canon 135mm f2 astrophotographyhouses for rent wilmington, nc under $1000

canon 135mm f2 astrophotography

Hi Trevor, It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area How about the sigma 50mm f1.4 Art? I cant decide whether to clean it up in processing or let it be. The duck and cat are really the only good shots. Sharp but smooth at the same time. My questions, for deep sky pics, should I get the 135mm lens or the RedCat 51 APO 250mm f/4.9 which you mentioned here as well? In fact, a light-weight 200/2.8 seems more interesting to own (e.g., the Minolta 200/2.8). Here is a short list of great astrophotography targets to shoot at 135mm with this lens: Below, is an incredible example of the types of projects possible with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 lens. Colour and contrast is great. The 135mm F2 lens design is truly special, and in this article (and the video I made), I want to try to convince you as well. Required fields are marked *. My first photo of the night sky is of Comet NEOWISE, however I know its not the best photo I could capture. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). 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. 45 minutes. No, Mr. I do not use burst mode, but the lens would produce movie-like frames. The Precious - sharp images, fast focus, perfect weight, reference-quality build. 6 Reasons I Love the Canon 135mm f/2 Lens - YouTube The best 200mm lens is precisely the older 200mm F4 SMC Takumar, which comes with the M42 camera thread, and requires the M42-EOS adapter. Were those taken with the Canon telephotos you spoke of, and the full spectrum modified camera and the clip in filter? Make sure to select your camera mount when checking the price (Check current price). (purchased for $1,100), reviewed August 12th, 2009 The full name of this lens is the Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC, with "ED" standing for extra-low dispersion, and UMC referring to the "ultra multi-coated" optics. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". Some noteworthy targets to try. KevinS, in my experience stopping down dramatically improves image quality in terms of chromatic aberration, coma and astigmatism. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. While they provide a very large flat field we noticed some CA. But I sold it and went back to using a 70-200 (alongside a 24-70). Simple as that! What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? If you shoot things in motion on a Canon body, and need some reach without massive bulk, this is the one I recommend. ", I'd no problem with that. 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. fast, sharp wide open, excellent bokeh, value for money, very fast, sharp, gorgeous background blur, world class lens. Great question Scott I think it depends on the image. But like a glitch in the matrix, an anomaly that shouldn't exist, you can get the Samyang/Rokinon 135mm for as little as $430 brand new. 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 A Bargain, very competively priced Samyang 135mm f/2.0 ED UMC Telephoto Lens for Canon EF Digital SLR Cameras Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. This lens has only two drawbacks. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 No more inside shooting with flash! 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 image below highlights the creative freedom this lens provides. Canon 135mm is a great lens. Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. I have a vintage Nikon135mm f/2.8 AI-s which produces virtually the same bokeh and weighs a quarter of this or any other 135mm AF lens. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. Let's dig in. Is this Nikon already, Astro modified, without need for H alpha filters or any further modifications? No rubber sealing against the camera body tend to give me the creeps when shooting in the wet. My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. At a local amateur soccer game using the 135 f/2 the action was almost always too close, or too far away. Adam007,"a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels"No thanks. Try to have eyes and nose / lips all in focus. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed February 4th, 2010 Which is the better buy? The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. In excellent condition, this lens retails for around $200. Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. It's a technical review about a couple of lens attributes. Not only does it let you travel light, but impressive wide field projects are often more successful when captured under a dark sky. Robert. 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. Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. Off topic, Really, just an amazing lens, easily worth the $800-900 it commands on the street. 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. f/2, fast-accurate-silent focus, (relatively) small & light, super sharp!! Jordan has a simple fix camera manufacturers could implement to improve their video autofocus. Below, are a few examples of astrophotography images Ive taken with lenses of varying focal lengths. The 70-200L being a much more useful lens. I just love the lightning fast & accurate focus of this lens. Another drawback is the focal length. To shoot indoors under typical gymnasium lighting, you often need f/2.0 or wider to get a shutter speed high enough to stop the action. For posed portraiture, it's a very nice budget option.FWIW, I'm a corporate portrait and event pro. 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. Test Notes It is a heavy lens. I purchased this lens for the purposes of wide-field deep-sky astrophotography from my light-polluted backyard (shown below), and when traveling to a dark sky site. 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. Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM Lens Review - The-Digital-Picture.com Bokeh == Visual character of the lens optics to render light and color mixing together. No telephoto lens can be used with cameras modified by the removal of the internal UV/IR cut filter and anti-aliasing filter. It could really use an update to its coatings. 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. The downsides of this configuration are that shooting wide open can make focusing difficult. Lots of wet blankets around here. Zeiss Jena or Oberkochen? I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. I shoot it wide open 90% of the time. You can barely tell it's a pond.#3: Duck.Birds with bokeh are fine. Excellent build quality, fast auto focus, and its fast. Sharpness, contrast and the natural vignetting on full-frame cameras is awesome! If the telescope mount is precisely aligned to the celestial north pole, unguided exposures of one to two minutes are possible. Typical L construction. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! Juksu, your point is well taken. I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. 