A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively I enjoied the use of this lens many years before the DSLR. http://www.adstateagent.com | http://www.printradiant.com | http://www.hitsticker.com, I love this lens. When i check a F stop chart, i see 15 stops if i count the main, and the secondary ones: 2, 2.4, 2.8, 3.3, 4, 4.8, 5.6, 6.7, 8, 9.5, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22. Some people may disagree with the vignetting being a good thing or not, but thats a matter of taste I guess. While some people LOVE the bokeh circles (first photo), others hate them and consider them a distraction.The 50mm f/1.8 is hardly a lens to talk about. Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. For me, that's enough. You will get perfectly round star images if you use an aperture stop in front of the lens made of a series of filter thread step-down rings. The one and only 300mm lens I tested is the Zeiss Tele-Tessar 300mm F4. By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. Well, if you consider downloading a lens image from https://www.bhphotovideo.com, and photoshop it on top of my photos to cover mistakes, and demonstrate sharpness of a lens with a jpeg that is way oversharpened; if you call knowledge that "the long focal length compresses the background" , If you call blurr a bokeh just because it sounds better, and so on 1000 words would not be enough to point out what a mess this review is Then you are right, I absolutely do not know as much as he does. One very popular lens for bokeh fiends is the Canon 85mm F1.2it can produce extremely creamy out of focus backgrounds. Do you have a link to Yuri's photo stream? The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. This is great news if you like to photograph small things up close. Many lenses lose their appeal after time, but not this one. Neutral yet very nice colours. When I got home and loaded the photo into Lightroom I was blown away by two things. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. You will see why. The diameter of the lens is 77mm, with a non-rotating filter mount on the objective lens. It is a heavy lens. Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. 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. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. modest cost for "L" series, wonderful optics and fast speed, nitpicking, but not a circular aperature and no weather sealing. I used this lens quite a bit years ago as my main working lens. 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 ;). tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej 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. I just wish this lens had IS for low light and portraits with flash. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. Check out Amazing colours, contrast, bokeh, everything! Be careful with the focus. A lot of us have been saying this for years. Why so salty? Sony has added a full-frame 50mm F1.4 prime to its premium 'GM' range of E-mount lenses. Let's unbox, review and test this lens to find out why it is one of the best bang for your buck deals in astrophotography! The lenses I selected are all affordable prime lenses, easily available on the second-hand market, and adaptable to the EOS system. Now, I have to admit that up to this point, it sounds a little too good to be true. It's an ideal portrait lens. 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. 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. Manual focus on wide angle lens, for landscapes, ok, if you have a reliable manual focus system, which Samyang, at least in my mount, does not have. 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. 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. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class. 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. Stage photography is another good use for the 135 L. 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. KevinS, in my experience stopping down dramatically improves image quality in terms of chromatic aberration, coma and astigmatism. If You can afford it, buy it! enlarge. And you can even crop a 135 efl with today's sensors should you actually need it. Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. IQ will rival any other lens. 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 had of course heard that this lens is supposed to be very sharp, but I had never before had such a full blown "wow" experience when reviewing the sharpness of a lens. For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. 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. (purchased for $725), reviewed March 26th, 2013 Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. Some real life images from my photoblog: http://hellabella.de, One of the best and sharpest lens around. A series of such images can be digitally stacked to produce excellent results. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed August 12th, 2009 In excellent condition, this lens retails for around $200. I have used and still use the 135MM F/2 l lens. Sharp wide open, wonderful bokeh, fast AF in dark conditions. Thanks! 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). Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. The 135 is lighter, but that's its only advantage. Does the bright star reflection bother you? I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. I disagree. for sample photos and video tour, This is simply the best Canon prime lens that I have tested. You don't have to worry about shopping for a better lens anymore. This thing is a beast in comparison. This lens flares easily and the flare can be especially ugly if a sun or flash are in the frame. The sigma 150mm f2.8 tests very well, zeiss 135mm apo sonnar, and leica 180mm f3.5 apo all proven performers on star tests. 