I was expecting a lot more of an article that says "the best telephoto lenses for astrophotography". The image shown below covers 4.96 x 5.98 degrees in the constellation Cassiopeia. The lens is available on eBay for around $200. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. If you want to preview the image field you can expect with a particular camera sensor and lens combination, Stellarium features a useful tool. The Rokinon website lists this lens as being useful for portraiture photography, and most telephoto applications. 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. But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. This lens is simply lighter, cheaper & faster (f/2.0 vs f/2.8). Trully sharp accross whole frame from f2 on 5d. After the first exposure in M mode, the camera throws an error saying Error please press the shutter button again. It is harder work than using a zoom lens, and some shots I just cannot get at all (cannot get close enough, or far enough way) but the shots I do get are so much nicer looking than I get with any other lens that for me and my goals it is a fair trade off. - 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. 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. F2 allows higher shutter speeds in lower light without raising the ISO. Canon 60Da DSLR and Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L2 lens at 135mm, f/3.2. 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area We think it rises to the challenge. Fast focus, Super sharp, Well built, Awesome for low light. Available in other Styles, Configurations & Kits. That setup will give you all that you really need. For some reason Samyang makes lenses nobody is asking for. It's just "girl" in front of blurriness.#2: Plants on a pond.It's okay. 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! 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. It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. The images were collected using a Canon EOS Rebel T3i camera riding on a Fornax Mounts LighTrack II. They are by nature designed to compromise by magnification and distance, and are therefore not optically optimized at any single setting. Helps me as a beginner a lot The 135mm f2.8 in particular can take amazing photos of the brighter deep sky objects with about 1 second time . (purchased for $800), reviewed March 15th, 2010 (purchased for $900), reviewed December 14th, 2006 I had a 70-200 f/4 that i used unstopped at 200 with awesome results. One very popular lens for bokeh fiends is the Canon 85mm F1.2it can produce extremely creamy out of focus backgrounds. Not another article that promotes portraits shot with wide open lens and out of focus highlights in the background. Canon 300/4 ED IF AF (non-IS) I own Samyang 135 f2 for Nikon Mount and indeed it is incredible value lens. For me, that's enough. I am telling them - don't! Build quality: excellent. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. Check them out for yourself! But for many of us, somewhere in between, are plenty of short to mid-tele lenses that will deliver solid service (in terms of subject separation) without carrying around still another kilo for the sake of more blur. 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. Valerio, Electronically Assisted Astronomy (No Post-Processing), Community Forum Software by IP.BoardLicensed to: Cloudy Nights, DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging, This is not recommended for shared computers, Back to DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging, Buckeyestargazer 2022 in review and New Products. Fantastic IQ & Bokeh. On a full frame body, I rely upon this lens and it does not disappoint. parts of your main subject extend beyond the DOF range it will never look flat. I stopped reading after the part where someone I don't know told me I "should" be doing something. Over the years, I have tried more than two dozen telephoto lenses, until I finally found three or four perfect solutions. sigh, overdone bokeh and centre sharpness bear little relevance to the art of this hobby. The 135 f/2 is not perfect. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. The lens arrived next day, less than 24 hours after I hit the order button. With no general agreement about what Bokeh is it is little wonder that there is so much argument and disagreement. (Suggesting that diffraction limiting is only part of the story with lens softness at tiny apertures.). 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. Light weight and robust. 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. With the 135 I imagine I'd have to get up on the roof. Just place your subject against a distant background, and half of the job is done. Nevertheless, it performs excellently on most star fields, and is too cheap not to acquire. From my experience, the toughest test on a lense is its ability to function wide open. What is it like shooting with one today? I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. My first photo of the night sky is of Comet NEOWISE, however I know its not the best photo I could capture. Pleiades (M45) Orion Nebula (M42) Carina Nebula (shown below) North American Nebula; Heart and Soul Nebula (IC 1805 / IC 1848) But for me, the reason to get this lens is the Bokeh and DOF control. In this new review, I focus exclusively on the unprecedented Samyang 135mm f/2, which is primarily designed for portrait and wildlife. One very popular lens for bokeh fiends is the Canon 85mm F1.2it can produce extremely creamy out of focus backgrounds. (purchased for $890), reviewed July 17th, 2006 I wish every lens was this good!! But If you want the "look" you get with a medium telephoto at f/2, hen all those negatives become irrelevant. I mount it on my APS-C camera and the focal length literally becomes 216 mm, which is too tight. Here