The original poster is right that it was a compromise though and stopping down was necessary for critical sharpness and a better image. Voting ends March 8, 2023. 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. The finish and texture of the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is a step up from the 14mm F/2.8 I ordered a few years ago. Great lens, but I can't understand why Canon can't control quality. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. +1 for the 135mm lens. It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. At least not in my camera (Sony A6000), the focal length in a crop sensor does not make it very suitable for portrait, the photo detail is something else, but without AF that type of photography with that focal distance and at least 80 cm of the subject it requires too much dedication, with how comfortable the DMF approach mode is for that type of photography Also in my mount it does not have any communication with the camera (it does not have a chip, it only has it for Nikon). Also Nikon DC 135mm f/2 is a great lens, a little better than 135mm Canon When I was teaching photography in 70's at a junior college, I critiqued students photos, but I never did so harshly. Why so salty? Thanks & Cheers This is perhaps because I'm more of a zoom guy (I have the trio of Canon f2.8 L zoom lenses, with coverage from 16mm to 200mm), and I didn't see that big a difference between my 70-200 f2.8 and my 135 f2except I could cover a lot more with my zoom than I could with a prime. The image below was captured using a DSLR and 135mm lens on the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. That's a cheap, fun date for AP. Ive captured a lot of deep-sky astrophotography targets from the northern hemisphere, but Im usually in too deep to capture an entire region of space at once. Or is there a use case for fitting the Samyang 135mm to a Panasonic gx85 (or Panasonic gh5) ?? With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. Optics quality, sharp,very special picture, sharpness, clarity, weight, fast, accurate AF (fringe benefit of f/2), price, no IS, makes you regret buying any zoom lenses, compact, very sharp wide open, good color contrast, bokeh, this is the lens. I have used the canon 70-200 f2.8L ii and also the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 L with excellent results. This allows for less aggressive camera settings for night photography such as using a lower ISO setting and shorter exposure. In fact, a light-weight 200/2.8 seems more interesting to own (e.g., the Minolta 200/2.8). Definetely the most sharpest lens which I have ever seen. Round one of polls are now open, pick your winners and share your voice. That is kind of the point I am trying to make -- These pictures are really not in another league. Stopping down would actually have improved the picture. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. 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). I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. I think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. No more inside shooting with flash! In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. Image quality, weight and value for money. You're right, but a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels I bought put to use! Focal length: 135mm Maximum aperture: f/2.0 Lens construction: 10 elements in 8 groups Angle of view: 18 degrees Closest focusing distance: 3 feet Focus adjustment: Rear focusing system with USM Mount: Canon Filter size: 72mm Dimensions: 3.2 inches in diameter and 4.4 inches long Weight: 1.7 pounds Warranty: 1 year See more This creates an effective focal length of roughly 200mm, a useful magnification for a wide variety of astro-imaging scenarios. Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. Sme of the wide field are. 45 minutes. Please ride off on the same horse you rode in on. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. 2. I got this lens because of portraiture. In my test, nikon have the same color correction than Canon and same sharpness. 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. Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. People mistake "Bokeh" to blurry background, what is very very common mistake. The extremes are 2 and 22. They account for much of the disagreement that we see on-line (but not for the rudeness and viciousness of some of it). Even if I wanted a 135mm lens (and the 70-200mm f/2.8 is more versatile) it would be the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC lens. The diameter of the lens is 77mm, with a non-rotating filter mount on the objective lens. Proper composition, light and retouching are much prefferable to crazy gooey bokeh. Rudy, why didn t you include any L lenses from canon? The difference between modern and old telephoto lenses is probably similar to the difference between my APO and an old Jaegers 5in F5. 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. Juksu, your point is well taken. 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. And it's not the one problem from my L lenses very sad =(, My favourite lens, hands down. @juksu - you're such a liar. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. Hey Trevor, great article! 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. My Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 mounted to a Fornax Mounts LighTrack II. Samyang 85mm f1.83. [emailprotected]. Now i have the f2.8 version, and while the resolution is better it s under no circumstance as good as the f/4 one. 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. I just love the lightning fast & accurate focus of this lens. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. 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. Do I wish it were manufactured with metal? Tack sharp at f/2. The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. If you have the 1.8 version, way to go. 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. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. don't get me wrong; this lens will take great photos, but the 'flatness' i was getting in my photos nearly had me give up 25 years of hobby photography. Well, after lugging that lens around for years, I'm experimenting with adding the 135L back to my kit. Along with improvements in telescope mounts, camera technology, filters, and digital image processing, these have allowed amateurs to produce astrophotographs of nearly professional quality. 