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. Several functions may not work. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. Check out some of the photos he took. Heh, it's amazing how far Samyang has come since this article (I'm loving their 45 & 75 f1.8), and kinda amusing that they ended up delivering exactly what you asked for Kinda reminds me of that article by Roger Cicala about how long lens development takes. Since i am totally new in this field, i would like to start with astrophotography but using my existing camera (Fuji XT-30). Very sharp even at f2, build quality, price, weight, autofocus is fast, bokeh, No IS, flare, autofocus isn't quite as consistent as some newer lenses, focus speed, image quality, predictability, Image quality, build like a tank, focus ring, weight. Let's dig in. The Canon is about as sharp as the Samyang, but it has some very slight chromatic aberration. Flip on through what we found, and see how the lens performs in the real world in our sample gallery. 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. On FF I use this lens for both tight portraits and landscape shots. I just purchased a very lightly used Canon 200mm F2.8L II USM for $620 from a great online dealer and can't wait for an opportunity to try it out with my Astronomik CLS clip on a T4i at a dark site. It is worth of it's price?Any links to astrophotos with this lens?Thanks. 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. The difference between modern and old telephoto lenses is probably similar to the difference between my APO and an old Jaegers 5in F5. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. Lens hood - when I bought this lens years ago the included hood was rather cheap (perhaps Canon has updated the hood) by comparison with other hoods. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. As in all arts the client's likes influence the result up to a point. 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. Super sharp from f2. And yet this review is on front page of DPReview prompting me to go and buy this lens -- so surely it must be a professional , well grounded review, right? One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? And it's not the one problem from my L lenses very sad =(, My favourite lens, hands down. Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. 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. For those of you that like to pixel-peep, have a look at the single image frame captured using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. See the full-size version on Astrobin. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. Lots of wet blankets around here. Oh and it's stabilised. Nothing just makes sense about the review -- the writer does not really understand the lens he is reviewing, very basic concepts are wrong. I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. This is so annoying that I intend to replace the Canon lens cap with a Tamron cap. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). ", I'd no problem with that. Perhaps you have seen the photos of masterful Russian portrait photographers such as Elena Shumilova or Anka Zhuravleva. Instead it means the style of rendering. Besides, adding IS would mean adding extra elements and that would very likely reduce the image quality. Bokeh == Visual character of the lens optics to render light and color mixing together. Yet the Jaegers becomes essentially color free when stopped down to 3in. This new, affordable wide zoom for L-mount is capable of some excellent landscapes. There's literally no story!#6: Purple Flower.The isolation works because it's the only color. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. The 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.2 is another story.While the 135mm f/2, in general, is a good lens, there are lots of lenses other than the 135 f/2 that will produce a very smoothly blurred background, including zoom lenses.It sounds like Micael is new to photography.Just my impression from this article. I had a 70-200 f/4 that i used unstopped at 200 with awesome results. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix) ". I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. Nice image, andysea. This brings me to my question. 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. It just doesn't get any better than this! Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. p.s. An update to the Mini 11, the new camera adds parallax correction capabilities, automatic flash control and a multi-function twist lens. No one yet mentioned a zoom lens, I had an opportunity to test my Canon 24-105L f/4 on M31 Andromeda Galaxy and received wonderful results with Canon 60D unmoded, I set it to 105mm, No vignatting, slight coma on the corners and no false color on bright stars. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. 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. It turns out that this. $218.00 for 7 days. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. Image quality is great, it is tack-sharp wide-open even though for partraiture, a little bit of softness is needed. 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. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 Would it at all be possible to at least make sure the people you publish know a little bit about photography? I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. Never before (nor after) have I seen a lens with this level of sharpness wide open. Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. Better than nothing I guess, would depend on how much it raises the price. For the rest there is Sigma 135 /1.8 Art also fantastic value lens. The Rho Ophiuchi Cloud Complex by Eric Cauble using the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens. I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . Using the lens's diaphragm interferes with the light path and results in diffraction spikes which I find unattractive. I'm thinking a modern (but expensive) Nikon 200mm f/2.0, 300mm f/4 or f/2.8 or a Borg telephoto/telescope would all be very good. Deserves to be in the camera hall of fame. I have the Sony SaL 135F1.8 Zeiss Lens and think that is excellent. (purchased for $900). If 135mm f2 works for you, then fine. 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 lens hood is removable (and reversible), which makes packing the Rokinon 135mm away into the included lens pouch possible. 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. When I was on my way home after purchasing my first 135mm lens (the Samyang/Rokinon one) I took a few quick snapshots just to try out the lens. They create a beautiful, mesmerizing dreamscape in their photos, and their secret weapon, besides an impeccable sense for aesthetics, is the 135mm F2 lens. I agree to some extent with many of the critics of the article and disagree with much of its content, but I also have respect for the the author's right to express those opinions. The following image was captured by Eric Cauble using the Samyang branded version of this lens. Don't know what the young man uses as his camera, and if he has tried to keep the noise under control, or even tried to focus on the eyes of the mallard, or the cat (their eyes are not truly in focus). Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. Really excels as indoor sports lens on a crop camera. There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. We have come to accept that most lenses are strong in only one or two of these three factors, that I personally focus on when researching lenses to buy. But she might as well be in front of a green screen. If canon puts an IS on this lens, it would be perfect! Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. 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). SIx months on from buying it this has become my favourite lens ever, beating my previous favourite (Leica's 4th version of the 35mm Summicron for its M-series rangefinders). http://www.astrovale-f-2/index.html, Hi Lord_Vader, CAs: a little in the OOF area - not disturbing anyway. AF ring feels loose compared to my other L lenses. (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) 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. here are some links to some pics taken with the lens: (purchased for $899), reviewed December 9th, 2006 Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. And they like circles (no ellipses or polygons) and smooth colour (no hard edges, no onion rings). Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. Yuri toropin tests a bunch of lenses on Flickr which is a great source. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. I shoot dozens of weddings every year but the 135mm stayed in my bag a majority of the time; I just didn't find myself needing to use it. There is some controversy about the use of UV filters, but I found that a good UV filter significantly improves contrast, sharpens small star images, and reduces chromatic aberration. @juksu - you're such a hypocrite. There is no doubt that the 135L deserves it excellent reputation for image quality. Weight. Nikon 300/4 ED IF, Sigma 50/2.8 DG Macro (not a telephoto, but good). I have used the canon 70-200 f2.8L ii and also the 100-400 f4.5/5.6 L with excellent results. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get. 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 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. 30-35% diameter reduction is usually necessary on "good" lenses. I loved the Nikon 80-400G for a year, or so, and then found everything with it wrong, and got rid of it. (For Nikon users there's the new 105mm too.). You would be hard pressed to find any other lens on a full frame camera that produces creamier bokeh. it is crisp, fast, and awsome. It can isolate subject while being tack sharp with beautiful creamy bokeh when used at f2. What's it got and what's it like to use? 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. Based on my handful of experiences with this lens in the backyard, I have found these traits to hold true. f/2! The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. During the frigid months of winter, my motivation to spend over an hour setting up my complete deep-sky imaging rig dwindles. Lots of older lenses no longer satisfy. 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. It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. 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. Thanks.. or.. Clear Skies! thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. Of my last 3500 shots only 62 were made with the 135 f/2. Literally it means "blur" so you could just as well use the dictionary definition below the top match from Google search: Bokeh - the visual quality of the out-of-focus areas of a photographic image, especially as rendered by a particular lens. I like fast lenses, and my Nikkor 105DC is my favourite. 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. 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. With no general agreement about what Bokeh is it is little wonder that there is so much argument and disagreement. 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.
Who Owns Walburg Travel Center,
Running Springs Breaking News,
House For Rent With Fenced In Backyard Fargo, Nd,
Captain Buscio Program Paramus, Nj,
Valley Medical Group Ridgewood, Nj Obgyn,
Articles C