Great reach for street shots. Samyang should definitely make 135 f2 with the same optical formula and AF for Sony EFF and also Nikon F plus Canon EF mount if possible. I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. 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. I know taste is subjective, but it seems to me that some people have become obsessed with blur and bokeh. As it is it is earns a 9. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. image quality wise it is by far one the sharpest lenses ive ever used. Equipment used was an astromodified Canon 700D, Samyang 135mm f2, SkyTech Triband filter, Star Adventurer 2i, ZWO mini finder with ASI120MM, guiding with PHD2 and polar alignment using sharpcap. 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. A quick question, I have a Sony a6300 mirrorless camera which is great but the sensor is very close behind the mount. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. Agreed. Build quality: excellent. it is crisp, fast, and awsome. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. How to Find the Perfect Astrophotography Target with Stellarium Why you should own a 135mm F2 lens - DPReview All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best. Bond, I expect you to buy! 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area The second best, is the Hoya Pro One Digital MC UV(0) filter. Shoot shiny metal at a wide aperture and you'll see some very extreme purple fringing. The downsides of this configuration are that shooting wide open can make focusing difficult. Unfortunately, standard photography lenses are generally poorly corrected for CA at the red end of the spectrum, relying on the human eye's poorer resolution in red than green or blue. Digital Cameras & Digital Camera Kits | Camera Gear | B&H I have the Sony SaL 135F1.8 Zeiss Lens and think that is excellent. The Precious - sharp images, fast focus, perfect weight, reference-quality build. This has several advantages from less demanding tracking accuracy, to being able to use a lower ISO setting. It also focuses really fast and accurate and is light. See the full-size version on Astrobin. To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? Also, as creative as the wide-field 135mm focal length is, its not practical for smaller DSOs and most galaxies. 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. But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. I have taken some of the coolest photos with this lens on a canon mark III which shoots ten frames per second. Click on following link to view images 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. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. Chris referred to the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM as 'a little gem'! You get what you get.#4: Cat in Underbrush.That's pretty good.#5: Woman with Blanket.It's like a snapshot. Canon 300/4 ED IF AF (non-IS) Star parties or dark sky excursions are another great time to use a camera lens in place of the telescope. When you buy a lens with fantastic sharpness and image quality at all apertures, you typically expect it to cost $1,200 on up. My only complaint about this lens is that the depth of the lens shade forces me to remove the shade in order to remove or replace the lens cap (my hands are fairly large). +1 for the 135mm lens. The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography - Articles Another example is the 100mm (or sometimes 90mm) F2.8 macro lens. This is great news if you like to photograph small things up close. Weight. Amazon.com: Customer reviews: Rokinon 135mm F2.0 ED UMC Telephoto Lens By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. However, they can be perfectly corrected with narrow band H-alpha or OIII filters. You're sour grapes man, you wish it were you who wrote the article. I put quotes around the ones that are written on the lens. It disagrees completely with the definition that you give! 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 the other end of the aperture range though, the 5D's larger pixels actually help matters, as the softening starts later (it's very sharp even at f/16), and is noticeably lower at f/32. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. Now - THAT's a lens everyone should have ;). They account for much of the disagreement that we see on-line (but not for the rudeness and viciousness of some of it). 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. Aperture ring. 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. 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. Zeiss Jena or Oberkochen? However, I am convinced that its large aperture and fast F ratio would perform exceptionally well in three color or narrow band H-alpha and OIII photography. Focus throw. I typically shoot with Canon lenses, but the potential for low light photography (whether thats astrophotography or the ability to film at dusk) caught my interest. Image quality, weight and value for money. 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. A single, 90-second exposure using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. http://www.idyll.com/laneysat Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC is one of the most affordable and practical lenses for astrophotography on the market. She's cold? 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. I do not like this. From my purchase research, I found a consensus that stopping down optimizes sharpness but the diaphragm will make nine diffraction spikes when stopped down. Really like the large focusing ring. Why would I want a 135/2.0 lens when I have a 135/1.8? The shallow depth of field present at its maximum aperture does indeed create a pleasing bokeh. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. 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. The 135mm focal length is absolutely perfect for the Heart and Soul Nebulae if youre using a crop sensor DSLR camera. The 135 is lighter, but that's its only advantage. Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? Standards have risen in recent years. Personally, I can't stand these circles, and I see them as VERY distracting.Lots of fads come and go, and this is just another one of these fads that some photographers are obsessed with. Focusing should be done on moderately bright stars using the 10x magnified Live View. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! The flat lens hood design allows you to easily take flat frames with the Rokinon 135mm using the white t-shirt method or using a flat panel. Again, there's no context. Which Canon EOS M Would be Best for Astrophotography? I dont mean to be rude, but I fail to see any photographic comparison or test to display the quality of this lens against others, concerning coma or anything else, except considerations on the manual focusing, its shape and ergonomic. f1.4 was a necessisty rather than a creative luxury. Interesting that ancient, low-tech (no ED glass, no special coatings) non-apo telephotos could produce decent results compared to something modern. I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. It could easily rival 'bokeh monsters lenses' at fraction of their price. @juksu - you're such a hypocrite. Seems like a great lens. A Canon 70-200L IS II at 200mm at f2.8 has all the same characteristics of the Canon 135L. Sony has added a full-frame 50mm F1.4 prime to its premium 'GM' range of E-mount lenses. Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. 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). 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 . Are you really using 135 a lot? We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class. Canon 135mm is a great lens. Best Canon Lens for Astrophotography [Top 8 Reviewed] What is it like shooting with one today? This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. Whats the best camera for around $2000? The aperture range of this lens is F/2 to F/22, with 9 diaphragm blades (aperture blades) that work in harmony to set your f-stop. I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. I do not think telephoto lenses would be suitable for use with your modified camera. Big F-value.Light. The background blur is amazingly creamy with this lens. But do some experimenting before you decide. However, when my Canon "L" lenses are used at f8 they are all very sharp and the 135L does not blow the others away.
Karen Peck And New River Net Worth, Can You Have Chickens In City Limits In Texas, How Did Justin Foley Get Sexually Assaulted, Sample Tribute By Siblings, Articles C