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. if you really want to get the best gym photos that can be taken, use it and enjoy what you will see. At 135mm, you can get really creative about the object or objects you shoot and where you position them within the frame. I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. 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. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. Your first serious portrait lens should be a modern stabilized 70-200 f/2.8. Juksu, your point is well taken. 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. I am not really looking at buying anything else, though. The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. The Andromeda Galaxy using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens. It's a technical review about a couple of lens attributes. Sure, not all 135mm lenses are lightweightSigma's new 135mm F1.8 is rather heavy at 1130gbut if you look at the Samyang 135mm F2, which is pretty much flawless optically, it weighs only 830g. I do not see much difference in background blur or bokeh. Fast focus, Super sharp, Well built, Awesome for low light. I just love the lightning fast & accurate focus of this lens. Great question Scott I think it depends on the image. If anything the argument in favor of even smaller and lighter 85/1.4s (like the 600g Sigma DN) is stronger than ever, and I say that as someone that loves shooting at 135-150mm. 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). 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. http://www.idyll.com/135. Now I wonder why people are never happy even on 3rd day of a new year :) Come on guys just think "Micael Widell" was working over holiday period to publish this free article ;). I find 400gm as the tolerable weight limit for a lens on my panasonic gx85, and I am guessing following telephoto lenses would satisfy the itch to get good bokeh shots, 1. It would not surprise me if modern lenses were useable at full aperture. A con is that it really makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. (purchased for $900), reviewed December 14th, 2006 The sigma 150mm f2.8 tests very well, zeiss 135mm apo sonnar, and leica 180mm f3.5 apo all proven performers on star tests. As rest you do just by cropping or stitching. Yes, it is about the same as 85mm f/1.4 blur factor is 60mm, while 135mm f/2 blur factor is 67mm. 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 . Target for bortle 9 astrophotography? - Beginning Deep Sky Imaging The OP admits he limited experience with lenses other than what he has. 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. It seems lazy to me. 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. A lot of lenses today are better than anything money could buy in 1980. This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get. The Rokinon 135mm F2.0 is considered to be a full-frame lens because it can accommodate a full-frame image sensor with its 18.8-degree angle of view. Robert. OK guysTOS rule number one "Posts that are not respectful of other individuals (be they members or not) are not welcome here.". It has just a hint of chromatic aberration on very bright stars and, if highly enlarged by 400-800%, the stars in the very corners barely begin to show a touch of astigmatism. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. Comment * document.getElementById("comment").setAttribute( "id", "a0721c0ca7d0974fd27b5d0ceb81918a" );document.getElementById("cfd2c22fe2").setAttribute( "id", "comment" ); Your email address will not be published. Helps me as a beginner a lot As the reader reviews below testify, this is an absolutely stellar lens, probably one of the sharpest and most distortion-free that Canon makes. The Rokinon 14mm F/2.8 was the first lens I had ever used like this, and these aspects do not hinder the astrophotography experience whatsoever. (purchased for $860), reviewed March 9th, 2017 The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography - Articles This photo was captured with the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens using a UV/IR cut filter and a QHY168C dedicated astronomy camera. In the middle of the OM System lineup, the OM-5 promises yesterday's top-tier performance in a lighter, more compact body. That is kind of the point I am trying to make -- These pictures are really not in another league. Voting ends March 8, 2023. 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. Definetely the most sharpest lens which I have ever seen. Technical Specifications Looking for specific info? 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. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. Several functions may not work. 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 The shot of the cat could certainly be improved through cropping, though. One is the price, which starts around $800 for the smallest units, and rapidly climbs into thousands of dollars for larger apertures. I bought this lens after reading your great review for my Nikon D5300. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. From my purchase research, I found a consensus that stopping down optimizes sharpness but the diaphragm will make nine diffraction spikes when stopped down. Test Notes The Image Sensor Frame tool lets you enter in the size of your camera sensor, and focal length of your lens (or telescope) to display a frame over the star map. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. fast, sharp wide open, excellent bokeh, value for money, very fast, sharp, gorgeous background blur, world class lens. you can see here a lot of photos mostly shot with the f/4 version. The background blur is amazingly creamy with this lens. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. 