The diameter of the lens is 77mm, with a non-rotating filter mount on the objective lens. 2 Dielectric Diagonals. Here is a recent ones taken with the canon xs and a lens. 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). But in the rush to make hybrids why are aren't we giving video shooters the tools they need? 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. 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 used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. Another drawback is the focal length. All content, design, and layout are Copyright 19982023 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. 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. I'm not a fan of the large hood. If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. At under 900USD, it's a steal. 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). This leaves you with a buttery bokeh and an object in perfect focus. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. 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. thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. Got it! In this post, Ill share my results using an affordable prime telephoto lens for astrophotography, the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC. I love the lens for my modified Sony a6000! She's cold? http://www.astrovale-f-2/index.html, Hi Lord_Vader, 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. 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. Already wide open this lens produce some high quality photos. Using the lens's diaphragm interferes with the light path and results in diffraction spikes which I find unattractive. I see that many commenters did not get what this lens can do. When all that was available were APS-C crop cameras a 85mm lens provided a near equivalent view angle to the 135mm on a full frame camera. Although your target audience is beginning DSLR imagers, much of your advice also applies to using lenses with CCD cameras. Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. That whole rig comes to about $1200, minus the mount. Large hood. - 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. Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. 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. 200mm Astrobin photos (not taken by me): https://www.astrobin.m USM F2.8 L II Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. It requires the Contax-EOS adapter for attachment to the camera. Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. http://www.radiantlite.com/2009/01/canon-135mm-f2l-usm-mini-review.html I do not like this. The interest of a f/1.4 is to be able to be perfect at f/2.8, while a f/1.8 or f/2 might need to be on f/4 to have the same sharpeness and overall IQ.They are not meant to be used wide open, except in rare moments. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. My Rokinon 135F2 on my crop body is fun to play with.. a budget lens with budget construction on a discontinued camera system.. but hey im just a ham and egger https://flic.kr/p/21nj82V, I had a Canon 135/2 for a while, but I decided I preferred the 100 L used not as a Macro but a normal lens (which my non-L USM 100 Macro was quite poor for). "That is why when SLRs came along the 200mm became the big seller and the 135 was largely forgotten"Did you notice that this 135mm F2 lens on an APS-C camera is more or less equivalent to a 200mm F2.8 lens on an FF camera ?So this lens can be seen as the 200mm F2.8 lens for APS-C camera users. I am no stranger to the full manual control of this lens, for both aperture and focus. RATING. I got my first 400 around 50 years ago, and I must say that each step forward feels like a revolution, for a while. Moreover if we have a serendipitous moment regarding a new (or used) lens, that's a good thing. If You can afford it, buy it! Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. When the aperture is stopped down to 37mm using step-down filter rings, this lens produces incredibly tiny pinpoint star images from edge to edge. (purchased for $899), reviewed March 19th, 2012 You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. 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. In the highest contrast situations there's a hint of both purple and green fringing but both are minor and easy to remove with software. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. Focus throw. The following image was captured by Eric Cauble using the Samyang branded version of this lens. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. Zoom lenses are entirely unsuitable for astrophotography due to prominent aberrations of every kind. Another example is the 100mm (or sometimes 90mm) F2.8 macro lens. My canon is clear modded and I use a an Astronomik EOS-clip L filter to block the uv and ir. 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. 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. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. Large focus ring. Holiday Savings $50 . The 200f2.8 L is excellent - I am using it right now. This seems to be the norm for telephotos. The image below highlights the creative freedom this lens provides. So now your 42Mpix A7rII is only a 10.5Mpix. reviewed August 2nd, 2017 Test Notes Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 It just doesn't get any better than this! The Precious - sharp images, fast focus, perfect weight, reference-quality build. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. 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. Backwards compatible (film). 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). My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! Thanks & Cheers I wish every lens was this good!! Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. Bokeh is buttery smooth, best you can get from a 135mm. I loved the Nikon 80-400G for a year, or so, and then found everything with it wrong, and got rid of it. Definitely now on my to-buy list. 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. Also, the newer and much more expensive 200mm F4 SMC Pentax with the K mount is decisively inferior, showing small but annoying red chromatic aberration. Some real life images from my photoblog: http://hellabella.de, One of the best and sharpest lens around. I use the word design, because although the available 135mm F2 lenses aren't the exact same optical formula, they share many important traits. Reg. Read on to find out which you should be using and why! Its a joy to work with every time. 