is a recent ones taken with the canon xs and a lens. Check out some of the photos he took. I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? Why take a step back from 250 to sit between the RedCat and the 24-105? Because it's an L-series lens by Canon, you can be sure that the image quality and performance of the 24-105mm meet the demanding aspects of astrophotography such as focus and star quality. I have done a review comparing the sharpness and quality of bokeh to the Canon 70-200 2.8. (purchased for $970), reviewed March 17th, 2011 Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. The one and only 300mm lens I tested is the Zeiss Tele-Tessar 300mm F4. When I was on my way home after purchasing my first 135mm lens (the Samyang/Rokinon one) I took a few quick snapshots just to try out the lens. But even better BOKEH is the SAL-135F2.8F4.5 STF (Smooth Trans Focus ) which has even better BOKEH, albeit a manual focus lens. Be careful with the focus. It's terrible. Geometric distortion is lower than one would expect, at 0.15% pincushion maximum, with an average of 0.07%. If you shoot things in motion on a Canon body, and need some reach without massive bulk, this is the one I recommend. This article was originally published on Micael's blog, and is being republished in full with express permission. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. 200mm Astrobin photos (not taken by me): https://www.astrobin.m USM F2.8 L II They create a beautiful, mesmerizing dreamscape in their photos, and their secret weapon, besides an impeccable sense for aesthetics, is the 135mm F2 lens. Really like the large focusing ring. 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? A promising start, no doubt, but not a master yet! f/2, fast-accurate-silent focus, (relatively) small & light, super sharp!! I have only owned my 135mm for less then a year, but already it is one of my top three most used and most fun lenses. The original poster is right that it was a compromise though and stopping down was necessary for critical sharpness and a better image. Exterem apertures are extrems (wether it's full open or closed) that should be reserved for extrem cases. After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. Of my last 3500 shots only 62 were made with the 135 f/2. For example, the legendary Canon 85mm F1.2L weighs in at 1025g, and the Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art isn't too light either at 1130g. Samyang 135mm f2, 100mm f2.8, and asperical 16mm f2.8. Thats quite a jump from 135mm, so the camera body you use with this lens may change the types of targets you shoot. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. 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. You may need to refocus your subject as the temperature changes throughout the night. Find out what happens when Chris shoots some very expired APS film using old Canon and Nikon cameras. 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. RATING. "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. it is crisp, fast, and awsome. I will say that at F/4 this lens is extremely sharp corner to corner when used on my 60Da. The Sadr Region in Cygnus, including the Crescent Nebula by Eric Cauble. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. The lens came in a handsome box, with core specifications and a lens construction diagram printed on the side. the lens is built strong, very strong. The lens hood is not petal-shaped, which is great news for those using this lens for astrophotography. Zoom lenses are entirely unsuitable for astrophotography due to prominent aberrations of every kind. Some of the primes have a special look to them, but only the 70-200 is indispensable. BTW, the 300-mm Tele-Tessar you describe -- what camera was it made for? 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. A series of such images can be digitally stacked to produce excellent results. 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. I almost bought one, but couldn't manage that focal length and DoF with moving subjects and manual focus. (AVX). See the full-size version on Astrobin. When you buy a lens with fantastic sharpness and image quality at all apertures, you typically expect it to cost $1,200 on up. Recently, the FAA announced that recreational drone pilots in the USA can request LAANC authorization to fly in controlled airspace at night. This lens has only two drawbacks. Second night out with mine right now and I am here in the comments looking for the part number or link! Overall, the lens feels very solid and well constructed. The Andromeda Galaxy using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens. The 135L is half the weight of the 70-200 2.8IS. Really excels as indoor sports lens on a crop camera. don't get me wrong; this lens will take great photos, but the 'flatness' i was getting in my photos nearly had me give up 25 years of hobby photography. Instead it means the style of rendering. I hear great things about the Canon 200/2.8 L but do not have one. I wanted to add my experience with some lenses that I thought worthy of being considered too, and some of the equipment that I have used. However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. 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. A Bargain, very competively priced The 70-200L being a much more useful lens. Perfect lens on the same level as CZ! I bought it for its bokeh. Hi Trevor, Last time I used a 135mm f2 was decades ago on a Canon F1. Neutral yet very nice colours. Voting ends March 8, 2023. thanks for the write-up.. i just got this lens and have just been trying it out. 