Hate these presumptuous kinds of articles and headlines. Sharp without being harsh. Lots of wet blankets around here. You just panned the subject for his photos and then turn around and needle thematic for looking into Ericsson. Thanks for the fine article and the thought you put into it. No more inside shooting with flash! 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? 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. 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. If you don't like that article that's your right as a member. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. An update to the Mini 11, the new camera adds parallax correction capabilities, automatic flash control and a multi-function twist lens. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. It's not the most versatile lens, but it's very great for tight portrait shoots; background blur is creamy IMO; one of the best 'bokeh' lens. 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. Do you have a link to Yuri's photo stream? No telephoto lens, and no apochromat, is sufficiently corrected to accomodate such a wide spectral range. (purchased for $899), reviewed March 19th, 2012 I really don't want to count all the pores - and the hairs coming out of them (eeeew!) 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. But I would argue that a 135mm F2 lens produces even greater bokeh, thanks to the long focal length that compresses the background far more than the 85mm lens. 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. The 70-200 f2.8 L2 and he 400f5.6 will however set you back way more than $1.100. I loved the Nikon 80-400G for a year, or so, and then found everything with it wrong, and got rid of it. And as this article clearly shows, no amount of blurr will make a poorly composed photo good. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. 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. Yes there's bokeh. Seems like a great lens. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. Some noteworthy targets to try. From my experience, the toughest test on a lense is its ability to function wide open. If so, which one? This way the focus will favor the red light which is more objectionable within a star image than a bit of blue. Check out some of the photos he took. Film Friday: DPRTV reviews Fujifilm's Acros II film, Fujifilm launches Instax Mini 12 instant camera, DPReview March Madness, vote for your champions, Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM sample gallery (DPReview TV), OM System M. Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro sample gallery, Live from Japan: Highlights from CP+ 2023, Retro Review: 24 years later, the Sony F505 is still pretty cool, Hands on with the OM System M. Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro, New FAA rules make it easier for recreational drone pilots to fly in restricted US airspaces, Leica marks James Bond's 60th* with a special edition D-Lux 7, Film Friday: A closer look at the Pentax KX, an original K-mount SLR, Blackmagic Design announces a new Studio Camera 6K Pro, National Geographic selects Pictures of the Year photo contest winner, Sigma brings DC DN APS-C primes to Nikon Z-mount, Panasonic Lumix S 14-28mm F4-5.6 Macro sample gallery, Tamron announces 11-20mm F2.8 ultra-wide zoom for Fujifilm X-mount, Film Friday: DPReview TV steps back in time to shoot APS film, Finer Points: Here's an easy way to improve video autofocus, DPReview TV: One simple fix to improve video autofocus, Head-to-head: Adobe Super Resolution vs. ON1 Resize AI vs. Topaz Labs Gigapixel AI, Waiting for the fishy in the little dishy by Gil Aegerter, Lava Lizard on Marine Iguana by ZimmWisdom. sigh, overdone bokeh and centre sharpness bear little relevance to the art of this hobby. Rokinon lenses are made in Korea, and so is the Samyang variation. Must have if you're serious about portraits. Tack sharp at f/2. 10/10 (Editor's Choice) Check Price. I would only recommend this lens for casual photographers where missed shot means nothing. Often need f2.2 to f2.8 to gain sufficient DOF for human subjects. Online since 2011, AstroBin is the #1 complete solution for image hosting of astrophotographs. I guess thats where practice will come in handy. This is the EF-M series version. The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. And it's not the one problem from my L lenses very sad =(, My favourite lens, hands down. 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. Many students just wanted to take better snapshots of family, vacation, pets, etc. When you buy a lens with fantastic sharpness and image quality at all apertures, you typically expect it to cost $1,200 on up. 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. 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. Extrapolating from this, minimum recommended guidescope power is 120x for the 300mm telephoto, 80x for the 200mm, and 55x for the 135mm. I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. This lens is simply lighter, cheaper & faster (f/2.0 vs f/2.8). In this buying guide weve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best. Does this work well with any of the 1.4x / 1.7x / 2.0x Teleconverters (extenders / barlows)? Manually focusing a lens for astrophotography is nothing new, but the manual aperture ring adjustments may feel a little strange at first. Really, just an amazing lens, easily worth the $800-900 it commands on the street. I own Samyang 135 f2 for Nikon Mount and indeed it is incredible value lens. Rokinon 135mm F2.0 ED Lens. The 135L is half the weight of the 70-200 2.8IS. One is its size and weight, which requires a sturdy support on the telescope. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 The Japanese word "bokeh" can be translated into English as "blur". Instead it means the style of rendering. The second best, is the Hoya Pro One Digital MC UV(0) filter. It's an ideal portrait lens. You currently have javascript disabled. One of Canon's best lenses for a reasonable price. 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. (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) All lenses mentioned below are adaptable to Canon EOS cameras with slim EOS adapters which allow the lenses to focus just slightly past infinity. "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. 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. 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. However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. The latter are designed for crop sensor cameras and the back of the lens sticks too far into the body of the camera and would hit the EOS-clip filter. The lens hood is removable (and reversible), which makes packing the Rokinon 135mm away into the included lens pouch possible. Helps me as a beginner a lot Wonderful, smooth bokeh. Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. Thanks.. or.. Clear Skies! A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively At under 900USD, it's a steal. Well saturated but neutral. Digital sensors are roughly 5 times as sharp as 400-speed film. However, as I have no actual experience with the Baader filter, I would suggest that you consult other members on the particular APO - Baader filter combination you have in mind. 