And only the cat photo has something OK (but it is a cat shot You easily get them look good). (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 The Samyang 135mm F/2 easily lives up to its hype and should be near the top of your list of purchases if you are new or experienced in the field of astrophotography. 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. But the Rokinon f/2 version fits into a different market. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get. In this new review, I focus exclusively on the unprecedented Samyang 135mm f/2, which is primarily designed for portrait and wildlife. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class. I actually have to walk 1/2 way up the stairs to be able get folk in the frame. Another drawback is the focal length. Contrasty but not harsh. Large focus ring. Only con I can think of, and that may be a big one depending on how you plan to use the lens is the lack of weather sealing. This is a fully manual lens, meaning that it does not have autofocus, and you must manually select the f-stop using the aperture ring at the base of the lens. From my experience, the toughest test on a lense is its ability to function wide open. Micael Widell is a photography enthusiast based in Stockholm, Sweden. Better than nothing I guess, would depend on how much it raises the price. IQ will rival any other lens. 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. Typical L construction. etc.. Ron. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. This new, affordable wide zoom for L-mount is capable of some excellent landscapes. Are you really using 135 a lot? @juksu - you're such a liar. Is this Nikon already, Astro modified, without need for H alpha filters or any further modifications? http://www.idyll.com/laney2014 Finally, although we don't explicitly test for it, we have to note that this lens' bokeh (rendering of out-of-focus objects) is really excellent as well. It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. 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. 135 mm. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. You get what you get.#4: Cat in Underbrush.That's pretty good.#5: Woman with Blanket.It's like a snapshot. And because you can shoot between F/2 and F/4, plenty of light reaches the sensor in a relatively short exposure. 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. Writer Anno Huidekoper takes a look at what this manual SLR can do and how it stacks up to its contemporaries. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " Although your target audience is beginning DSLR imagers, much of your advice also applies to using lenses with CCD cameras. 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. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. All lenses mentioned below are adaptable to Canon EOS cameras with slim EOS adapters which allow the lenses to focus just slightly past infinity. Also, accurate guiding is essential. Excellent color and saturation, a virtually perfect lens. If you have pictures taken using the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens, please feel free to share your results in the comments section (links to Astrobin, Flickr or your personal gallery are fine). I do know, however, that I can take an equally framed photo I've shot with my Canon kit lens, both zoomed to 100% I run circles around this guy. This lens has only two drawbacks. Or is there a use case for fitting the Samyang 135mm to a Panasonic gx85 (or Panasonic gh5) ?? Find out what happens when Chris shoots some very expired APS film using old Canon and Nikon cameras. Diffraction from the cheap EF-s kit zoom lens was uneven. Excellent build quality, fast auto focus, and its fast. best lens, blur, sharp-super, no CA, minimal shading. Thanks to you I got a Rokinon 14mm f2.8 and a 24mm f 1.4 and am considering this lens at the moment, but wonder how it compares to the Canon 135 mm f/2. Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. modest cost for "L" series, wonderful optics and fast speed, nitpicking, but not a circular aperature and no weather sealing. 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. 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. Im so new to all of this so thank you for your insightful and educational posts. Can't argue with your reasoning, Juksu, about the framing of the article, but just stopping by to say I really liked that cat picture, am shopping for a new smartphone, struck that this type of photo is in another league - all newbie observations, of course, which sort of supports your thoughts that an article like this would be better framed as a "Love this new long lens stuff" sort of thing. I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. 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. Whos Afraid of a Phantom: Istar Phantom 140mm F/6.5, that is? In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best. This seems to be the norm for telephotos. The CA is pretty low wide open and it rivals my 200mm L lens. Juksu, your point is well taken. 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. The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. I also find the other photos not very good. This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. It would not surprise me if modern lenses were useable at full aperture. The 5D's larger pixels also make chromatic aberration somewhat lower at most apertures. As you can see, the magnification of the lens used will dictate the type of projects you shoot. I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. - Actually though, it's performance is so good that you really have to consider it a bargain, even at the $800-900 street price. (Suggesting that diffraction limiting is only part of the story with lens softness at tiny apertures.). For that I would investigate alternatives just to make sure. it is crisp, fast, and awsome. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. Beautiful portrait lens. 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. I had a 70-200 f/4 that i used unstopped at 200 with awesome results. Backwards compatible (film). At 135mm, you can get really creative about the object or objects you shoot and where you position them within the frame. The flat lens hood design allows you to easily take flat frames with the Rokinon 135mm using the white t-shirt method or using a flat panel. Seems to me that Michael is pretty new to using long telephoto lenses, he writes that the Samyang is the first he has owned. 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. Now we have to read this kind of ignorant misinformation on DPR articles. There's literally no story!#6: Purple Flower.The isolation works because it's the only color. 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. The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. My Nikon focus and aperture rings are a thing of highly finessed engineering beauty! I'll walk you through all this inc. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. If you are a Nikon user, of course have a look at the Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC and compare it to the other lenses mentioned in this article. (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 When stopped down to 37mm, at F5.4, it also produces perfect, small and round star images across the entire field. Also Nikon DC 135mm f/2 is a great lens, a little better than 135mm Canon In 3 months I got loosy focus ring. enlarge. 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. 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. There is no agreement about what Bokeh means. I typically shoot with Canon lenses, but the potential for low light photography (whether thats astrophotography or the ability to film at dusk) caught my interest. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. If you buy a nifty fifty or a 100mm macro lens you simply cannot go wrongyou will get a great and handy lens for your money, with great image quality. I understand the optical design is quite old. So, let's see where it falls short of perfection: You can go lower, but you have to watch your technique. If canon puts an IS on this lens, it would be perfect! That's why I really enjoy shooting portraits with it. But you just know that there is the professionalism that is lacking here -- and the writer's Instagram page confirms that. Tack sharp at f/2. 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 think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. I have the Canon 135 f/2 and loved it from day one. Of the old teles I've had, Nikon's 400mm f/3.5 was decent, Olympus's 300mm f/4.5 was good (it had a precursor to ED glass) Pentax's 300mm Takumar was TERRIBLE, Pentax's 500mm was terrible, Nikon's 135 f/2.8 Q was ok, and Sigma's 400mm f/5.6 "apo" was satisfactory. Neutral yet very nice colours. It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. f/2, fast-accurate-silent focus, (relatively) small & light, super sharp!! The reason the 135mm lens was that it was the longest lens that would focus with a Leica rangefinder. Thanks.. Thanks! It requires the Contax-EOS adapter for attachment to the camera. It actually makes my eyes water as I try to resolve how bad the blurriness is. The Sadr Region in Cygnus, including the Crescent Nebula by Eric Cauble. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. Olympus 4x Optical Zoom f/2 Lens; 25-100mm (35mm Equivalent) Show More. Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. Several functions may not work. Rokinon 135mm F2.0 ED Lens. Canon CR-N700 4K PTZ Camera with 15x Zoom. 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. 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. Another example is the 100mm (or sometimes 90mm) F2.8 macro lens. Focusing should be done on moderately bright stars using the 10x magnified Live View. You're right, but a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels I bought put to use! Adam007,"a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels"No thanks. Which is the better buy? My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC lens. Add To Cart. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. Please send your photos of the Andromeda galaxy. I love the lens for my modified Sony a6000! A Bargain, very competively priced I read and bought it. You currently have javascript disabled. when you hold the lens in your hand you know you are holding a fine peice of optical equipment. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. When you buy a lens with fantastic sharpness and image quality at all apertures, you typically expect it to cost $1,200 on up. Yes, each can produce different results (And that's why I keep and use several different lenses), but my point is that sharpness or bokeh are not the only factors for portraits -- sometimes it just comes down to convenience or price! Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. But first, there are several general rules which must be understood. It focuses within a blink of an eye, instantly. I own a 135 since the film days (because you "had to have one" and could not afford much else), still have the zeiss Jena f3.5 M42 and even jumped for the zeiss f2.8 for my yashica when they were sold for next to nothing. And as this article clearly shows, no amount of blurr will make a poorly composed photo good. It is by far the fastest focusing, best bokeh, and lowest light lens you will ever find. Over the last ten to fifteen years excellent apochromatic telescopes have become available for visual use and photography. Just not useful if you already have traditional focal lengths. This lens provides all of these requirements. I see that many commenters did not get what this lens can do. I have compared many times my 135/2 against my 100/2.8 and there is a big difference. At least not in my camera (Sony A6000), the focal length in a crop sensor does not make it very suitable for portrait, the photo detail is something else, but without AF that type of photography with that focal distance and at least 80 cm of the subject it requires too much dedication, with how comfortable the DMF approach mode is for that type of photography Also in my mount it does not have any communication with the camera (it does not have a chip, it only has it for Nikon). Great question Scott I think it depends on the image. From the moment I reviewed the first sub-exposure on the display screen of my camera, I feel in love with the mid-range magnification of a 135mm lens. 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 . Pleiades (M45) Orion Nebula (M42) Carina Nebula (shown below) North American Nebula; Heart and Soul Nebula (IC 1805 / IC 1848) My point is that we must never lose the joy of photography. 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. Be careful with the focus. Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. 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. You're sour grapes man, you wish it were you who wrote the article. In excellent condition, this lens retails for around $200. If you want the best value possible for your money, and can survive without autofocus, buy the Samyang. Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. It starts out very sharp at f/2.0, gets even sharper at f/2.8, and softens only slightly at f/11. Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? It is the lens I use as a reference point to compare all new lens acquisitions to after purchase to determine if they need to be returned for repair or replacement. It's just "girl" in front of blurriness.#2: Plants on a pond.It's okay. I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. This gives me the power of 162x, which is barely sufficient for my 420mm fl APO astrograph at full camera resolution. http://www.idyll.com/laneysat Your Baader filter passes 420-680nm and, in theory, a good APO should be able to focus that part of the spectrum with no chromatic aberration. Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. These lenses go about as close as you could get without a dedicated macro lens. The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography. With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. "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. RATING. Unfortunately, standard photography lenses are generally poorly corrected for CA at the red end of the spectrum, relying on the human eye's poorer resolution in red than green or blue. We sell a wide variety of digital cameras from all the top brands like Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Fujifilm, Pentax, Leica, Samsung, and more. One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. I do not like this. 