Follow me!">
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! Stopping down would actually have improved the picture. I got mine for $60.00 on Craigslist but seen them on eBay for $100 and less all the time. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class. In my test, nikon have the same color correction than Canon and same sharpness. 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? Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. Tack sharp even at wide open aperture. The extremes are 2 and 22. By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. Canon's 700-200 zooms have IS and are weather sealed two features that the 135 f/2 lacks. Since i am totally new in this field, i would like to start with astrophotography but using my existing camera (Fuji XT-30). I use it routinely in preference to many other multicoated filters I tested, including the new Hoya MC UV. He loves photography, and runs a YouTube channel with tutorials, lens reviews and photography inspiration. (purchased for $900), reviewed December 4th, 2006 The Rho Ophiuchi Cloud Complex by Eric Cauble using the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens. Built quality is wonderful, focus ring is well-damped. An h-alpha filter would still be useful for your D500, but much more so if it were modified! Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. Camera tech for video has come a long way in recent years, with faster autofocus, subject tracking, eye tracking and smarter lenses that stabilize the frame. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. Contrasty, saturated, nice colours. Olympus 75mm f1.82. A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. It's not a bad lens, probably a great one, even if it doesn't seems really as sharp as a basic 85mm f/1.8 (used at f/2.8) , but it's a bad idea to work wide open if you don't need to. Given the spot on DPR front page, lots of 'what-lens-should-I-buy' newbies will be spending their money on this one. Deserves to be in the camera hall of fame. First of all, the background separation and the bokeh: I had photographed lots of animals in bushes before, but never before had I seen the bush melt away in the way it did with the 135mm lens. With todays huge variety of digital sensors, each with their own characteristics, in-camera and post-processing etc., much depends on the given combination of your photo gear to create a certain effect. To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. I rarely shoot static landscapes or posed, composed images. Off topic, Thanks! For me, that's enough. This lens flares easily and the flare can be especially ugly if a sun or flash are in the frame. Also, I used to have a Nikon 180/2.8 ED IF AF and 300/4 ED IF AF. 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. 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. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. Try to have eyes and nose / lips all in focus. They just wanted to increase their joy from photography. Please send your photos of the Andromeda galaxy. 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. Sharp wide open, wonderful bokeh, fast AF in dark conditions. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. I would like to make this work with the Nikkor 180mm ED (i.e., what I have versus what I cannot havelol). It could really use an update to its coatings. Sony has added a full-frame 50mm F1.4 prime to its premium 'GM' range of E-mount lenses. People mistake "Bokeh" to blurry background, what is very very common mistake. In the past, Ive covered a number of different lenses, from the Sigma 24mm F/1.4 to the Canon EF 300mm F/4L. Why would I want a 135/2.0 lens when I have a 135/1.8? 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. But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. What I am trying to avoid is spending another $1,100 on a quality APO, and instead using my existing Nikkor 180mm ED lens with a Baader-modified Canon 450D that I just obtained. In this post, Ill explain why I think the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is the perfect addition to an arsenal of astrophotography lenses. As in all arts the client's likes influence the result up to a point. Canon 300/4 ED IF AF (non-IS) 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. 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. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. However, as I have no actual experience with the Baader filter, I would suggest that you consult other members on the particular APO - Baader filter combination you have in mind. Available 03/21/23. This brings me to my question. Instead it means the style of rendering. 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. 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 need fast auto-focus, predictable focus lock and natural, vibrant color rendition. This lens provides all of these requirements. CAs: a little in the OOF area - not disturbing anyway. I bought my lens in mint condition for $350 from Japan, but I see that some retailers are asking significantly more. By the way, I still enjoy using my very sharp Sears 135mm, PKA mount lens. If you want the best possible image quality, and you must have autofocus, and you don't care if it is a bit heavy (maybe you need it for studio use), buy the Sigma. It could easily rival 'bokeh monsters lenses' at fraction of their price. No telephoto lens can be used with cameras modified by the removal of the internal UV/IR cut filter and anti-aliasing filter. See the full-size version on Astrobin. 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. The lens is not weather-sealed, so you definitely dont want to leave your camera and lens (and your tracking mount!) When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly. Because of chromatic aberration, no telephoto lens can be used at full aperture. I think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. Excellent color and saturation, a virtually perfect 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. The flat lens hood is great for taking flat frames after a night of astrophotography. It always happens to me with Samyang, it makes good glasses, fast and sharp, I want to have them, but they are not comfortable to use, not in Sony E, their focus is not precise, and they are not "so" cheap. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. 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. Another article that I read only the headline and saw a couple of samples then jumped directly to comments. A lot of lenses today are better than anything money could buy in 1980. My Nikon focus and aperture rings are a thing of highly finessed engineering beauty! http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/284303834/. The shallow depth of field present at its maximum aperture does indeed create a pleasing bokeh. Because it manage to do so. 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. IS would also help outside with wind. I read and bought it. Aside from being much more affordable, telephoto lenses are easier to transport, easier to mount and easier to guide, and are much more likely to produce encouraging results to a beginner. The next 200mm lens of excellent quality is the 200mm F4 Nikkor F which requires the Nikon F to EOS adapter. I had one question that i cant seem to find an answer to.. modest cost for "L" series, wonderful optics and fast speed, nitpicking, but not a circular aperature and no weather sealing. But you raise the exact point, that primes should be chosen with a 2x factor. 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. I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. thank you for that great review and also the explanations. I really don't want to count all the pores - and the hairs coming out of them (eeeew!) The image below was captured using a DSLR and 135mm lens on the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. I cant seem to find this documented anywhere. To see even more example photos using the Rokinon 135mm lens (or Samyang branded version), go ahead a perform a search on Astrobin or Flickr, with the appropriate filter. How's that for an endorsement? I mainly use for head shot photography. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. Stuff I used to take the photos. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! Sharp, handy, strong colours and contrast. Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! 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. 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. f1.4 was a necessisty rather than a creative luxury. 24/28mm, 50mm, 100mm, 200mm. This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. But first, there are several general rules which must be understood. I mount it on my APS-C camera and the focal length literally becomes 216 mm, which is too tight. With the high megapixel cameras, most people are going to ideally want to shoot at 1/200 or faster. 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. Zoom lenses are entirely unsuitable for astrophotography due to prominent aberrations of every kind. So, for Joe User or especially for Jane Client, one really has to look closely to see much of a difference. 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. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. I do not think telephoto lenses would be suitable for use with your modified camera. Online since 2011, AstroBin is the #1 complete solution for image hosting of astrophotographs. Bond, I expect you to buy! Have you ever come across this phenomena? This is one of my all time favourites. I bought it for its bokeh. Thanks.. or.. Clear Skies! I've owned a few L lenses and while their USM motors have always been quick to snap in focus, this 135mm is on a different level. There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. 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. There are times that making no comment at all is far more telling than posting negative - and sometimes offensive - ad hominem attacks on the author for daring to show some enthusiasm. When I was on my way home after purchasing my first 135mm lens (the Samyang/Rokinon one) I took a few quick snapshots just to try out the lens. I would only recommend this lens for casual photographers where missed shot means nothing. For this reason, a combination of a good light pollution filter, and the use of flat calibration frames are recommended. I almost bought one, but couldn't manage that focal length and DoF with moving subjects and manual focus. Large hood. Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. Olympus 4x Optical Zoom f/2 Lens; 25-100mm (35mm Equivalent) Show More. One of them is simplicity: A clear, simple subject that constitutes a shape, standing out and contrasting against a calm and simple background. in the rain. Shoot shiny metal at a wide aperture and you'll see some very extreme purple fringing. Did anybody use this lens for DSLR astrophoto? 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. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. If you own an EOS Camera - It's a no Brainer, Buy one But even better BOKEH is the SAL-135F2.8F4.5 STF (Smooth Trans Focus ) which has even better BOKEH, albeit a manual focus lens. Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! The OP admits he limited experience with lenses other than what he has. In photoshop I love to zoom 200, 300 and even 400% to see the extreme details it is an absolutely amazing lens, great backround blur, great for low light weddings with available light. $449.00. 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). 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. (AVX). Never before (nor after) have I seen a lens with this level of sharpness wide open. My point is that we must never lose the joy of photography. 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. A promising start, no doubt, but not a master yet! I bought this lens after reading your great review for my Nikon D5300. Comment * document.getElementById("comment").setAttribute( "id", "a0721c0ca7d0974fd27b5d0ceb81918a" );document.getElementById("cfd2c22fe2").setAttribute( "id", "comment" ); Your email address will not be published. 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. AF is accurate and very fast. sigh, overdone bokeh and centre sharpness bear little relevance to the art of this hobby. If the telescope mount is precisely aligned to the celestial north pole, unguided exposures of one to two minutes are possible. lol, nice images, and i nearly bought this lens myself a few years ago. 