(purchased for $900), reviewed November 2nd, 2015 you can see here a lot of photos mostly shot with the f/4 version. Lior, I have done a lot of reading on modern zoom lenses. These are affordably available on eBay, and result in perfectly round star images, the way nature intended them to be. Make sure to select your camera mount when checking the price (Check current price). To shoot indoors under typical gymnasium lighting, you often need f/2.0 or wider to get a shutter speed high enough to stop the action. Helps me as a beginner a lot In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. 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. 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. 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. 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. Also, accurate guiding is essential. Bottom line, this is just an outstanding lens by any measure, one that makes clear why you'd want to pay the freight for expensive prime glass. 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. To actually learn to compose the photos so that the background complements the image instead of being something that must be blurred away. My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. I find neither the cat nor the duck particularly good. (purchased for $860), reviewed March 9th, 2017 On FF I use this lens for both tight portraits and landscape shots. I stopped reading after the part where someone I don't know told me I "should" be doing something. Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. Second night out with mine right now and I am here in the comments looking for the part number or link! Perfect lens on the same level as CZ! It's an ideal portrait lens. Neutral yet very nice colours. Stellarium has a great viewport feature that allows you to preview different lens and sensor combinations on DSO's before you decide on the focal length you want. In the highest contrast situations there's a hint of both purple and green fringing but both are minor and easy to remove with software. The lens hood is not petal-shaped, which is great news for those using this lens for astrophotography. Canon 60Da DSLR and Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L2 lens at 135mm, f/3.2. 2. 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. Voting ends March 8, 2023. How good this lens overall and how sharp and color-free? Available 03/21/23. (AVX). This creates an effective focal length of roughly 200mm, a useful magnification for a wide variety of astro-imaging scenarios. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. I own a 135 since the film days (because you "had to have one" and could not afford much else), still have the zeiss Jena f3.5 M42 and even jumped for the zeiss f2.8 for my yashica when they were sold for next to nothing. [emailprotected]. There's literally no story!#6: Purple Flower.The isolation works because it's the only color. The Japanese word "bokeh" can be translated into English as "blur". Jordan has a simple fix camera manufacturers could implement to improve their video autofocus. 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). This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop using the aperture ring at the base of the lens. You're right, but a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels I bought put to use! The foolproof image seems to be more a case of how a bright fuzzy cluttered moving background can completely detach from the offset dark subject matter and overwhelm it. I bought this lens after reading your great review for my Nikon D5300. A single, 90-second exposure using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. Bond, I expect you to buy! 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. Orion nebula shot with Canon T3i and Rokinon 135mm @ F2.0 150 shots with dark bias and flats stacked and edited. Lots of wet blankets around here. Write your own user review for this lens. Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? After the first exposure in M mode, the camera throws an error saying Error please press the shutter button again. That's a cheap, fun date for AP. Thanks & Cheers Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed October 5th, 2008 This includes everything from the rich star fields of Sagittarius, to a complete look at the Andromeda Galaxy. The latter are designed for crop sensor cameras and the back of the lens sticks too far into the body of the camera and would hit the EOS-clip filter. When attached to a DSLR camera with a full frame sensor, the lens offers a massive 15.5 x 10.6 field of view, or 18.8 across the diagonal. But this lens changed my mind. Used with a FF body the DOF can be unforgiving, but if you nail focus the results can be magnificent. It requires the Contax-EOS adapter for attachment to the camera. I'll walk you through all this inc. 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. 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. I really don't want to count all the pores - and the hairs coming out of them (eeeew!) Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. And you can even crop a 135 efl with today's sensors should you actually need it. The 135mm f2.8 in particular can take amazing photos of the brighter deep sky objects with about 1 second time . The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. Fantastic IQ & Bokeh. The 135mm f/2.0 ED UMC Lens from Samyang is a manual focus telephoto prime lens useful for portraiture and most telephoto applications. Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. It improves slightly stopped down. I have used the canon 70-200 f2.8L ii and also the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 L with excellent results. As you know, camera lenses come in varying focal lengths, apertures, and optical quality. 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. Probably you could get a very similar image with a 85mm 1.8. Nice image, andysea. After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. I used this lens quite a bit years ago as my main working lens. Some lenses are incurable. f2, very sharp, virtually without CAs, contrast, colour, lightwight, buildings. I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. Be careful with the focus. 