Meanwhile the ol' Canon 135/2 is still commanding a higher than average price on the used market (70%+ of MSRP isn't common), I guess the low weight and super easy resale have almost made it a high end commodity. Beautiful portrait lens. I am a complete amateur at photography in general and this is all new to me so thank you for all the information and videos. Equipment used was an astromodified Canon 700D, Samyang 135mm f2, SkyTech Triband filter, Star Adventurer 2i, ZWO mini finder with ASI120MM, guiding with PHD2 and polar alignment using sharpcap. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get. Perhaps this impression of unreal sharpness is strengthened by the contrast to the extremely creamy bokeh you typically get in the same photo. Samyang 135 f/2 astrophotography gallery Below some pictures I made using Samyang 135 lens with QHY163 mono camera and iOptron Smart EQ Pro mount. I am telling them - don't! Bokeh is buttery smooth, best you can get from a 135mm. Just plain black plastic (no interior felt as in newer lens hoods). One of Canon's best lenses for a reasonable price. Perfect lens on the same level as CZ! Interesting. There's just nothing there. I have found myself shooting wide open almost all the time. 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. Yes the Samyang is good and yes there are lenses with bad bokeh. Instead it means the style of rendering. p.s. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. Better than nothing I guess, would depend on how much it raises the price. F2 allows higher shutter speeds in lower light without raising the ISO. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. 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. Together they still weight less than any modern 135mm :>. Got it! (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 When stopped down to 37mm, at F5.4, it also produces perfect, small and round star images across the entire field. Required fields are marked *. A quick question, I have a Sony a6300 mirrorless camera which is great but the sensor is very close behind the mount. The California Nebula. When coupled with my Canon DSLR camera, the entire system weighs just over 3 pounds. No one yet mentioned a zoom lens, I had an opportunity to test my Canon 24-105L f/4 on M31 Andromeda Galaxy and received wonderful results with Canon 60D unmoded, I set it to 105mm, No vignatting, slight coma on the corners and no false color on bright stars. (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 I've been using a vintage FD 135/3.5 on my A7R IV as a compact tele option, often alongside a tiny Samyang 75/1.8. With no general agreement about what Bokeh is it is little wonder that there is so much argument and disagreement. 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. I do know, however, that I can take an equally framed photo I've shot with my Canon kit lens, both zoomed to 100% I run circles around this guy. It's bokeh is comparable to the 85mm 1.2 but IMO not as nice. Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. +1 for the 135mm lens. He's better than I am on BS, I got to give him that. However, they can be perfectly corrected with narrow band H-alpha or OIII filters. One is the price, which starts around $800 for the smallest units, and rapidly climbs into thousands of dollars for larger apertures. Available 03/21/23. 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. So I sold it for nearly what I bought it for and chalked it up to a learning experience. There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. Even if the background is very close to your subject, somehow the optical construction in the 135mm lens will still manage to separate the background beautifully. Canon 300/4 ED IF AF (non-IS) 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. If you own an EOS Camera - It's a no Brainer, Buy one The second best, is the Hoya Pro One Digital MC UV(0) filter. I am still very proud of some of the photos I shoot with a Pentax O450 15 years ago - a good smartphone camera today is at least as capable. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. Amazing colours, contrast, bokeh, everything! I shoot it wide open 90% of the time. You currently have javascript disabled. The inset picture is a magnified view of the bottom right corner of the frame. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). @ Juksu - you're pathologically clueless. This photo was captured with the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens using a UV/IR cut filter and a QHY168C dedicated astronomy camera. Never before (nor after) have I seen a lens with this level of sharpness wide open. My 24-70L needs to be stopped down to f5.6 to begin to match the sharpness of my 135L at f2.0 (the test shots were of the portrait of Andrew Jackson on a $20 bill). you can see here a lot of photos mostly shot with the f/4 version. When all that was available were APS-C crop cameras a 85mm lens provided a near equivalent view angle to the 135mm on a full frame camera. 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. The APO showed no chromatic aberration at all with the addition of the Astronomik UV/IR cut clip filter (passing 380-680nm), but the telephoto lenses, even when stopped down, showed a tight bright red ring around all stars. 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. 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. I do not see much difference in background blur or bokeh. I've owned nice SLR gear since 1976, and am normally a wide angle shooter this is my favorite lens, of all time. However, when my Canon "L" lenses are used at f8 they are all very sharp and the 135L does not blow the others away. If you want autofocus and great value for money, buy the Canon 135mm, as it has almost the image quality of the Samyang, and you can get it for under $1,000 new. I found with the 70-200 made me lazy. 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! Canon 135mm is a great lens. The only reason i sell this lens is because of versatility. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. I'll walk you through all this inc. As rest you do just by cropping or stitching. I bought it for its bokeh. This image of NGC 7000 was done at F/4 at iso 800 with a Canon 20D mod. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? I have the Canon 135 f/2 and loved it from day one. Flip on through what we found, and see how the lens performs in the real world in our sample gallery. I am no stranger to the full manual control of this lens, for both aperture and focus. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. This way you get both lenses with only one! Nikon 300/4 ED IF, Sigma 50/2.8 DG Macro (not a telephoto, but good). 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. I would only recommend this lens for casual photographers where missed shot means nothing. Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. Also, the lens can only be operated when aperture is set to 22, wondering how I could use F2. never mind.. confirmed from others that F19 is indeed the one that is excluded on this lens! Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. Given the spot on DPR front page, lots of 'what-lens-should-I-buy' newbies will be spending their money on this one. This lens flares easily and the flare can be especially ugly if a sun or flash are in the frame. Thanks! To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. 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. Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. 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. Excellent build quality, fast auto focus, and its fast. Would you recommend a collar/support for the lens? Stick to Andromeda, and skip the Whirlpool. Another lens to consider at this focal length (at maximum zoom) is the Rokinon 135mm F/2. I already did some trials with the Samyang 12mm lens. Not only does it let you travel light, but impressive wide field projects are often more successful when captured under a dark sky. Everyone assumes their definition is the "true" one. I was expecting a lot more of an article that says "the best telephoto lenses for astrophotography". He has quite a breadth photos many of which are quite good. IQ will rival any other lens. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. I do not presume to further decorate the universe, and perceive them for what they are: interference. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. To actually learn to compose the photos so that the background complements the image instead of being something that must be blurred away. There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. Test Notes 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. Do you expect me to gawk? $449.00. So, for Joe User or especially for Jane Client, one really has to look closely to see much of a difference. My only complaint about this lens is that the depth of the lens shade forces me to remove the shade in order to remove or replace the lens cap (my hands are fairly large). http://www.radiantlite.com/2009/01/canon-135mm-f2l-usm-mini-review.html So.. its like there is one F stop not being used by the lens..how do you know what click is for what F stop?? Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. Not another article that promotes portraits shot with wide open lens and out of focus highlights in the background. Click on following link to view images A tiny bit of fringing, but that would only be noticed by pixel-peepers. Before I go any further, Id like to share a photo from Gabriel Millou of the Andromeda Galaxy using a Canon 1300D. 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. Andysea, those are great images on your website. Still, all things considered, I prize this lens very highly and can not imagine giving it up. Although typically unused in astrophotography, I did get a chance to see the beautiful bokeh this lens creates when shooting at F/2. Backwards compatible (film). The size (3.2 x 4.4"/82.5 x 112mm) and weight (1.7 lb/750g) (and color) of this lens are not imposing - you probably won't get much attent My copy is 12-years-old and still delivers at over 75 weddings a year. 2 Dielectric Diagonals. 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. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. Sharpness, contrast and the natural vignetting on full-frame cameras is awesome! thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. You get what you get.#4: Cat in Underbrush.That's pretty good.#5: Woman with Blanket.It's like a snapshot. The diameter of the lens is 77mm, with a non-rotating filter mount on the objective lens. (purchased for $900), reviewed December 14th, 2006 Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. 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. Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. There are only a handful of foolproof strategies for making a great photograph. 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. I would! BirdDog P240 40X NDI PTZ Camera. I am not really looking at buying anything else, though. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. But the Rokinon f/2 version fits into a different market. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. [emailprotected]. Olympus 75mm f1.82. As you'd expect from a premium prime lens, both maximum and average chromatic aberration is very low across the aperture range, with the maximum CA on the order of 0.02% of frame height regardless of aperture. Since I am interested in wide field astrophotography, I bought a new, unmodified, Canon 600D body for use with telephoto lenses. You may need to refocus your subject as the temperature changes throughout the night. I really like how they augment my longer focal length scopes. 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. OM System's latest lens is a whopper of a macro, featuring optical stabilization, full weather sealing, up to 2x magnification and a whole lot more. 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. 135 mm. Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. Since i am totally new in this field, i would like to start with astrophotography but using my existing camera (Fuji XT-30). I just got the Samyang version of this lens and used it with my Canon 3ti on a Skywatcher Star Adventurer. Some lenses are incurable. But I sold it and went back to using a 70-200 (alongside a 24-70). They create a beautiful, mesmerizing dreamscape in their photos, and their secret weapon, besides an impeccable sense for aesthetics, is the 135mm F2 lens. Also Nikon DC 135mm f/2 is a great lens, a little better than 135mm Canon After weeks with a production Fujifilm X-T5, Chris and Jordan have some final thoughts. Thanks.. Ive been using kit lenses for the past year, favoring the Nikkor 50mm 2.8. 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. Could use a few updates. Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. Build quality: excellent. Agreed. Be careful with the focus. The 135mm F2 lens design is truly special, and in this article (and the video I made), I want to try to convince you as well. 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. Standards have risen in recent years. 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. 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. Besides lack of IS, the only major issue I have with this lens is flare. When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly. Sharp without being harsh. Unfortunately I haven't more the Canon lens. 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. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. AHAB. I'm not a fan of the large hood. Sure, that would be swellbut it doesn't matter with regard to how it performs. Thanks & Cheers (on a full frame camera)Wonderful lens for some portraiture applications, sporting events and candids at a party or event. But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. Is it possible to get good results on a Baader filter modifed Canon 450D and a good telephoto lens, or do I need to get a good APO? Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? Moreover if we have a serendipitous moment regarding a new (or used) lens, that's a good thing. I would recommend buying it used if you want to save some money, with the added benefit that you can re-sell it at the same price as you bought it for, effectively giving you the opportunity to "rent it" for free. here are some links to some pics taken with the lens: Already wide open this lens produce some high quality photos. The moment I tried the Samyang 135mm F2 for the first time after purchasing it, I immediately felt that it was a very special lens. Which is the better buy? In fact, in my test shots, I noticed that the red channel was a little softer than green and blue. f/2! If you don't like that article that's your right as a member. The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. 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. (purchased for $900). 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. Below, are a few examples of astrophotography images Ive taken with lenses of varying focal lengths. We were very impressed with X-T5's 40-megapixel APS-C sensor, check out some full resolution images! Or is there a use case for fitting the Samyang 135mm to a Panasonic gx85 (or Panasonic gh5) ?? I had both for a while. Big F-value.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. One of the prime examples of such a design is the "nifty fifty"the 50mm F1.8 lens construction that many lens manufacturers provide. Why so salty? (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). You're sour grapes man, you wish it were you who wrote the article. Chris referred to the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM as 'a little gem'! Then you should have tried the 180mm nikkor ED, the old one, which is the favorite tool of a lot of astrophotographers. I see that many commenters did not get what this lens can do. Perhaps you have seen the photos of masterful Russian portrait photographers such as Elena Shumilova or Anka Zhuravleva. But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? Samyang 135mm f2, 100mm f2.8, and asperical 16mm f2.8. Today I want to talk about another such lens design: The 135mm F2 lens. Love the shot of the blue anemone, which also displays nice bokeh, and blur! We always expect to see some drop in performance (particularly corner sharpness) when we move from testing on a sub-frame to a full-frame camera, but the 135mm f/2L turned in a really remarkable performance even at full-frame. Some people like these, and consider them decorative. (purchased for $970), reviewed March 17th, 2011 Thus the enthusiasm has a valid basis but may not be suitable for all shooting conditions. Add To Cart. One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. Voting ends March 8, 2023. So there - it is not a perfect object. Diffraction from the cheap EF-s kit zoom lens was uneven. 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 Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. On a full frame body, I rely upon this lens and it does not disappoint. However, stepping outside to polar align a small star tracker and attach a DSLR and lens is quick and painless. This brings me to my question. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. if you really want to get the best gym photos that can be taken, use it and enjoy what you will see. Zeiss Jena or Oberkochen? People mistake "Bokeh" to blurry background, what is very very common mistake. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens. Released only weeks apart, the Sony 50mm F1.4 GM and Sigma F1.4 DG DN Art are clear competitors. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ Sometimes though, we stumble upon a great lens design which is strong in all three. A single, 90-second exposure using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. And now important part: This lens can be stopped down if desired effect is not required and no, with 85/1.8 you will never get this effect. Tiring. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. Let's the games begin! Include the Carl Zeiss in your research though, it might be an interesting lens for you, even if it is a bit pricey for what you get.
Jennifer Cella Biography,
Marie Amos Dobyns,
Uefa Category 4 Stadiums England,
Most Expensive Cities In North America 2021,
Articles C