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. 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. This lens has a long focus adjustment ring, with great tension. Magical images, great AF, great close focusing abilities. 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. Some people may disagree with the vignetting being a good thing or not, but thats a matter of taste I guess. With weather sealing this would be a 10. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). Interesting. If you have the 1.8 version, way to go. I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. Material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted or otherwise used without the prior written consent of The Imaging Resource. Check them out for yourself! tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. 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. Thats quite a jump from 135mm, so the camera body you use with this lens may change the types of targets you shoot. http://www.idyll.com/laney2014 Some people do not like this and consider Bokeh to refer only to the rendering of out of focus points of light. Colour and contrast is great. I have a vintage Nikon135mm f/2.8 AI-s which produces virtually the same bokeh and weighs a quarter of this or any other 135mm AF lens. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. Overall, spectacular 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). Some real life images from my photoblog: http://hellabella.de, One of the best and sharpest lens around. 645 lenses such as the mamiya apo line and pentax edif can operate within these conditions without vignetting on apsc sensors. Valerio, Electronically Assisted Astronomy (No Post-Processing), Community Forum Software by IP.BoardLicensed to: Cloudy Nights, DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging, This is not recommended for shared computers, Back to DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging, Buckeyestargazer 2022 in review and New Products. Sharp but smooth at the same time. etc.. Ron. One is its size and weight, which requires a sturdy support on the telescope. I really wanted to use, and like, a 135mm f2 lens so I bought the Canon version. It would seem to be a better use of a camera to first look for a suitable background, and then and only then to use bokeh. Bokeh is buttery smooth, best you can get from a 135mm. 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. 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. (purchased for $800), reviewed March 15th, 2010 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. 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. 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 really like how they augment my longer focal length scopes. It seems lazy to me. This lens is one of canons finest lenses i have ever used. No rubber sealing against the camera body tend to give me the creeps when shooting in the wet. You will never be able to beat this lense, believe me, i have tried them all. I cant wait to try this lens out during the winter months on some wide-field targets in Orion. Could use a few updates. We revisit a classic DPReviewTV episode in which Chris Niccolls and Jordan Drake shoot a few rolls of Fujifilm's Acros 100 II, and a few frames on the X-T3 in Acros film simulation, to find out. Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. 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. Many students just wanted to take better snapshots of family, vacation, pets, etc. Do I wish it were manufactured with metal? Chromatic aberration is almost eliminated in narrowband, so lenses with that problem may be fine performers. And they like circles (no ellipses or polygons) and smooth colour (no hard edges, no onion rings). I have a Nikon d 500. The rest are relatively uncreative, and just seem lame to me. Imaging Resource 1998 - 2023. Dear Trevor, However, all the reviews were made by nature and sports photographers, and I would like to find out more about their performance in astrophotography. (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 To me it is a dead spot between 85 and 200. it is crisp, fast, and awsome. The Sadr Region in Cygnus, including the Crescent Nebula by Eric Cauble. The 5D's larger pixels also make chromatic aberration somewhat lower at most apertures. Creamy smooth bokeh. Large focus ring. A series of such images can be digitally stacked to produce excellent results. [emailprotected]. If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. 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. Although this lens feels solid, it is rather light when compared to a telescope. With a rounded 9-blade diaphragm, shallow depth of field imaging will be rendered with pleasing out-of-focus highlights. 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. That's why I really enjoy shooting portraits with it. Lots of older lenses no longer satisfy. One very popular lens for bokeh fiends is the Canon 85mm F1.2it can produce extremely creamy out of focus backgrounds. Unfortunately I haven't more the Canon lens. A camera tracker (or star tracker) is necessary for long exposure deep-sky astrophotography, but a compact model such as the iOptron SkyTracker or Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer will do just fine. AF ring feels loose compared to my other L lenses. 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. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix) ". Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? Holiday Savings $50 . No telephoto lens I tested, nor my TSAPO65Q, was suitable for use with a DSLR "clear glass" modified to include deep red and IR. 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. 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. How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? 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. 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. Along with improvements in telescope mounts, camera technology, filters, and digital image processing, these have allowed amateurs to produce astrophotographs of nearly professional quality.
Proctoru Technical Issues,
Johanna Ortiz Size Guide,
Articles C
Follow me!