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. These are affordably available on eBay, and result in perfectly round star images, the way nature intended them to be. Perfect lens on the same level as CZ! One of them is simplicity: A clear, simple subject that constitutes a shape, standing out and contrasting against a calm and simple background. Lior, I have done a lot of reading on modern zoom lenses. I've owned nice SLR gear since 1976, and am normally a wide angle shooter this is my favorite lens, of all time. Selecting between it and the 200mm Takumar was not an easy choice but, in the end, I chose the Takumar because it seemed to have slightly better contrast. As the reader reviews below testify, this is an absolutely stellar lens, probably one of the sharpest and most distortion-free that Canon makes. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. Second of all, the incredible sharpness of the photo: I have owned many lenses, most of which I bought because they were supposed to have world-class sharpness, but the Samyang 135mm still stands out to me. 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 ;). thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. Theres no image stabilization on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 either, but thats a non-issue for amateur astrophotographers. 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. You currently have javascript disabled. (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 Just like the above samples, most are just bad. MCovington, my Zeiss 300/4 is the full thickness barrel version, made in West Germany, serial number 5990836. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. I guess thats where practice will come in handy. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. I think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. Here's what I see from the photographs:#1: Woman in traffic. 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. The only downside with that lens is that it is manual focus, which might not be suitable for photographing sports or children. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. Large focus ring. I have only owned my 135mm for less then a year, but already it is one of my top three most used and most fun lenses. Because it manage to do so. Its a joy to work with every time. LENSES FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY: Samyang 135mm f2 REVIEW - YouTube Also Nikon DC 135mm f/2 is a great lens, a little better than 135mm Canon I also find the other photos not very good. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. Whos Afraid of a Phantom: Istar Phantom 140mm F/6.5, that is? Please ride off on the same horse you rode in on. 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. To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. So I feel I'm being cheated. (purchased for $970), reviewed March 17th, 2011 Rokinon 135mm f/2.0 ED UMC Lens (Canon EF) - B&H Photo Dear Trevor, Have you ever come across this phenomena? The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. The full extent of the relationship between Rokinon and Samyang is unknown to me, but the packaging on my lens says Technology by Samyang Optics. I am not really looking at buying anything else, though. (purchased for $800), reviewed March 15th, 2010 The few occasions I use a 135 FL usually are landscape shots (where I have no use for f2) and childrens playing (where I need zoom and fast af). $218.00 for 7 days. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. Great looking lens, if you ever saw it from the front. Canon 135mm F2.8 SF for astrophotography? - Stargazers Lounge After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. Hate these presumptuous kinds of articles and headlines. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. Could use a few updates. 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. The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. Manually focusing a lens for astrophotography is nothing new, but the manual aperture ring adjustments may feel a little strange at first. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC lens. It's not a bad lens, probably a great one, even if it doesn't seems really as sharp as a basic 85mm f/1.8 (used at f/2.8) , but it's a bad idea to work wide open if you don't need to. for sample photos and video tour, This is simply the best Canon prime lens that I have tested. (purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 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). Several days ago another member posted a stunning telephoto image of the Snake Nebula, Barnard 72, taken with a Canon lens which costs $12,000. By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. If so, which one? The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. enlarge. 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. Tack sharp at f/2. (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) The aesthetic quality of the blur in the out-of-focus parts of the image are buttery smooth and soft. Large emission nebulae like the California Nebula (pictured below) are a great choice for this focal length. Do you have a link to Yuri's photo stream? The next 200mm lens of excellent quality is the 200mm F4 Nikkor F which requires the Nikon F to EOS adapter. 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. In 3 months I got loosy focus ring. I rarely shoot static landscapes or posed, composed images. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. 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. 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? It can isolate subject while being tack sharp with beautiful creamy bokeh when used at f2. With todays huge variety of digital sensors, each with their own characteristics, in-camera and post-processing etc., much depends on the given combination of your photo gear to create a certain effect. I mount it on my APS-C camera and the focal length literally becomes 216 mm, which is too tight. I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. Camera tech for video has come a long way in recent years, with faster autofocus, subject tracking, eye tracking and smarter lenses that stabilize the frame. Otherwise this lens is absolutely incredible. There was no reason to test any other because, when stopped down to 49mm, F6.1, this lens is simply perfect, comparable to any APO on the market. Bond, I expect you to buy! (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 You won't get the excessive background blurr -- which for the beginning photographer may actually be a good thing. 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. It is sharp but somehow not that analytic way as a macro lens. The lens is available on eBay for around $200. I hear great things about the Canon 200/2.8 L but do not have one. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. 