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. KevinS, in my experience stopping down dramatically improves image quality in terms of chromatic aberration, coma and astigmatism. The sigma 150mm f2.8 tests very well, zeiss 135mm apo sonnar, and leica 180mm f3.5 apo all proven performers on star tests. The only thing that could possibly make this better would be to add IS. For some objects a reflection can take away from the photo because it covers interesting details of the object (Think Alnitak in the Horsehead Nebula). Last time I used a 135mm f2 was decades ago on a Canon F1. I had both for a while. 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. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. Not too heavy. I wish every lens was this good!! 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. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? At $900 US it a relative steal. F2 allows higher shutter speeds in lower light without raising the ISO. With a rounded 9-blade diaphragm, shallow depth of field imaging will be rendered with pleasing out-of-focus highlights. I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. The lenses I listed are certainly not the ONLY exceptional lenses made over the years. 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. My goal for this article was to show some great example photos and share some ideas for projects this lens is a good fit for. (purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 Great for portraits. You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. Agreed. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. Unfortunately I haven't more the Canon lens. For me, that's enough. etc.. Ron. 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. It seems they are now quite comparable in quality to prime lenses. Amazing for portraits, easily fast enough for indoor sports. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. Which is the better buy? But ppl should know there is much better advice in the forums. Images that sing. Proper composition, light and retouching are much prefferable to crazy gooey bokeh. (cont. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . This is so annoying that I intend to replace the Canon lens cap with a Tamron cap. IS would also help outside with wind. 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. When you buy a lens with fantastic sharpness and image quality at all apertures, you typically expect it to cost $1,200 on up. (For Nikon users there's the new 105mm too.). Again, there's no context. 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. If this was used to shoot video you would think that the first image was using a green screen. Fast. And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? BirdDog P240 40X NDI PTZ Camera. Bokeh == Visual character of the lens optics to render light and color mixing together. What is it like shooting with one today? I bought it for its bokeh. Great post; thanks for the detailed information. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/284303834/. Thanks.. I am not really looking at buying anything else, though. I have a Nikon d 500. Thanks, 10/10 (Editor's Choice) Check Price. Im so new to all of this so thank you for your insightful and educational posts. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. Why so salty? 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. Of my last 3500 shots only 62 were made with the 135 f/2. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. Lenses with extreme sharpness and bokeh tend to be heavy. The combination of a wide aperture and very little light lost in transmission makes very high shutter speeds possible. It also focuses really fast and accurate and is light. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. I would like to make this work with the Nikkor 180mm ED (i.e., what I have versus what I cannot havelol). How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? With the high megapixel cameras, most people are going to ideally want to shoot at 1/200 or faster. No rubber sealing against the camera body tend to give me the creeps when shooting in the wet. I guess thats where practice will come in handy. The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. If you don't like that article that's your right as a member. Perhaps you have seen the photos of masterful Russian portrait photographers such as Elena Shumilova or Anka Zhuravleva. I'll take photo of Orion as soon as possible. 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". It is fantastic on my old 5d. I also find the other photos not very good. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. One thing I am most stun is its AF performance. 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. Dear Trevor, I can tell you its a great performer for astro use. 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. Instead it means the style of rendering. I think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. 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. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. And if you want autofocus, I would recommend the Canon 135mm f2.0L, which is incredibly light for its performance at just 750g. My work requires auto-focus. 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. I've missed shots at wide apertures because the DOF is so extremely thin. We take OM System's new 90mm prime F3.5 macro lens out and about around Seattle, in search of sunlight, people and very tiny things to get up close and personal with. They are by nature designed to compromise by magnification and distance, and are therefore not optically optimized at any single setting. This lens has only two drawbacks. However, when my Canon "L" lenses are used at f8 they are all very sharp and the 135L does not blow the others away. Best lens for portraiture I've ever tried. Particular properties of modern 135/2 lenses are resolution with e.g. Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. 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. 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. Ive been using kit lenses for the past year, favoring the Nikkor 50mm 2.8. This criticism refers to rare cases when your main subject matter is flat and completely inside the limited DOF range while the rest of the image is outside. He has quite a breadth photos many of which are quite good. The aesthetic quality of the blur in the out-of-focus parts of the image are buttery smooth and soft. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". Whats the best camera for around $2000?