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. enlarge. Explore the sky, try frame some targets and see what works well with your DSLR and lens combination. I use it routinely in preference to many other multicoated filters I tested, including the new Hoya MC UV. The lenses I selected are all affordable prime lenses, easily available on the second-hand market, and adaptable to the EOS system. Every different lens design has different "bokeh" even when the lenses are by specs same, like Canon 135mm f/2 vs Samyang 135mm f/2 are both same, but both render differently, even when both have same DOF. (purchased for $890), reviewed July 17th, 2006 The aperture ring is marked with each f-stop, and you need to manually click through F/2 F/22 and watch the blades do their work. To actually learn to compose the photos so that the background complements the image instead of being something that must be blurred away. Thanks, I am telling them - don't! But when holes in text prompt me to look at the work of the writer, there is nothing professional there either. Theres no image stabilization on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 either, but thats a non-issue for amateur astrophotographers. The 200f2.8 L is excellent - I am using it right now. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed August 12th, 2009 Hey Trevor, great article! Focusing a wide open F/2 lens is demanding of the optics, especially on a field of stars in the night sky. Include the Carl Zeiss in your research though, it might be an interesting lens for you, even if it is a bit pricey for what you get. 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. So, let's see where it falls short of perfection: This article was originally published on Micael's blog, and is being republished in full with express permission. I've owned a few L lenses and while their USM motors have always been quick to snap in focus, this 135mm is on a different level. Great post; thanks for the detailed information. 1. You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. It focuses within a blink of an eye, instantly. Pocketable. Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. 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. If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. So so far the best that I have used are the 200f2.8L and the 400f5.6L. 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. 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. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC is one of the most affordable and practical lenses for astrophotography on the market. Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. Another article that I read only the headline and saw a couple of samples then jumped directly to comments. At a local amateur soccer game using the 135 f/2 the action was almost always too close, or too far away. The 135mm f2 is by all accounts one of their better and more reliable lenses however I believe the chance of a defective lens is lower with the Canon. This criticism refers to rare cases when your main subject matter is flat and completely inside the limited DOF range while the rest of the image is outside. The inset picture is a magnified view of the bottom right corner of the frame. I was very happy for this reason to eventually get a full frame DSLR in 2007 and sell the 85mm lens and buy a 105mm one to replace it. Could use a few updates. I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? Yuri toropin tests a bunch of lenses on Flickr which is a great source. They just wanted to increase their joy from photography. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. 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. IS would also help outside with wind. They're heavy, and expensive, but you can carry one lens instead of three, and can vary the compression and field of view to a significant degree - from nearly normal, to long portrait focal lengths. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. I would! It has no chromatic aberration, and no hint of star deformities in the corners. To prevent damage to the lens finish, apply nylon acorn nuts (or cap nuts) to the tips of the retaining ring's three alignment screws. In fact, a light-weight 200/2.8 seems more interesting to own (e.g., the Minolta 200/2.8). A promising start, no doubt, but not a master yet! I would be careful with the Nikon 135 f/2 DC (I have one). Well, after lugging that lens around for years, I'm experimenting with adding the 135L back to my kit. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. 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. 8MP is plenty for the usual 8x10 or 16x20 portrait print. " I have been following your work both on YT and here from Japan for a while. Photography is full of fuzzy concepts. 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. Ive spent a handful of nights testing this lens in my Bortle Scale Class 6/7 backyard, and my results live up to the hype it gets in terms of astrophotography performance. I've done comparisons between my brand-new Samyang 85/1.4 and the old big Apollo 135/1.8 lens I had lying around, and the shots were for all practical purposes identical (exept, obviously, for the pixel count once cropped). If you want the best possible image quality, and you must have autofocus, and you don't care if it is a bit heavy (maybe you need it for studio use), buy the Sigma. Latter looks quite professional.. Voting ends March 8, 2023. If canon puts an IS on this lens, it would be perfect! The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. Photography is art and technology, the latter serving the first.Photography is not something arty with a lot of gadgetry. The extremes are 2 and 22. One way to combat potential soft images and chasing perfect focus all night is to stop the lens down to F/2.8 or even F/4. Maybe try a 400mm f/2.0 to see it that one's got enough blur. You will never be able to beat this lense, believe me, i have tried them all. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. Im getting a samyang to use with my 60D. Lots of older lenses no longer satisfy. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. I almost bought one, but couldn't manage that focal length and DoF with moving subjects and manual focus. Overall, spectacular lens. The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. The EOS R6 II arrives in one of the most competitive parts of the market, facing off against some very capable competition. In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. I just wish this lens had IS for low light and portraits with flash. Try to have eyes and nose / lips all in focus. I understand the optical design is quite old. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. But, since fast 300mm ED lenses are beyond my toy budget, I would appreciate seeing magnified center and corner test images of actual star fields. A lot of lenses today are better than anything money could buy in 1980. 