Sharp but smooth at the same time. My copy is 12-years-old and still delivers at over 75 weddings a year. 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 $900). Olympus 75mm f1.82. The 70-200 f2.8 L2 and he 400f5.6 will however set you back way more than $1.100. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. 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. If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 Then you should have tried the 180mm nikkor ED, the old one, which is the favorite tool of a lot of astrophotographers. As a complete beginner in Astrophotography should I buy Rokinon 135mm lens or Canon EF 75-300mm lens with Canon EF 50mm lens? Voting ends March 8, 2023. Some reviewers have listed lack of IS as a "Con". :). 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. Focus throw. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. 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 starts out very sharp at f/2.0, gets even sharper at f/2.8, and softens only slightly at f/11. thanks for the tiring patronising lecture and then agreeing with me. Great lens, but I can't understand why Canon can't control quality. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. 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. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. "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. When i just judge by the indicator line as i click through, it seems like its 19 that gets skipped wondering if there is anything more definite? 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. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. Pocketable. But when holes in text prompt me to look at the work of the writer, there is nothing professional there either. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. - posted in Beginning Deep Sky Imaging: I have recently received my star adventurer and as of now only have the star adventurer, benro tripod (super stable), and a unmodded canon t2i with only a 18-55mm lens. in the rain. I would be careful with the Nikon 135 f/2 DC (I have one). (And cost less too). I think youll find that this lens is behind some of the most amazing wide-field astrophotography images online! Based on my handful of experiences with this lens in the backyard, I have found these traits to hold true. My Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 mounted to a Fornax Mounts LighTrack II. 45 minutes. 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. CP+ 2023: Sigma has announced it is bringing its trio of DC DN APS-C prime lenses to Nikon's Z mount: its first lenses for Nikon's mirrorless system. 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. You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. For some reason Samyang makes lenses nobody is asking for. 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. Yes the Samyang is good and yes there are lenses with bad bokeh. I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. Here's what I see from the photographs:#1: Woman in traffic. I love the lens for my modified Sony a6000! I was blown away when I loaded the photos into my computer. Material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted or otherwise used without the prior written consent of The Imaging Resource. Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. Light weight and robust. 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. However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. I have an old 135/2.5 Takumar that is not bad at all, for the price. This is so annoying that I intend to replace the Canon lens cap with a Tamron cap. 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. 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. That is why when SLRs came along the 200mm became the big seller and the 135 was largely forgotten. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. 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. 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. Image quality is great, it is tack-sharp wide-open even though for partraiture, a little bit of softness is needed. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. (AVX). The cat is a case for the bit bucket i my opinion - it has no composition, a distracting background and a random parts of the body in focus - the same picture made with a smart phone could not look worse. I hear great things about the Canon 200/2.8 L but do not have one. However, stepping outside to polar align a small star tracker and attach a DSLR and lens is quick and painless. Of my last 3500 shots only 62 were made with the 135 f/2. Pleiades (M45) Orion Nebula (M42) Carina Nebula (shown below) North American Nebula; Heart and Soul Nebula (IC 1805 / IC 1848) Test Notes As rest you do just by cropping or stitching. Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. I shoot it wide open 90% of the time. That setup will give you all that you really need. For that I would investigate alternatives just to make sure. One of my very best lenses! The first example is good to show that you can take photos of persons in front of an ugly background without completely ruining the shot (important for people shooting events), the last one is the only one I really like (because of the color) but you could shoot this with any lens with short MFD. Thanks for the fine article and the thought you put into it. Several functions may not work. Yeah I agree that the sentiment that they were designed to be used stopped down is wrong as they were designed to be used wide open because they had to be for speed (my point above). Thanks & Cheers I am no stranger to the full manual control of this lens, for both aperture and focus. 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. Digital sensors are roughly 5 times as sharp as 400-speed film. And because you can shoot between F/2 and F/4, plenty of light reaches the sensor in a relatively short exposure. Maybe try a 400mm f/2.0 to see it that one's got enough blur. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. As if absolutely clueless Youtube instructors who have no idea what they are talking about weren't enough. 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. 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. The only thing that could possibly make this better would be to add IS. 