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. There have been a lot of Tele-Tessars over the years. The Rokinon website lists this lens as being useful for portraiture photography, and most telephoto applications. Some people like these, and consider them decorative. Exposure uniformity (vignetting) is also really excellent, reaching a maximum of 1/4 EV (on a camera with an APS-C size sensor) at f/2, and dropping to well under 1/10 EV at f/2.8 and above. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. Second night out with mine right now and I am here in the comments looking for the part number or link! Sharp without being harsh. I find neither the cat nor the duck particularly good. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. This has several advantages from less demanding tracking accuracy, to being able to use a lower ISO setting. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. IS would also help outside with wind. 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. Of my last 3500 shots only 62 were made with the 135 f/2. The duck and cat are really the only good shots. Particular properties of modern 135/2 lenses are resolution with e.g. enlarge. The lens shows a very slight pincushion distortion, but it's well under 0.1% of frame height, an excellent performance by any measure. But first, there are several general rules which must be understood. Large emission nebulae like the California Nebula (pictured below) are a great choice for this focal length. I got my first 400 around 50 years ago, and I must say that each step forward feels like a revolution, for a while. This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop . Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. And if you want autofocus, I would recommend the Canon 135mm f2.0L, which is incredibly light for its performance at just 750g. But do some experimenting before you decide. I would! I'm enjoying the Sigma Art 135mm - it's notably sharper than the Canon (which I owned at the same time), and it's f/1.8 instead of f/2. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed August 12th, 2009 Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. 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. The 5D's larger pixels also make chromatic aberration somewhat lower at most apertures. 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. wew.. Seems like a great lens. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. I think youll find that this lens is behind some of the most amazing wide-field astrophotography images online! In an effort to save money, Id like to start using a Canon 80D that we already own to start picking targets and imaging. Best Canon Lens for Astrophotography [Top 8 Reviewed] After the first exposure in M mode, the camera throws an error saying Error please press the shutter button again. The lenses I listed are certainly not the ONLY exceptional lenses made over the years. Oh and it's stabilised. Based on my handful of experiences with this lens in the backyard, I have found these traits to hold true. 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 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 do not presume to further decorate the universe, and perceive them for what they are: interference. (purchased for $845), reviewed November 16th, 2005 It is the lens I use as a reference point to compare all new lens acquisitions to after purchase to determine if they need to be returned for repair or replacement. For portraits and with a high MP body I'd be more inclined than ever to just go 85mm, and for other uses it's hard to pass up the zooms' versatility, but I still there's still room for 135s in some kits and some formats. Sure, that would be swellbut it doesn't matter with regard to how it performs. Canon 60Da DSLR and Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L2 lens at 135mm, f/3.2. After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. 10/10 (Editor's Choice) Check Price. From my experience, the toughest test on a lense is its ability to function wide open. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. This is huge for me, as it allows me to be much more nimble with getting the right composition and angle. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. 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. Olympus 4x Optical Zoom f/2 Lens; 25-100mm (35mm Equivalent) Show More. This new, affordable wide zoom for L-mount is capable of some excellent landscapes. You can go lower, but you have to watch your technique. 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. Weight. its useful to keep in mind these bokeh circles are the result of light sources bright lamps from autos Christmas lights streetlamps etc and are seriously overused in articles on lenses with strong subject\ backround seperations, they approach parody in the way they characterise subject separation, for most purposes and in most portrait situations its less highlight dominant backrounds that grace a photo. Super sharp from f2. Samyang 135 f/2 ED astrophotography modifications - astrojolo Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! I owned this lens for a long time, then traded it for the 70-200 2.8IS II. Well, after lugging that lens around for years, I'm experimenting with adding the 135L back to my kit. 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. 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. I cant decide whether to clean it up in processing or let it be. Write your own user review for this lens. It is a heavy lens. The CA is pretty low wide open and it rivals my 200mm L lens. One thing I am most stun is its AF performance. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. The 135 is lighter, but that's its only advantage. 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. It could easily rival 'bokeh monsters lenses' at fraction of their price. Dear Trevor, You will see why. Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. How to Find the Perfect Astrophotography Target with Stellarium