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. Amazing colours, contrast, bokeh, everything! Big F-value.Light. Im currently shooting with a Canon 60D. That is kind of the point I am trying to make -- These pictures are really not in another league. Just not useful if you already have traditional focal lengths. That's why I really enjoy shooting portraits with it. Crazy fast AF! The presentation and hands-on look and feel of the 135mm F/2 lens is impressive considering the reasonable price of this lens. 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! The 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.2 is another story.While the 135mm f/2, in general, is a good lens, there are lots of lenses other than the 135 f/2 that will produce a very smoothly blurred background, including zoom lenses.It sounds like Micael is new to photography.Just my impression from this article. - Actually though, it's performance is so good that you really have to consider it a bargain, even at the $800-900 street price. 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. The criterion I used in evaluating lenses was optical perfection with no reservations. 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). Otherwise this lens is absolutely incredible. The diameter of the lens is 77mm, with a non-rotating filter mount on the objective lens. 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. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. Overall, spectacular lens. Digital camera types . Great question Scott I think it depends on the image. How good this lens overall and how sharp and color-free? Photography is full of fuzzy concepts. The colder temperatures will make DSLR astrophotography much more practical, and there are plenty of great targets to choose from. I cant wait to try this lens out during the winter months on some wide-field targets in Orion. . The only downside with that lens is that it is manual focus, which might not be suitable for photographing sports or children. It's tiny compared to almost everything else in the 85-135 range, and used properly, it can produce results that hold up to my DC (all other factors being equal such as subject distance, f-stop, lighting, etc.). Would it at all be possible to at least make sure the people you publish know a little bit about photography? A higher-res Blackmagic Studio Camera just dropped. its useful to keep in mind these bokeh circles are the result of light sources bright lamps from autos Christmas lights streetlamps etc and are seriously overused in articles on lenses with strong subject\ backround seperations, they approach parody in the way they characterise subject separation, for most purposes and in most portrait situations its less highlight dominant backrounds that grace a photo. There's just nothing there. As you know, camera lenses come in varying focal lengths, apertures, and optical quality. +1 for the 135mm lens. 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. Weight. Why would I want a 135/2.0 lens when I have a 135/1.8? I've missed shots at wide apertures because the DOF is so extremely thin. It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. Such "full spectrum" cameras are somewhat more sensitive in the ultraviolet, but much more sensitive in the deep red and infrared. This creates an effective focal length of roughly 200mm, a useful magnification for a wide variety of astro-imaging scenarios. Sigma 105/2.8 DG EX Macro (very sharp at infinity) It is a heavy lens. This allows for less aggressive camera settings for night photography such as using a lower ISO setting and shorter exposure. 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. It turns out that this. The inset picture is a magnified view of the bottom right corner of the frame. Let's the games begin! Lots of wet blankets around here. 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. CAs: a little in the OOF area - not disturbing anyway. I thought I would miss shooting at 200mm, but 135mm is long enough for most portraits and gives a decent amount of compression. As I posted on the Petapixel variant of this article, cropping a 85/1.4 shot to a 135mm-equivalent FoV gives you approx. 2 Dielectric Diagonals. I put quotes around the ones that are written on the lens. If anything the argument in favor of even smaller and lighter 85/1.4s (like the 600g Sigma DN) is stronger than ever, and I say that as someone that loves shooting at 135-150mm. Optics quality, sharp,very special picture, sharpness, clarity, weight, fast, accurate AF (fringe benefit of f/2), price, no IS, makes you regret buying any zoom lenses, compact, very sharp wide open, good color contrast, bokeh, this is the lens. Ive been using kit lenses for the past year, favoring the Nikkor 50mm 2.8. If you have a more appropriate portrait lens like an 85, 90 or 100, the 135 does not bring you very much. Both the 135 and 200mm Canon l lenses are winners IMHO. Well, after lugging that lens around for years, I'm experimenting with adding the 135L back to my kit. 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. Everyone assumes their definition is the "true" one. Colour and contrast is great. Together they still weight less than any modern 135mm :>. I speak Japanese fluently, was a translator in Tokyo for 8 years and studied photography there for two years. To see even more example photos using the Rokinon 135mm lens (or Samyang branded version), go ahead a perform a search on Astrobin or Flickr, with the appropriate filter. $581.00 for 7 days. Some people do not like this and consider Bokeh to refer only to the rendering of out of focus points of light. The 70-200 f2.8 L2 and he 400f5.6 will however set you back way more than $1.100. You just panned the subject for his photos and then turn around and needle thematic for looking into Ericsson. 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. I mainly use for head shot photography. By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. $218.00 for 7 days. 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. :). Aperture ring. 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. The image below was captured using a DSLR and 135mm lens on the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. Make sure to select your camera mount when checking the price (Check current price). Thanks, The clip-in Astronomik 12nm Ha is one of their most popular filters ever and for good reason! 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. Never before (nor after) have I seen a lens with this level of sharpness wide open. Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? Great reach for street shots. Check out (purchased for $860), reviewed March 9th, 2017 Another article that I read only the headline and saw a couple of samples then jumped directly to comments. But will live with it as it provides good protection of the front element. - in my subjects' skin. Perhaps I missed it, but did you use a clip-in light pollution filter with your 60D and this lens? For the rest there is Sigma 135 /1.8 Art also fantastic value lens. 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. The shallow depth of field present at its maximum aperture does indeed create a pleasing bokeh. Does the bright star reflection bother you? Preaching to the choir! 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. Sharpness, contrast and the natural vignetting on full-frame cameras is awesome! I have never had a bad experience buying used Canon lenses from eBay sellers with 99.5%+ positive feedback. AHAB. 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. 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. [emailprotected]. This lens flares easily and the flare can be especially ugly if a sun or flash are in the frame. As it is it is earns a 9. My first shot was a section of the constellation Sagittarius that included the Lagoon Nebula, and Trifid Nebula. Stopping down would actually have improved the picture. Imaging Resource 1998 - 2023. 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. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. Extrapolating from this, minimum recommended guidescope power is 120x for the 300mm telephoto, 80x for the 200mm, and 55x for the 135mm. But this lens changed my mind. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens. Another example is the 100mm (or sometimes 90mm) F2.8 macro lens. 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. You will never be able to beat this lense, believe me, i have tried them all. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ wew.. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC. (purchased for $845), reviewed November 16th, 2005 You don't have to worry about shopping for a better lens anymore. Thanks Gary! 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. 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. (on a full frame camera)Wonderful lens for some portraiture applications, sporting events and candids at a party or event. Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. Before I go any further, Id like to share a photo from Gabriel Millou of the Andromeda Galaxy using a Canon 1300D. Your images have a chance at remaining sharper once critical focus has been achieved, but now you have lost the extra light-gathering power you wanted. If the title had been: "Testing My First Telephoto and LOVING IT!!!!!!!. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 I have a Nikon d 500. 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. 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. 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. But like a glitch in the matrix, an anomaly that shouldn't exist, you can get the Samyang/Rokinon 135mm for as little as $430 brand new. If you want the best value possible for your money, and can survive without autofocus, buy the Samyang. 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. 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). If the telescope mount is precisely aligned to the celestial north pole, unguided exposures of one to two minutes are possible. (Actually if I can live with the DoF I prefer it to my 85/1.2 too, as there is much less bonus colour.) Well, for me. Canon 135mm is a great lens. My 24-70L needs to be stopped down to f5.6 to begin to match the sharpness of my 135L at f2.0 (the test shots were of the portrait of Andrew Jackson on a $20 bill). At a local amateur soccer game using the 135 f/2 the action was almost always too close, or too far away. in the rain. But first, there are several general rules which must be understood. 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 Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 includes a lens hood, lens pouch, front and rear lens caps, and a 1-year Rokinon manufacturer warranty. Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. I got this lens because of portraiture. 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. Bokeh == Visual character of the lens optics to render light and color mixing together. Im getting a samyang to use with my 60D. Yes there's bokeh. I think they are an outstanding value for any wide-field astrophotographer, and are particularly suitable for newcomers. And yet this review is on front page of DPReview prompting me to go and buy this lens -- so surely it must be a professional , well grounded review, right? Its a joy to work with every time. Still, what a time to be an enthusiast/photog, so many nice options. I should mention that I have only tested this full-frame lens using my astrophotography DSLRs, all of which are crop-sensor camera bodies. This has several advantages from less demanding tracking accuracy, to being able to use a lower ISO setting. thanks for the tiring patronising lecture and then agreeing with me.
Catholic Retreat Centers In Texas,
Why Did Vanguard Primecap Drop Today,
Felon Smith Obituary,
Paul Walker Last Photo,
Articles C