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). The other one is the inevitable and persistent regret that, because of chromatic aberration, the full 75mm aperture of this beautiful lens can not be used in full visible spectrum photography. One of the prime examples of such a design is the "nifty fifty"the 50mm F1.8 lens construction that many lens manufacturers provide. Geometric distortion is lower than one would expect, at 0.15% pincushion maximum, with an average of 0.07%. 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. If so, which one? Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. As you can see, the magnification of the lens used will dictate the type of projects you shoot. Just place your subject against a distant background, and half of the job is done. Stopping down would actually have improved the picture. Just not useful if you already have traditional focal lengths. You don't have to worry about shopping for a better lens anymore. The extent of this influence lies mainly in photographer's perception and creativity.As all arts photography may serve given needs due to numerous reasons with the resulting integrity of the work not necessarily suggesting art.The photographic gear (from lens cleaning tissues up to s/w) is just the tool(s) of a photographer in order to produce its work. After weeks with a production Fujifilm X-T5, Chris and Jordan have some final thoughts. For this reason, a combination of a good light pollution filter, and the use of flat calibration frames are recommended. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". The combination of a wide aperture and very little light lost in transmission makes very high shutter speeds possible. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. Everyone assumes their definition is the "true" one. It's sharp, has very low aberrations, no real distortion and the bokeh is very nice. As you know, camera lenses come in varying focal lengths, apertures, and optical quality. This is huge for me, as it allows me to be much more nimble with getting the right composition and angle. Yes, because it is not f/2. To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. There is no agreement about what Bokeh means. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. 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. Today I want to talk about another such lens design: The 135mm F2 lens. That's a cheap, fun date for AP. $218.00 for 7 days. Some reviewers have listed lack of IS as a "Con". Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. This is actually worse than just plain obsession with blur. Not rude at all, a fair comment. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. 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. Below, are a few examples of astrophotography images Ive taken with lenses of varying focal lengths. MCovington, my Zeiss 300/4 is the full thickness barrel version, made in West Germany, serial number 5990836. (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) This free website's biggest source of support is when you use these links, especially these directly to it at Adorama or at Amazon, when you get anything, regardless of the country in which you live. I've missed shots at wide apertures because the DOF is so extremely thin. A specialist lens, at best, though I did enjoy the cat image. This is so annoying that I intend to replace the Canon lens cap with a Tamron cap. Whats the best camera for around $2000? I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. Typical L construction. The 135mm f2.8 in particular can take amazing photos of the brighter deep sky objects with about 1 second time . For me, that's enough. Not too heavy. Now I have only the Nikon but I can try to take a photo of the same subject fully open I understand the optical design is quite old. Focusing should be done on moderately bright stars using the 10x magnified Live View. 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. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. 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. This photo was captured with the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens using a UV/IR cut filter and a QHY168C dedicated astronomy camera. Any good ones apart from the Big Boys. 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. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. But I sold it and went back to using a 70-200 (alongside a 24-70). Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. That is why when SLRs came along the 200mm became the big seller and the 135 was largely forgotten. Sometimes though, we stumble upon a great lens design which is strong in all three. Amazing colours, contrast, bokeh, everything! In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. In my test, nikon have the same color correction than Canon and same sharpness. I bought my lens in mint condition for $350 from Japan, but I see that some retailers are asking significantly more. I was blown away when I loaded the photos into my computer. Could use a few updates. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. Sharp wide open, wonderful bokeh, fast AF in dark conditions. Available Monday. And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). If they could make 135 f2 lighter version with AF for Sony and price is slightly under Sigma 135 /1.8 and obviously Batis 135 2.8 it could sell like hotcakes. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! Because of some residual chromatic aberration even with the aperture stop, the best focus lies not where the star image is the smallest, but rather just slightly away from infinity, at the point where the star image barely begins to enlarge. It must not be confused with the much cheaper SMC Takumar, often deceptively advertised as SMC Pentax Takumar, which has the M42 camera thread, and is plagued with unextinguishable blue chromatic aberration. So I feel I'm being cheated. Fantastic IQ & Bokeh. (purchased for $700), reviewed October 9th, 2012 Most of the available 135mm F2 lenses have a very short minimum focusing distance in relation to the focal length, creating a magnification ratio of around 0.2 - 0.25. the lens is built strong, very strong. (And cost less too). 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. The second best, is the Hoya Pro One Digital MC UV(0) filter. Again, there's no context. A Canon 70-200L IS II at 200mm at f2.8 has all the same characteristics of the Canon 135L. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed February 4th, 2010 The next 200mm lens of excellent quality is the 200mm F4 Nikkor F which requires the Nikon F to EOS adapter. The CA is pretty low wide open and it rivals my 200mm L lens. It also focuses really fast and accurate and is light. Be careful with the focus. IS is useful in my f/4 zooms but I don't need it to hand-hold this lens. My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 Rudy, why didn t you include any L lenses from canon? A Bargain, very competively priced 645 lenses such as the mamiya apo line and pentax edif can operate within these conditions without vignetting on apsc sensors. Yes the Samyang is good and yes there are lenses with bad bokeh. Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. But do some experimenting before you decide. Used on a crop body the results are still splendid but you gain on DOF, making it a great combination for wedding/event and ambient/available light. I have just acquired my astrophotography set up thanks to all your videos and doing some research. 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. How's that for an endorsement? wew.. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. Samyang 135mm F/2 ED UMC Review (Camera Labs), Does a F/2.0 lens become F/2.8 when used on a crop sensor camera? That means that it doesnt require a robust equatorial telescope mount as a larger, heavier telephoto lens would. Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. (purchased for $725), reviewed March 26th, 2013 I am telling them - don't! This gives me the power of 162x, which is barely sufficient for my 420mm fl APO astrograph at full camera resolution. Aside from being much more affordable, telephoto lenses are easier to transport, easier to mount and easier to guide, and are much more likely to produce encouraging results to a beginner. 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. Sharp, handy, strong colours and contrast. And they like circles (no ellipses or polygons) and smooth colour (no hard edges, no onion rings). If you own an EOS Camera - It's a no Brainer, Buy one Aperture ring. The 135mm focal length is absolutely perfect for the Heart and Soul Nebulae if youre using a crop sensor DSLR camera. This is the EF-M series version. 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). 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. No rear seals - since the 17-40 Canon has added rear seals to L lenses, to help in weather sealing. Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. Lots of wet blankets around here. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " My copy has very stiff manual focus though and is quite heavy. I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. You can go lower, but you have to watch your technique. The colder temperatures will make DSLR astrophotography much more practical, and there are plenty of great targets to choose from. 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. As it is it is earns a 9. There's just nothing there. You're sour grapes man, you wish it were you who wrote the article. $449.00. 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. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. If you want to preview the image field you can expect with a particular camera sensor and lens combination, Stellarium features a useful tool. 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. You currently have javascript disabled. Based on my handful of experiences with this lens in the backyard, I have found these traits to hold true. Another lens to consider at this focal length (at maximum zoom) is the Rokinon 135mm F/2. Beware others critical comments here about how flat these images look, the author has chosen specific topics and viewpoints to highlight f2 with this lens, so see the wow review for what it is please and the negative comments need placing in context. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! Explore the sky, try frame some targets and see what works well with your DSLR and lens combination. (cont. Touching the telescope, even ever so slightly, will introduce vibrations which will ruin the photograph. 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. http://www.adstateagent.com | http://www.printradiant.com | http://www.hitsticker.com, I love this lens. I am still very proud of some of the photos I shoot with a Pentax O450 15 years ago - a good smartphone camera today is at least as capable. When coupled with my Canon DSLR camera, the entire system weighs just over 3 pounds. 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. 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. In an effort to save money, Id like to start using a Canon 80D that we already own to start picking targets and imaging. I mainly use for head shot photography. 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. 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. Really like the large focusing ring. I prefer this lens than the 70-200/2.8. Standards have risen in recent years. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? We revisit a classic DPReviewTV episode in which Chris Niccolls and Jordan Drake shoot a few rolls of Fujifilm's Acros 100 II, and a few frames on the X-T3 in Acros film simulation, to find out. While there are certainly pricey 135mm F2 lenses out there (such as the aforementioned Sigma 135mm F1.8 Art, or the Carl Zeiss 135mm) there are a couple that give you extreme value for the money. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. However, all the reviews were made by nature and sports photographers, and I would like to find out more about their performance in astrophotography. 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 How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? And now important part: This lens can be stopped down if desired effect is not required and no, with 85/1.8 you will never get this effect. Interesting. You will never be able to beat this lense, believe me, i have tried them all. If you can afford it buy this lens, you will love it. I hope that this post has provided some practical insight into a popular camera lens for astrophotography. I thought I would miss shooting at 200mm, but 135mm is long enough for most portraits and gives a decent amount of compression.