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. Based on my handful of experiences with this lens in the backyard, I have found these traits to hold true. If you must have autofocus, and care about weight, buy the Canon. 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. Even if the background is very close to your subject, somehow the optical construction in the 135mm lens will still manage to separate the background beautifully. 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. I know taste is subjective, but it seems to me that some people have become obsessed with blur and bokeh. (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 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. It's kinda curious how topsy turvy things have gotten since this article, just 4 years later, I think 135mm is possibly more niche than ever yet Samyang finally delivered an AF version of this concept at a lighter weight for E mount, but also at a higher price. 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 . At 135mm, you can get really creative about the object or objects you shoot and where you position them within the frame. 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). Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. 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. These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. Proper composition, light and retouching are much prefferable to crazy gooey bokeh. The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. 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. Smooth but contrasty. Available Monday. You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. Hey Trevor, great article! 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. The 135mm f2.8 in particular can take amazing photos of the brighter deep sky objects with about 1 second time . Although typically unused in astrophotography, I did get a chance to see the beautiful bokeh this lens creates when shooting at F/2. I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. In my test, nikon have the same color correction than Canon and same sharpness. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens. (purchased for $899), reviewed March 19th, 2012 Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. 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 had one question that i cant seem to find an answer to.. However, these APOs have a couple of drawbacks. It starts out very sharp at f/2.0, gets even sharper at f/2.8, and softens only slightly at f/11. 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. Focusing a wide open F/2 lens is demanding of the optics, especially on a field of stars in the night sky. Overall, spectacular lens. This image of NGC 7000 was done at F/4 at iso 800 with a Canon 20D mod. Finally, to prevent image shift during exposure, all telephoto lenses must be supported at two points: at the camera end, and at the far end with a large retaining ring. So, for Joe User or especially for Jane Client, one really has to look closely to see much of a difference. How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? To remedy this, I reduced the star size in post, and I started shooting at F/4 to really tighten things up. It disagrees completely with the definition that you give! Cost. Got it! Take care not to confuse this lens with the 200mm F4 SMC Takumar 6x7 which has a different optical configuration, and which I have never tested. Thus the enthusiasm has a valid basis but may not be suitable for all shooting conditions. These were just a tad less sharp at the corners than their Canon competition, but certainly extremely sharp all over the field if closed down one stop or even half a stop. Anyone use the Samyang 135mm for astrophotography? I bought my lens in mint condition for $350 from Japan, but I see that some retailers are asking significantly more. See the full-size version on Astrobin. image quality wise it is by far one the sharpest lenses ive ever used. @juksu - you're such a hypocrite. 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. 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. I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. Sme of the wide field are. Definetely the most sharpest lens which I have ever seen. The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. The lens hood is removable (and reversible), which makes packing the Rokinon 135mm away into the included lens pouch possible. The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. You might never need another lens in the overlapping range at 135mm there isn't much difference between the separation afforded by f/2 vs f/2.8, and the latest 70-200s are plenty sharp. OM System's latest lens is a whopper of a macro, featuring optical stabilization, full weather sealing, up to 2x magnification and a whole lot more. In this buying guide weve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best. This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. FULL FRAME TELEPHOTO 135mm F2.0 Also, as creative as the wide-field 135mm focal length is, its not practical for smaller DSOs and most galaxies. Yep the speed wars in the 70's that gave us all these bokeh monsters were all about the fact that its hard to get usable images in poor lighting when your film was stuck at iso 80 (or even 400 when you were pushing it). Focal length is great. It is harder work than using a zoom lens, and some shots I just cannot get at all (cannot get close enough, or far enough way) but the shots I do get are so much nicer looking than I get with any other lens that for me and my goals it is a fair trade off. 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. I do not presume to further decorate the universe, and perceive them for what they are: interference. When stopped down to 37mm, at F5.4, it also produces perfect, small and round star images across the entire field. And as this article clearly shows, no amount of blurr will make a poorly composed photo good. Wonderful image quality, lots of detail, contrasty, subject separation, fast and accurate AF, bright viewfinder, solid construction, unobtrusive in use, No weather sealing, makes all my other lenses look poor (even the 'L' zooms that, when I first got them, imagined could hardly be improved on). It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. http://www.idyll.com/laneysat Widefield Astrophotography with the Samyang 135mm f/2 Lens They seem to be really good for NB work. I got this lens because of portraiture. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. If you have the 1.8 version, way to go. With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. The 5D's larger pixels also make chromatic aberration somewhat lower at most apertures. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . 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.

Vivian And Charlotte Cabell Age, Piedmont High School Athletics Tickets, Articles C

Posted on 2023-04-19 ｜ Posted in funny name for a nosey person | laura kelly tori kelly

canon 135mm f2 astrophotography

　

Comment