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. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. Trully sharp accross whole frame from f2 on 5d. Check out I'll take photo of Orion as soon as possible. I wish every lens was this good!! Nikon 300/4 ED IF, Sigma 50/2.8 DG Macro (not a telephoto, but good). Best lens for portraiture I've ever tried. :). https://www.dpreview.com/news/7777572944/video-using-the-5-700-canon-200mm-f2-on-the-new-sony-a7r-iii, DPReview TV: We share our 2021 predictions while freezing our asses off, Video: Here's how Adobe Lightroom Mobile works on the Zeiss ZX1, DPReview TV: How to set up Sony's 'Real-Time' autofocus tracking, 7Artisans releases a $195 35mm F5.6 golden pancake lens for Leica M mount cameras, OM System M. Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro Sample Gallery, Fujifilm X-T5 production sample gallery (DPReview TV), DPReview TV: Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM Review, DPReview TV: Sony 50mm F1.4 GM vs Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG DN Art, The best cameras for family and friends photos in 2022, Best affordable cameras for sports and action in 2022. Dear Trevor, Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. I have just acquired my astrophotography set up thanks to all your videos and doing some research. Thanks! (purchased for $725), reviewed March 26th, 2013 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. Tamron has announced its 11-20mm F2.8 Di III-A RXD ultra-wide angle zoom will be made available for Fujifilm X-mount. Contrasty but not harsh. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. 135mm and 200mm lenses are suitable for wide angle star-field views, and comet and asteroid hunting, while 300mm lenses serve very well for the Andromeda galaxy, large emission nebulae, open clusters, and even larger globular clusters. Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. Cost. http://www.idyll.com/135. By the way, I still enjoy using my very sharp Sears 135mm, PKA mount lens. 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). It's small, light, cheap and extremely wide but is it any good? The Andromeda Galaxy using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens. I have never had a bad experience buying used Canon lenses from eBay sellers with 99.5%+ positive feedback. Great reach for street shots. However, they can be perfectly corrected with narrow band H-alpha or OIII filters. Youll never have to worry about losing your position just by touching the lens, but you can always tape the position down to be sure. For posed portraiture, it's a very nice budget option.FWIW, I'm a corporate portrait and event pro. Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? Write your own user review for this lens. The foolproof image seems to be more a case of how a bright fuzzy cluttered moving background can completely detach from the offset dark subject matter and overwhelm it. The image below highlights the creative freedom this lens provides. Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. 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. If I got this lens, would it make more sense long term to get the Canon mount with a E mount adaptor so I could fit it more easily to a dedicated astro camera later? Still - a great portrait lens when used at f/2.8 or f/4, with a creamy bokeh indeed. Using the lens's diaphragm interferes with the light path and results in diffraction spikes which I find unattractive. Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. The F/2.0 maximum aperture of the Rokinon 135mm lens offers a chance to collect a serious amount of signal in a single shot. 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. Here's what I see from the photographs:#1: Woman in traffic. You get what you get.#4: Cat in Underbrush.That's pretty good.#5: Woman with Blanket.It's like a snapshot. 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. I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. 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. Were those taken with the Canon telephotos you spoke of, and the full spectrum modified camera and the clip in filter? Several functions may not work. It's just "girl" in front of blurriness.#2: Plants on a pond.It's okay. Meanwhile the ol' Canon 135/2 is still commanding a higher than average price on the used market (70%+ of MSRP isn't common), I guess the low weight and super easy resale have almost made it a high end commodity. They seem to be really good for NB work. Given the spot on DPR front page, lots of 'what-lens-should-I-buy' newbies will be spending their money on this one. 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. Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens. Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. I have the Canon 135 f/2 and loved it from day one. This lens has a long focus adjustment ring, with great tension. 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. Because of chromatic aberration, no telephoto lens can be used at full aperture. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. Large focus ring. There's literally no story!#6: Purple Flower.The isolation works because it's the only color. Bottom line, this is just an outstanding lens by any measure, one that makes clear why you'd want to pay the freight for expensive prime glass. Got it! For my purposes, this is a spectacular lens. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. 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. Can I assume that this article applies only to full frame & not to micro four thirds? Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. From far to near, the AF is instantaneous. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed October 5th, 2008 The downsides of this configuration are that shooting wide open can make focusing difficult. 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 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. I have a Nikon d 500. The moment I tried the Samyang 135mm F2 for the first time after purchasing it, I immediately felt that it was a very special lens. Together they still weight less than any modern 135mm :>. #light_bulb I would disagree. What next, an article extolling the virtues of 43mm, or 70mm? I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. Zeiss Jena or Oberkochen? 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. Again, there's no context. The best of them, Nikon's 70-200E, is just as sharp all but the very best primes - ie, already too sharp for most portrait work. Target for bortle 9 astrophotography? Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. Now I have only the Nikon but I can try to take a photo of the same subject fully open After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. I think they are an outstanding value for any wide-field astrophotographer, and are particularly suitable for newcomers.