canon 135mm f2 astrophotography

Micael Widell is a photography enthusiast based in Stockholm, Sweden. But do some experimenting before you decide. Yes there's bokeh. Its nice to have the F/2. All content, design, and layout are Copyright 19982023 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens. if you really want to get the best gym photos that can be taken, use it and enjoy what you will see. Some real life images from my photoblog: http://hellabella.de, One of the best and sharpest lens around. 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? It seems lazy to me. Not rude at all, a fair comment. F2 allows higher shutter speeds in lower light without raising the ISO. After weeks with a production Fujifilm X-T5, Chris and Jordan have some final thoughts. That's why I really enjoy shooting portraits with it. Is this Nikon already, Astro modified, without need for H alpha filters or any further modifications? Sharp, handy, strong colours and contrast. I love the lens for my modified Sony a6000! Back in 1999, Sony released the F505, their first digital camera with a Carl Zeiss lens. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. It focuses within a blink of an eye, instantly. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. This lens is simply lighter, cheaper & faster (f/2.0 vs f/2.8). Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC LensCheck Price (Amazon): https://amzn.to/2MOUFeOExample Images: https://astrobackyard.com/rokinon-135mm-f2-astrophotography/I've . Well saturated but neutral. Voting ends March 8, 2023. Just like the above samples, most are just bad. SIx months on from buying it this has become my favourite lens ever, beating my previous favourite (Leica's 4th version of the 35mm Summicron for its M-series rangefinders). tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " I speak Japanese fluently, was a translator in Tokyo for 8 years and studied photography there for two years. It is fantastically sharp, can make beautiful blurred backgrounds and bokeh, and is both light and inexpensive for what you get. The 135 is lighter, but that's its only advantage. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. That means that it doesnt require a robust equatorial telescope mount as a larger, heavier telephoto lens would. I bought it for its bokeh. How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? 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. If you have a more appropriate portrait lens like an 85, 90 or 100, the 135 does not bring you very much. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. If you're using or are looking to buy the Samyang or Rokinon 135mm F/2, please let me know what you're imaging with it or any questions you may have in the comment section below. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? This new, affordable wide zoom for L-mount is capable of some excellent landscapes. For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. 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. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. Thanks! It also focuses really fast and accurate and is light. It's terrible. The CA is pretty low wide open and it rivals my 200mm L lens. It's a trade off. 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. Testing on an EOS-5D, we see that it's sharpness is almost as good wide open in the corners as on the EOS-20D with its smaller sensor. 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. SharpStar Askar ACL200 200-mm f/4 astrographic telephoto lens, Astrotrac 360 tracking platform first impression, FIELD TEST: CARL ZEISS APOCHROMATIC & SHARPEST (CZAS) BINOVIEWER, Deus_Ex_Mamiya and Michael Covington like this. Since Eric was so generous to share his images with me, I had to include his photo of the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex as well. I have used and still use the 135MM F/2 l lens. Everyone should have one? I wanted to add my experience with some lenses that I thought worthy of being considered too, and some of the equipment that I have used. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. And it's not the one problem from my L lenses very sad =(, My favourite lens, hands down. Try to have eyes and nose / lips all in focus. You currently have javascript disabled. In fact, it might be fun to try! here some information (sorry only in italian) http://www.astrovale-usm/index.html I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. The EOS R6 II arrives in one of the most competitive parts of the market, facing off against some very capable competition. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". Several functions may not work. sigh, overdone bokeh and centre sharpness bear little relevance to the art of this hobby. With the high megapixel cameras, most people are going to ideally want to shoot at 1/200 or faster. I have done a review comparing the sharpness and quality of bokeh to the Canon 70-200 2.8. About 3 hours of exposures split between Narrowband, Broadband and short exposure shots to make an HDR image. 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. 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. If you have the 1.8 version, way to go. No rear seals - since the 17-40 Canon has added rear seals to L lenses, to help in weather sealing. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . How's that for an endorsement? 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. Amazing sharpness wide open at F2.0 and the focus ring is nice and firm not tight you don't really need to tape it down for astrophotography. The 200f2.8 L is excellent - I am using it right now. Show some humility and don't troll. The shot of the cat could certainly be improved through cropping, though. I love this lens, The Sharpest Lens available for Eos cameras IMO Some noteworthy targets to try. I therefore reduce the aperture at the front end of the lens (as an aperture stop) by screwing in a series of step-down rings into the filter thread. Or is there a use case for fitting the Samyang 135mm to a Panasonic gx85 (or Panasonic gh5) ?? Here's what I see from the photographs:#1: Woman in traffic. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ Im a newbie at astro.. and photography in general really! In this post, Ill share my results using an affordable prime telephoto lens for astrophotography, the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC. The 70-200 f2.8 L2 and he 400f5.6 will however set you back way more than $1.100. Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. "Bokeru" is a verb, and it can apply equally to to optical and psychological effects, including the reduced mental clarity that can some with age. In the past, Ive covered a number of different lenses, from the Sigma 24mm F/1.4 to the Canon EF 300mm F/4L. (purchased for $899), reviewed March 19th, 2012 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). When the aperture is stopped down to 37mm using step-down filter rings, this lens produces incredibly tiny pinpoint star images from edge to edge. I do not think telephoto lenses would be suitable for use with your modified camera. Unfortunately I haven't more the Canon lens. So I feel I'm being cheated. I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. Focus are dead on with my Fullframe or APS system. Besides lack of IS, the only major issue I have with this lens is flare. http://johncarnessali.com/camera-lens-tests/5109, After reading too many long, and arduous threads pertaining to the new Zeiss 135, I felt compelled to share my perspective on the wonderful Canon 135. 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. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. 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. Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. Do I wish it were manufactured with metal? 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. My copy is 12-years-old and still delivers at over 75 weddings a year. It's small, light, cheap and extremely wide but is it any good? 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. 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area I haven't seen compassion with the excellent Zeiss lens you quote (That BTW costs at least 3.5-4 times, yet a good comparison as similar to Zeiss, Samyang believes in providing the exceptional Image Quality, with Manual focus) but compare with Canon's L 135mm F2.0, that by many reviews, is considered as one the best Canon lenses ever made (Not . I already did some trials with the Samyang 12mm lens. The California Nebula. For me, that's enough. 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. Tiring. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. What next, an article extolling the virtues of 43mm, or 70mm? Pocketable. I use the word design, because although the available 135mm F2 lenses aren't the exact same optical formula, they share many important traits. Astrophotography is one of the ultimate tests of lens quality, as long exposure photography of deep-sky objects in space can highlight issues that are hidden during daytime photography. Have you ever come across this phenomena? Yes, because it is not f/2. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. Contrasty but not harsh. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. This is one of my all time favourites. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. Thus the enthusiasm has a valid basis but may not be suitable for all shooting conditions. Prime lenses are typically lighter as they do not need the additional glass and mechanics required to zoom at varying magnifications. 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. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. I just got the Samyang version of this lens and used it with my Canon 3ti on a Skywatcher Star Adventurer. If you aren't completely set on the 135mm, the 200mm f/2.8L is a fantastic lens and i think its less expensive than the 135mm f/2L. You will get perfectly round star images if you use an aperture stop in front of the lens made of a series of filter thread step-down rings. 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. Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. when you hold the lens in your hand you know you are holding a fine peice of optical equipment. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. The best ones listed below serve well with a one stop reduction, and some require two or even three stops. 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. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. These lenses can be had on eBay in mint condition for around $70, and are probably the most price efficient optical instrument in the world. I think they are an outstanding value for any wide-field astrophotographer, and are particularly suitable for newcomers. Pentax seems to have put more emphasis than others on keeping the resolution uniform all over the field. 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. Far from being a generic run-of-the-mill image hosting website, it was created and is still operated by an astrophotographer, and boasts features that are very specific to astrophotography. My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. Your Baader filter passes 420-680nm and, in theory, a good APO should be able to focus that part of the spectrum with no chromatic aberration. This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop . KevinS, in my experience stopping down dramatically improves image quality in terms of chromatic aberration, coma and astigmatism. If You can not, buy Canon EF 85/1.8, which delivers quite similar results. 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. 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. The image shown below covers 4.96 x 5.98 degrees in the constellation Cassiopeia. Both the 135 and 200mm Canon l lenses are winners IMHO. BirdDog P240 40X NDI PTZ Camera. My canon is clear modded and I use a an Astronomik EOS-clip L filter to block the uv and ir. Thanks, There are, of course, outlierssuch as the legendary unicorn lens Canon EF 200mm F2but that one isn't a great alternative unless you are cool with spending $5,700 and carrying around something about as wieldy as a fire hydrant. When stopped down to 49mm it really is indistinguishable from an APO, except it shows red chromatic aberration with modified cameras even with the UV/IR block or CLS-CCD filter. IQ will rival any other lens. I bought a Fotasy Minolta MD->EOSM adapter off ebay for $11, and then for about $20 each on craigs list really sharp, well built Minolta MC 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4, and 135mm f2.8 lenses that turned out to be great for astrophotography. Stopping down would actually have improved the picture. You will never be able to beat this lense, believe me, i have tried them all. This seems to be the norm for telephotos. Can't argue with your reasoning, Juksu, about the framing of the article, but just stopping by to say I really liked that cat picture, am shopping for a new smartphone, struck that this type of photo is in another league - all newbie observations, of course, which sort of supports your thoughts that an article like this would be better framed as a "Love this new long lens stuff" sort of thing. One way to combat potential soft images and chasing perfect focus all night is to stop the lens down to F/2.8 or even F/4.

Seborrheic Keratosis Under Breasts, Fiserv Servicepoint Client Portal, Similarities Between Natural And Man Made Disasters, Glacier Bay Power Flush Toilet Parts, Articles C