85 Is a different story, my 85 gets used a lot. I have done a review comparing the sharpness and quality of bokeh to the Canon 70-200 2.8. Seems to me that Michael is pretty new to using long telephoto lenses, he writes that the Samyang is the first he has owned. 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. (purchased for $700), reviewed June 13th, 2009 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. OTOH you can now get a 70-180 f2.8 zoom that weights virtually the same and is only a tiny bit longer (Tamron's on E mount, like 20mm longer than the AF SY or most other modern 135s), and there's lighter than ever 85/1.4s (eg Sigma's DN for L/E mount) that can achieve a very similar look while coming in at 600g, tho at an even higher price. 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. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. The clip-in Astronomik 12nm Ha is one of their most popular filters ever and for good reason! "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. 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. 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. An update to the Mini 11, the new camera adds parallax correction capabilities, automatic flash control and a multi-function twist lens. This lens is available for several camera mounts, including Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Samsung, and Fuji. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " 1. However, these APOs have a couple of drawbacks. A promising start, no doubt, but not a master yet! Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. What's it got and what's it like to use? 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. thank you for that great review and also the explanations. I thought I would miss shooting at 200mm, but 135mm is long enough for most portraits and gives a decent amount of compression. 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. Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. This lens is available on Amazon for most camera bodies. To actually learn to compose the photos so that the background complements the image instead of being something that must be blurred away. 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. With a good smartphone, some creative legwork, and the photos scaled down as they are in this article you can make photos that at least just as good. I use the word design, because although the available 135mm F2 lenses aren't the exact same optical formula, they share many important traits. 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. Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. The author's recipe for a good photo is:1) Just shoot blindly, with no regard to what's in the frame, because the lens will blur away everything on the background.2) If (1) does not work, just head on to https://www.bhphotovideo.com, download a jpg of the lens you were using, and photoshop it on top of the taillaits of the passig car that didn't get blurred out enough.3?) Also, accurate guiding is essential. Such "full spectrum" cameras are somewhat more sensitive in the ultraviolet, but much more sensitive in the deep red and infrared. 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. I shoot it wide open 90% of the time. Yes there's bokeh. I'm not a fan of the large hood. An h-alpha filter would still be useful for your D500, but much more so if it were modified! 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. For the rest there is Sigma 135 /1.8 Art also fantastic value lens. However, I find the process tedious, and prefer single, manually guided, long exposures which seem to have deeper colors. Your images have a chance at remaining sharper once critical focus has been achieved, but now you have lost the extra light-gathering power you wanted. I've owned nice SLR gear since 1976, and am normally a wide angle shooter this is my favorite lens, of all time. This is a very practical way to plan your next astrophotography project, and especially handy when using a wide field lens like the Rokinon 135mm F/2. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. Nevertheless, it performs excellently on most star fields, and is too cheap not to acquire. Part of it might be that they were designed for film photography and modern digital sensor are far more demanding in terms of optical quality. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". 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. I use it to photograph highschool basketball in poor light. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. I got my first 400 around 50 years ago, and I must say that each step forward feels like a revolution, for a while. Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. :). This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop . Fantastic IQ & Bokeh. A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively Why would I want a 135/2.0 lens when I have a 135/1.8? Deep-sky astrophotography is often associated with a camera and telescope, but the truth is there are a lot of great camera lenses for astrophotography out there. 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. Really like the large focusing ring. $581.00 for 7 days. The aesthetic quality of the blur in the out-of-focus parts of the image are buttery smooth and soft. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. Not rude at all, a fair comment. 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. Pentax seems to have put more emphasis than others on keeping the resolution uniform all over the field. This lens provides all of these requirements. How's that for an endorsement? If they could make 135 f2 lighter version with AF for Sony and price is slightly under Sigma 135 /1.8 and obviously Batis 135 2.8 it could sell like hotcakes. Tack sharp even at wide open aperture. A tiny bit of fringing, but that would only be noticed by pixel-peepers. 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. (purchased for $900), reviewed November 2nd, 2015 The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. 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. The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! (Suggesting that diffraction limiting is only part of the story with lens softness at tiny apertures.).

Psg Player Ratings L Equipe, Yelling At Someone With Ptsd, Fawn Miniature Pinscher, Second Chance Apartments In Kennesaw, Ga, Vietnam Fatigues Sale, Articles C