Juksu, your point is well taken. I already did some trials with the Samyang 12mm lens. An h-alpha filter would still be useful for your D500, but much more so if it were modified! I do not use burst mode, but the lens would produce movie-like frames. I do not think telephoto lenses would be suitable for use with your modified camera. if you compare images taken with this lens to those from a 105mm f1.8 ais or a cosina 125mm and you'll see what i mean. One is its size and weight, which requires a sturdy support on the telescope. Lots of older lenses no longer satisfy. I would be careful with the Nikon 135 f/2 DC (I have one). 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. These are affordably available on eBay, and result in perfectly round star images, the way nature intended them to be. Im a newbie at astro.. and photography in general really! I think the bokeh won me over with the cat, as well as the fact that I like animals; the case for the duck was the same. No telephoto lens, and no apochromat, is sufficiently corrected to accomodate such a wide spectral range. At $900 US it a relative steal. The finish and texture of the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is a step up from the 14mm F/2.8 I ordered a few years ago. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. Nikon 300/4 ED IF, Sigma 50/2.8 DG Macro (not a telephoto, but good). The Andromeda Galaxy using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens. The full name of this lens is the Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC, with "ED" standing for extra-low dispersion, and UMC referring to the "ultra multi-coated" optics. Sure, if you scroll through his page there are quite a few lens tests on starshttps://www.flickr.chotos/ytoropin/, Community Forum Software by IP.BoardLicensed to: Cloudy Nights, Article: The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography, This is not recommended for shared computers, Review of Explore Scientific First Light 8, COUNTING SUNSPOTS WITH A $10 OPTICAL TUBE ASSEMBLY, Hubble Optics 14 inch Dobsonian - Part 2: The SiTech GoTo system, iStar Opticals Phantom FCL 140-6.5 review. Also, the lens can only be operated when aperture is set to 22, wondering how I could use F2. Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. 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. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. The 135 f/2 is not perfect. Please send your photos of the Andromeda galaxy. 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. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. So whats so great about shooting at 135mm anyway? I actually have to walk 1/2 way up the stairs to be able get folk in the frame. 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. The difference between modern and old telephoto lenses is probably similar to the difference between my APO and an old Jaegers 5in F5. 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. One difference worth pointing out is for those who image using narrowband filters. However, I find the process tedious, and prefer single, manually guided, long exposures which seem to have deeper colors. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. 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. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. 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. +1 for the 135mm lens. Maybe try a 400mm f/2.0 to see it that one's got enough blur. 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. With a rounded 9-blade diaphragm, shallow depth of field imaging will be rendered with pleasing out-of-focus highlights. There are only a handful of foolproof strategies for making a great photograph. 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). We take OM System's new 90mm prime F3.5 macro lens out and about around Seattle, in search of sunlight, people and very tiny things to get up close and personal with. I have no experience with that lens, Jerry Lodriguss however published a review of that lens on his websitehttp://www.astropix.NIKON_180MM.HTM. 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. That means that it doesnt require a robust equatorial telescope mount as a larger, heavier telephoto lens would. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. Camera tech for video has come a long way in recent years, with faster autofocus, subject tracking, eye tracking and smarter lenses that stabilize the frame. Today I want to talk about another such lens design: The 135mm F2 lens. Fast. It's not a bad lens, probably a great one, even if it doesn't seems really as sharp as a basic 85mm f/1.8 (used at f/2.8) , but it's a bad idea to work wide open if you don't need to. You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. Has a good weight to it. Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 It's terrible. OM System's latest lens is a whopper of a macro, featuring optical stabilization, full weather sealing, up to 2x magnification and a whole lot more. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. I think youll find that this lens is behind some of the most amazing wide-field astrophotography images online! It just doesn't get any better than this! In fact, in my test shots, I noticed that the red channel was a little softer than green and blue. #light_bulb I would disagree. 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? Round one of polls are now open, pick your winners and share your voice. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. I want to see the bokeh and the sharpness at 100% mag, don't care about the photos. You can use Stellarium to preview the image scale with the 135mm lens and your DSLR. 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. It's gross, all is a matter of balance and the perfect one, given you want sharp and fuzzy elements in your picture, is in the blend, and the way details seems to disappear gracefully (while keeping a level of readability). And you can even crop a 135 efl with today's sensors should you actually need it. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! For that I would investigate alternatives just to make sure. Hate these presumptuous kinds of articles and headlines. The lenses I listed are certainly not the ONLY exceptional lenses made over the years. My work requires auto-focus. 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. The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. Lenses with extreme sharpness and bokeh tend to be heavy. The 135 is lighter, but that's its only advantage. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. And as this article clearly shows, no amount of blurr will make a poorly composed photo good. 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. Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. This lens provides all of these requirements. Light weight and robust. 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. I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. Olympus 75mm f1.82. you can see here a lot of photos mostly shot with the f/4 version. The flat lens hood is great for taking flat frames after a night of astrophotography. I had one question that i cant seem to find an answer to.. I mainly use for head shot photography. CP+ 2023: Sigma has announced it is bringing its trio of DC DN APS-C prime lenses to Nikon's Z mount: its first lenses for Nikon's mirrorless system. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens is a fantastic companion for the Canon 60Da, as it offers a useful "mid-range" focal length for a variety of deep-sky projects. 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. Other times, like the Witch Head Nebula, I love seeing the star responsible for the object in all its glaring glory! Prime lenses are typically lighter as they do not need the additional glass and mechanics required to zoom at varying magnifications. With an effective focal length of roughly 216mm when coupled with a Canon crop sensor body, the field of view is nearly identical to the one youd find on a full-frame camera with a 200mm telephoto lens. 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. 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. The Samyang 135mm f/2 lens is very wide in astrophotography terms. Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. 24/28mm, 50mm, 100mm, 200mm. This is the EF-M series version. 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 ;). When coupled with my Canon DSLR camera, the entire system weighs just over 3 pounds. $399 00. Nice image, andysea. You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. It seems they are now quite comparable in quality to prime lenses. It starts out very sharp at f/2.0, gets even sharper at f/2.8, and softens only slightly at f/11. 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. I have never had a bad experience buying used Canon lenses from eBay sellers with 99.5%+ positive feedback. My copy has very stiff manual focus though and is quite heavy. Since Eric was so generous to share his images with me, I had to include his photo of the Rho Ophiuchi cloud complex as well. Touching the telescope, even ever so slightly, will introduce vibrations which will ruin the photograph. And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? 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. 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. Whos Afraid of a Phantom: Istar Phantom 140mm F/6.5, that is? 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. Its a joy to work with every time. But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. They create a beautiful, mesmerizing dreamscape in their photos, and their secret weapon, besides an impeccable sense for aesthetics, is the 135mm F2 lens. Now we have to read this kind of ignorant misinformation on DPR articles.