expect, at 0.15% pincushion maximum, with an average of 0.07%. Besides, adding IS would mean adding extra elements and that would very likely reduce the image quality. Or is there a use case for fitting the Samyang 135mm to a Panasonic gx85 (or Panasonic gh5) ?? (purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 Hate these presumptuous kinds of articles and headlines. You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. If anything the argument in favor of even smaller and lighter 85/1.4s (like the 600g Sigma DN) is stronger than ever, and I say that as someone that loves shooting at 135-150mm. Prime lenses are typically lighter as they do not need the additional glass and mechanics required to zoom at varying magnifications. I use it routinely in preference to many other multicoated filters I tested, including the new Hoya MC UV. 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. Light weight and robust. 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. BirdDog P240 40X NDI PTZ Camera. I found with the 70-200 made me lazy. 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. Over the last ten to fifteen years excellent apochromatic telescopes have become available for visual use and photography. Sme of the wide field are. Of my last 3500 shots only 62 were made with the 135 f/2. A specialist lens, at best, though I did enjoy the cat image. You don't have to worry about shopping for a better lens anymore. So I feel I'm being cheated. The following image was captured by Eric Cauble using the Samyang branded version of this lens. D8XX cameras, subject isolation and quality of bokeh.Zoom lenses can not hold a candle to such primes. Also, I used to have a Nikon 180/2.8 ED IF AF and 300/4 ED IF AF. Otherwise this lens is absolutely incredible. But do some experimenting before you decide. And in their task to get that blurry background, they most often throw their main subject out of focus and/or to focus for anything else in the photograph that would make it, and end results are just "gear porn". I'll walk you through all this inc. 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. Stick to Andromeda, and skip the Whirlpool. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. Lots of wet blankets around here. Image quality, weight and value for money. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. Also, when used as recommended, and properly guided at full camera resolution, they are all comparable to a field-corrected APO, producing perfect images from edge to edge which can be easily cropped 25% with no evidence of aberrations. Thanks & Cheers Must have if you're serious about portraits. But even better BOKEH is the SAL-135F2.8F4.5 STF (Smooth Trans Focus ) which has even better BOKEH, albeit a manual focus lens. F2 allows higher shutter speeds in lower light without raising the ISO. 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.). It starts out very sharp at f/2.0, gets even sharper at f/2.8, and softens only slightly at f/11. Round one of polls are now open, pick your winners and share your voice. I speak Japanese fluently, was a translator in Tokyo for 8 years and studied photography there for two years. Check them out for yourself! Already wide open this lens produce some high quality photos. We think it rises to the challenge. Have not used a 70-200 since. They just wanted to increase their joy from photography. Both the 135 and 200mm Canon l lenses are winners IMHO. (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 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. 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. The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. People mistake "Bokeh" to blurry background, what is very very common mistake. What you need to know is the author is a hobbyist and hands his images over to px500, the bottom of the barrel so of course he is impressed, he doesnt use top flight gear day in, day out to earn his pay. 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. 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. A con is that it really makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. It would not surprise me if modern lenses were useable at full aperture. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. My Nikon focus and aperture rings are a thing of highly finessed engineering beauty! The second best, is the Hoya Pro One Digital MC UV(0) filter. Most of the available 135mm F2 lenses have a very short minimum focusing distance in relation to the focal length, creating a magnification ratio of around 0.2 - 0.25. I was blown away when I loaded the photos into my computer. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best. Oh and it's stabilised. Here is a short list of great astrophotography targets to shoot at 135mm with this lens: Below, is an incredible example of the types of projects possible with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 lens. The 135 f/2 is not perfect. 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. Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. It also focuses really fast and accurate and is light. They create a beautiful, mesmerizing dreamscape in their photos, and their secret weapon, besides an impeccable sense for aesthetics, is the 135mm F2 lens. So so far the best that I have used are the 200f2.8L and the 400f5.6L. For me, that's enough. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. If 135mm f2 works for you, then fine. Star parties or dark sky excursions are another great time to use a camera lens in place of the telescope. Most small refracting telescopes start in the 300 to 400 mm focal length range, and even these are classed as widefield telescopes. I have found myself shooting wide open almost all the time. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! Large emission nebulae like the California Nebula (pictured below) are a great choice for this focal length. Robert. 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. 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. I had both for a while. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. Better than nothing I guess, would depend on how much it raises the price. reviewed August 2nd, 2017 The lens is so crisp that the diaphragm blade pattern is visible on point light sources shot at large aperature. I am telling them - don't! It's sharp, has very low aberrations, no real distortion and the bokeh is very nice. 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. The interest of a f/1.4 is to be able to be perfect at f/2.8, while a f/1.8 or f/2 might need to be on f/4 to have the same sharpeness and overall IQ.They are not meant to be used wide open, except in rare moments. Shoot shiny metal at a wide aperture and you'll see some very extreme purple fringing. wew.. I understand the optical design is quite old. Check out Image quality is great, it is tack-sharp wide-open even though for partraiture, a little bit of softness is needed. What's it got and what's it like to use? Finally, to prevent image shift during exposure, all telephoto lenses must be supported at two points: at the camera end, and at the far end with a large retaining ring. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. The 135mm focal length is absolutely perfect for the Heart and Soul Nebulae if youre using a crop sensor DSLR camera. 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. I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. Do you have a link to Yuri's photo stream? The Rho Ophiuchi Cloud Complex by Eric Cauble using the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens. On the 135/2 all you've got is the bare metal. For my purposes, this is a spectacular lens. Some people do not like this and consider Bokeh to refer only to the rendering of out of focus points of light. Great question Scott I think it depends on the image. 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 got mine for $60.00 on Craigslist but seen them on eBay for $100 and less all the time. This summer I'm going to try the lenses out for LRGB images to see how they perform. 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. Mr Ericsson makes a very good point, and to go and dig irrelevant background info on him to discredit him is just well THAT is trolling. The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. Thanks, Chris, hi Trevor my name is sagar i have same lens but i have one question why lot of stars are appearing in my image which is taken thru rokinon 135mm, Your email address will not be published. Exposure uniformity (vignetting) is also really excellent, reaching a maximum of 1/4 EV (on a camera with an APS-C size sensor) at f/2, and dropping to well under 1/10 EV at f/2.8 and above. Write your own user review for this lens. 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. But this lens changed my mind. Required fields are marked *. . Yes the Samyang is good and yes there are lenses with bad bokeh. The Nikon D810A, however, is modified for astrophotography out of the box. Also, as creative as the wide-field 135mm focal length is, its not practical for smaller DSOs and most galaxies. But you couldn't have because you don't know even as much as this guy. Extrapolating from this, minimum recommended guidescope power is 120x for the 300mm telephoto, 80x for the 200mm, and 55x for the 135mm. While there are certainly pricey 135mm F2 lenses out there (such as the aforementioned Sigma 135mm F1.8 Art, or the Carl Zeiss 135mm) there are a couple that give you extreme value for the money. IQ will rival any other lens. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. From the moment I reviewed the first sub-exposure on the display screen of my camera, I feel in love with the mid-range magnification of a 135mm lens. PRICE. That's why I really enjoy shooting portraits with it. At $900 US it a relative steal. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. He loves photography, and runs a YouTube channel with tutorials, lens reviews and photography inspiration. My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. The image below highlights the creative freedom this lens provides. The next 200mm lens of excellent quality is the 200mm F4 Nikkor F which requires the Nikon F to EOS adapter. Over the years, I have tried more than two dozen telephoto lenses, until I finally found three or four perfect solutions. 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. 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. tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej never mind.. confirmed from others that F19 is indeed the one that is excluded on this lens! Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. 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. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. Some lenses are incurable. OK guysTOS rule number one "Posts that are not respectful of other individuals (be they members or not) are not welcome here.". My Rokinon 135F2 on my crop body is fun to play with.. a budget lens with budget construction on a discontinued camera system.. but hey im just a ham and egger https://flic.kr/p/21nj82V, I had a Canon 135/2 for a while, but I decided I preferred the 100 L used not as a Macro but a normal lens (which my non-L USM 100 Macro was quite poor for). Does the bright star reflection bother you? My Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 mounted to a Fornax Mounts LighTrack II. 2. parts of your main subject extend beyond the DOF range it will never look flat. It's bokeh is comparable to the 85mm 1.2 but IMO not as nice. Sharp without being harsh. Please send your photos of the Andromeda galaxy. Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. 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. 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. Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens. It seems they are now quite comparable in quality to prime lenses. Best lens for portraiture I've ever tried. 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. However, stepping outside to polar align a small star tracker and attach a DSLR and lens is quick and painless. The Rokinon 14mm F/2.8 was the first lens I had ever used like this, and these aspects do not hinder the astrophotography experience whatsoever. 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! This lens has only two drawbacks. For posed portraiture, it's a very nice budget option.FWIW, I'm a corporate portrait and event pro. It requires the Contax-EOS adapter for attachment to the camera. We sell a wide variety of digital cameras from all the top brands like Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Fujifilm, Pentax, Leica, Samsung, and more. It could really use an update to its coatings. Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? The inset picture is a magnified view of the bottom right corner of the frame. Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. And because you can shoot between F/2 and F/4, plenty of light reaches the sensor in a relatively short exposure. Only con I can think of, and that may be a big one depending on how you plan to use the lens is the lack of weather sealing. A higher-res Blackmagic Studio Camera just dropped. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. 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. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. One of them is simplicity: A clear, simple subject that constitutes a shape, standing out and contrasting against a calm and simple background. 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. 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. The focuser adjustment ring on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is excellent, but fine-tuning your critical focus on a bright star at F/2 will take some trial and error to get right. Focal length is great. In this post, Ill share my results using an affordable prime telephoto lens for astrophotography, the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens.