I've got the glass acquisition itch again... this is triggered in part as I just sent away my 450D to get it converted to full spectrum (UV to IR, although rumour has it Canon sensors don't do UV). One main application will be astrophotography, and to help in that I'm debating getting a fast prime, in the ball park of 135-200mm. In this context, fast means faster than f/2.8. 135mm is really on my lower limit so going shorter is not an option.
Sticking to Canon initially, there's the 135mm f/2 which is my 1st choice I think. Great sharpness reviews all round, will be used on crop so vignetting should be manageable. I've not managed to establish so far how it fares on coma. The other choice of course is the 200/2 but that's rather outside my budget!
So now to open it out, what else is out there? Not sure the Nikon equivalent of the 135/2 offers any advantage, nor is their 200/2 any more affordable. Is there anything in the medium format or other systems in this ball park I should look at?
Hi,
In manual lenses there was Zeiss, Sigma 135mm f1.8, and Porst 135mm f1.8 (M42), but I guess Canon 135 f2 is better lens than last two. In other brands there is Zuiko 150mm f2, accoording to reviews extremly good, and for the price of about 2000 - 2200USD, so almost twice as Canon's 135mm. Not sure, if something else exists.
A.
I forgot my beloved Pentax <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> - there is manual A*135mm f1.8, that used goes for more than new Canon's 135 f2, and K135mm f2.5 (about 200USD, tested here on PZ). Thinking about astrophotography new Pentax GPS unit is very usefull (works only with K5/K-r), check [url="http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2011/06/pentax-unveils-o-gps1-slrs"]here[/url]. There are some samples already on the web, and it really works.
A.
How about the excellent Zeiss 135mm f1.8 for Sony. Combined with the new A77 might be interesting due to the low camera shake(no moving mirror), and image stabilisation...
Just a guess.
The 135L is a quite affordable lens (especially when bought used).
If you don't need AF there are a number of lenses faster than f/2.8 in the
range 135mm to 200mm ... some are already mentioned ... like to add one
here ... the Tamron SP 180mm f/2.5 (Adaptall-2 mount) ... not easy to get,
since there are not many of it around, but it offers excellent image quality.
Just a thought ... Rainer
Thanks for the suggestions.
Pentax 135 f/2.5... there seems to be many models around. Are they the same? The reviewed "K" one seems unexciting. Can't find the f/1.8 in a quick look. I do agree the GPS unit looks like a handy accessory, combined with the K-r and a few lenses... the cost is adding up fast though. I'm not sure how much use I'd put it to though. Plus I'm not putting another body though astro conversion, if I can find anyone that does Pentax anyway.
Oly 150/2 - should be nice. Too expensive, plus I'd have to worry about image circle, mount conversion etc...
Sony/Zeiss 135 f/1.8, I had forgotten about that. It may be marginally "better" than the Canon f/2, but for the huge increase in price and requiring either a different body or mount conversion, is more pain than it is worth. The A77 definitely is not an option for it if I were to consider it. This is one application where the mirror ghosting is highly likely to show up and absolutely unacceptable at any level.
Tamron 180mm f/2.5 - looks interesting but I can't find one.
I guess I should add I already have the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro in this area, hence wanting something a bit faster. I'm not sure f/2.5 is faster enough, unless it was significantly better wide open than the Sigma.
So overall I don't think there sounds like anything that would sway me from the Canon 135/2. I found one used but it is hardly less than a new one. But is it worth it as I don't think I'd really have a use for it outside astrophotography... I'm not sure. So expect to hear that I bought one tomorrow. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1315128068' post='11297']
Tamron 180mm f/2.5 - looks interesting but I can't find one.
I guess I should add I already have the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro in this area, hence wanting something a bit faster. I'm not sure f/2.5 is faster enough, unless it was significantly better wide open than the Sigma.
[/quote]
Yes, it is quite hard to get one.
Significantly better than a dedicated macro lens? ... That's unlikely, albeit the 180/2.5 is very good wide open.
f/2.8 -> f/2.5 is just one third f-stop ... so that's not really worth it.
Seems, your best choice is the 135L.
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1315065201' post='11277']
Sticking to Canon initially, there's the 135mm f/2 which is my 1st choice I think.[/quote]
Stick with it.
Got the 135/2 sitting next to me now <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> Can't try it until this evening though... although for the astrophotography use I ideally still have to wait for modified 450D to be returned hopefully within a week or so, and I still need a replacement polar finder scope to replace one I broke last time I used it.
I did use the ad link to buy this so hopefully the referral fee went through ok.
If you used a camera capable of clean high ISOs you could do away with f/2.8 glass, and canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non is is wonderful for a start. There are plenty of manual lenses around 200/2.8 and an odd bargain of 300/2.8 although you really have to hunt for it. Really, upgrade to 5D II or 1DIV (or D3s should you fancy) and you'll have more options.
[quote name='DTR' timestamp='1315865140' post='11527']
If you used a camera capable of clean high ISOs you could do away with f/2.8 glass, and canon 70-200mm f/2.8 non is is wonderful for a start. There are plenty of manual lenses around 200/2.8 and an odd bargain of 300/2.8 although you really have to hunt for it. Really, upgrade to 5D II or 1DIV (or D3s should you fancy) and you'll have more options.
[/quote]
For astrophotography, high ISO makes a lot less difference than you think. A lower value to maintain dynamic range helps there. Also by using a bigger sensor you will then be subject to the wider border characteristics.
If I were to go f/2.8, I see no reason to get anything other than the 70-200 IS II in the middle ground. The only reason I don't have it yet is I don't really have a use for it. I'm in no hurry to "go large" so will wait for the 5D3 as things have moved on since the 5D2 sensor generation. I used to have a 300/2.8L (non-IS) and that suffered from really bad vignetting even on crop sensor. And besides, I wanted a shorter focal length for this application.
Anyway, I did have one short break in the clouds with the moon far enough off for a quick test of the 135/2. That was a bit of a "wow" moment. Stars in corners remained as tight as the ones in the middle. I think I can get away with using this one wide open, or stopped down to f/2.8 if I need a bit more. I doubt any native f/2.8 lens of a similar focal length will match it there.