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 http://www.adstateagent.com | http://www.printradiant.com | http://www.hitsticker.com, I love this lens. Shoot shiny metal at a wide aperture and you'll see some very extreme purple fringing. I have used the canon 70-200 f2.8L ii and also the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 L with excellent results. Must have if you're serious about portraits. if you really want to get the best gym photos that can be taken, use it and enjoy what you will see. Now - THAT's a lens everyone should have ;). My goal for this article was to show some great example photos and share some ideas for projects this lens is a good fit for. Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. You can use Stellarium to preview the image scale with the 135mm lens and your DSLR. Simple as that! IQ will rival any other lens. Together they still weight less than any modern 135mm :>. I would love to see his test images. 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. In this review, however, I am using the lens on a crop sensor (APS-C) Canon EOS 60Da, which puts the field of view at 12.4 degrees. Backwards compatible (film). There are a total of 8 stops actually written on the lens. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. My tests on it are described on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens135.html, i have never been a prime lens fan, just seems to leave you feeling trapped in a single dimension. To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. 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. To remedy this, I reduced the star size in post, and I started shooting at F/4 to really tighten things up. This is huge for me, as it allows me to be much more nimble with getting the right composition and angle. Also, the lens can only be operated when aperture is set to 22, wondering how I could use F2. If you must have autofocus, and care about weight, buy the Canon. Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. I have a Nikon d 500. Micael Widell is a photography enthusiast based in Stockholm, Sweden. I think they are an outstanding value for any wide-field astrophotographer, and are particularly suitable for newcomers. Nevertheless, it performs excellently on most star fields, and is too cheap not to acquire. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. Manually focusing a lens for astrophotography is nothing new, but the manual aperture ring adjustments may feel a little strange at first. The images were collected using a Canon EOS Rebel T3i camera riding on a Fornax Mounts LighTrack II. Thus the enthusiasm has a valid basis but may not be suitable for all shooting conditions. It may be superfluous to add, but it can't do any harm, that in astrophotography all shutter control must be done with a wired or wireless electrical shutter release swith. Not only does the Rokinon 135 add additional reach, but I can also now shoot at F/2, instead of F/4 on the Canon. The Japanese word "bokeh" can be translated into English as "blur". I'll take photo of Orion as soon as possible. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. Canon 135mm is a great lens. AF is accurate and very fast. But she might as well be in front of a green screen. Will I be able to capture the heart nebula with the lens youre talking about or would I need to modify my camera as well? This includes everything from the rich star fields of Sagittarius, to a complete look at the Andromeda Galaxy. 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. Hi Trevor, But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. Yes, it is about the same as 85mm f/1.4 blur factor is 60mm, while 135mm f/2 blur factor is 67mm. For posed portraiture, it's a very nice budget option.FWIW, I'm a corporate portrait and event pro. Just like the above samples, most are just bad. 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. A con is that it really makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. (purchased for $900), reviewed December 4th, 2006 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. Its nice to have the F/2. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). The difference between modern and old telephoto lenses is probably similar to the difference between my APO and an old Jaegers 5in F5. Nikon 300/4 ED IF, Sigma 50/2.8 DG Macro (not a telephoto, but good). Robert. I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. Some of the primes have a special look to them, but only the 70-200 is indispensable. This lens flares easily and the flare can be especially ugly if a sun or flash are in the frame. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. This way the focus will favor the red light which is more objectionable within a star image than a bit of blue. The image below was captured using a DSLR and 135mm lens on the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. I would like to make this work with the Nikkor 180mm ED (i.e., what I have versus what I cannot havelol). Stuff I used to take the photos in this video:- The Canon 135mm f2 lens: https://amzn.to/346Paz7- Sony A7III Camera: https://amzn.to/2xM776q- Sony Grip exten. Rokinon FE14M-C Lens. 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. For this reason, a combination of a good light pollution filter, and the use of flat calibration frames are recommended. Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. (purchased for $970), reviewed March 17th, 2011 DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! Do I wish it were manufactured with metal? Well, for me. Would it at all be possible to at least make sure the people you publish know a little bit about photography? Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. Try to have eyes and nose / lips all in focus. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". 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. It can isolate subject while being tack sharp with beautiful creamy bokeh when used at f2. For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. But that 10Mpix is more than enough to make a very good A3-A2 size print, but your technique needs to be very good as even slight misfocus is even more visible and the rendering faults as well.