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. A higher-res Blackmagic Studio Camera just dropped. 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. Helps me as a beginner a lot I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. Seems to me that with your gallery and website of images you should refrain from passing judgment on who is and isn't a photography master. 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. Simple fact is the Samyang 135/2 is a remarkably good lens for the price, and it offers a set of optical characteristics that typically cost 2-4x more. 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. Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC LensCheck Price (Amazon): https://amzn.to/2MOUFeOExample Images: https://astrobackyard.com/rokinon-135mm-f2-astrophotography/I've . Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. 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. 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 EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. You can use Stellarium to preview the image scale with the 135mm lens and your DSLR. Far from being a generic run-of-the-mill image hosting website, it was created and is still operated by an astrophotographer, and boasts features that are very specific to astrophotography. It is fantastic on my old 5d. Could use a few updates. Before I go any further, Id like to share a photo from Gabriel Millou of the Andromeda Galaxy using a Canon 1300D. I really like how they augment my longer focal length scopes. 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! My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. Definetely the most sharpest lens which I have ever seen. Do you expect me to gawk? All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". OTOH you can now get a 70-180 f2.8 zoom that weights virtually the same and is only a tiny bit longer (Tamron's on E mount, like 20mm longer than the AF SY or most other modern 135s), and there's lighter than ever 85/1.4s (eg Sigma's DN for L/E mount) that can achieve a very similar look while coming in at 600g, tho at an even higher price. Thanks Gary! It is a parade of photos that should have been galled out after a boring Sunday afternoon shoot of "Think I'll bring along a camera when I walk the dog", There are so many things wrong in this 'review' -- most of all the idea that 'you' should get this lens and somehow it magically makes the duck or the cat stuck right in the center of picture a great photo! Everyone assumes their definition is the "true" one. 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. 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. Most small refracting telescopes start in the 300 to 400 mm focal length range, and even these are classed as widefield telescopes. You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. Fast focus, Super sharp, Well built, Awesome for low light. I think they are an outstanding value for any wide-field astrophotographer, and are particularly suitable for newcomers. 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. Although if Bokeh and sharpness is your thing and you can live with MF the Laowa 105mm f/2 Smooth Trans Focus (STF) is amazing. Unfortunately I haven't more the Canon lens. 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. I do not presume to further decorate the universe, and perceive them for what they are: interference. 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. $218.00 for 7 days. Another article that I read only the headline and saw a couple of samples then jumped directly to comments. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder. If you can afford it buy this lens, you will love it. 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). Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. Large hood. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. I was expecting a lot more of an article that says "the best telephoto lenses for astrophotography". In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. Also, I used to have a Nikon 180/2.8 ED IF AF and 300/4 ED IF AF. Star parties or dark sky excursions are another great time to use a camera lens in place of the telescope. Why take a step back from 250 to sit between the RedCat and the 24-105? Amazing sharpness wide open at F2.0 and the focus ring is nice and firm not tight you don't really need to tape it down for astrophotography. As soon as e.g. The only thing that could possibly make this better would be to add IS. I have taken some of the coolest photos with this lens on a canon mark III which shoots ten frames per second. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. These are affordably available on eBay, and result in perfectly round star images, the way nature intended them to be. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 I know this is a very old article but I was re reading as I mulled over this very point (85/1.4 vs 135/1.8) and I've gotta point out this math is all wrong First off 85->135 is a 1.6x crop and a 1.6x crop will yield 16MP on 42MP bodies (42 / (1.6x1.6) ), ~20MP on the A1, and ~24MP on the A7R IV. Released only weeks apart, the Sony 50mm F1.4 GM and Sigma F1.4 DG DN Art are clear competitors. (purchased for $700), reviewed June 13th, 2009 The sigma 150mm f2.8 tests very well, zeiss 135mm apo sonnar, and leica 180mm f3.5 apo all proven performers on star tests. The lens is not weather-sealed, so you definitely dont want to leave your camera and lens (and your tracking mount!) He has quite a breadth photos many of which are quite good. I thought I would miss shooting at 200mm, but 135mm is long enough for most portraits and gives a decent amount of compression. The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. 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. If you have a more appropriate portrait lens like an 85, 90 or 100, the 135 does not bring you very much. It disagrees completely with the definition that you give! At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. Defocus control enables the photographer to use an aperture of f/4 for the subject and to adjust the amount of background blur or the amount of foreground blur. Really excels as indoor sports lens on a crop camera. No rear seals - since the 17-40 Canon has added rear seals to L lenses, to help in weather sealing. Would it at all be possible to at least make sure the people you publish know a little bit about photography? I would only recommend this lens for casual photographers where missed shot means nothing. Never before (nor after) have I seen a lens with this level of sharpness wide open. With weather sealing this would be a 10. Yes there's bokeh. It is fantastically sharp, can make beautiful blurred backgrounds and bokeh, and is both light and inexpensive for what you get. Read on to find out which you should be using and why! With a rounded 9-blade diaphragm, shallow depth of field imaging will be rendered with pleasing out-of-focus highlights.