ICEINSPACE
Most Read Articles
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON Waxing Gibbous
81.4%
The Sun Now
Time Zones
Sydney*
7:23 am
Perth
4:23 am
Auckland*
9:23 am
New York
3:23 pm
Paris
9:23 pm
GMT
8:23 pm




  #1  
Old 26-10-2018, 07:32 AM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Best 150 to 250 lens for Canon full frame?

I have a Sigma APO 150 mm f/2.8 that I use to my Canon full frame EOS 6D. It's good and I'm satisfaid with it.

But what alternatives are there. The Canon 200 f/2.8L has always had a good reputation. But how is it today, are there other lenses that out perform the Canon 200 lens or my Sigma 150 mm lens?

It should have a focal length of about 150 to 220 mm, not too heavy, f/4 is enough if it perform well. Low vignetting even at full frame.

What is the shortest focal length APO tripple lens telescope, included field flattener for full frame. I think I have seen one with 350 FL. But even if I find one I think they will be too heavy and clumsy.

It shall be a part of my astro travel equipment.

Any ideas?

Just as I know for the future.

This is what I have today:
http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/...n-cluster.html

I need to practise more to polar align the Star Adventurer.

/Lars

Last edited by Astrofriend; 26-10-2018 at 09:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 26-10-2018, 02:44 PM
markas (Mark)
Registered User

markas is offline
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 247
Lars,


Don't know of Canon 200 APO, but the Canon 200 f/2.8L MkII is a very good lens. I think it is one of the best L series lenses in the Canon line-up. I have not used it for astro work, but for landscape it is outstanding.


Mark
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 26-10-2018, 10:09 PM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your reply, that was the lens I ment, edited my last thread to be correct.

But the question, how does it perform today relative others, Sigma, Tokina etc does the other perform better today relative the Canon lens hen using them as an astrograph?



And if looking for a smaller telescope/astrograph like these:

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/...ag-ota/p,57322

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/...ld-ota/p,53101

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/...b_bar_0_select

https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/...ue-ota/p,55190

I have no experience of that kind of telescopes, anyone who have experience from them?

How does it perform realtive a Canon 300 mm f/4L lens?

It still a bit too big for me, but curious to know.

Lars
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 27-10-2018, 09:04 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14,793
They all look like the same manufacturer is making them with different brandings. But the ones that say FPL53 would be the ones to consider. It should be superior to Lanthanum.

45mm should be good enough for a full frame camera but I would check if the 2.5 inch focuser is wide enough. It may be.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 27-10-2018, 11:38 AM
RickS's Avatar
RickS (Rick)
PI cult recruiter

RickS is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 10,465
The Borg 55FL f/3.6 has a focal length of 200mm. I have one on order that should be shipping next week.

https://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech...gPackage/2.htm

Cheers,
Rick.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 27-10-2018, 03:52 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 6,136
While you may not like the price, Canonís 200mm F2.0 L series is one of the sharpest lenses, if not the sharpest, Canon make. Itís an awasome piece of glass.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 27-10-2018, 08:10 PM
skysurfer's Avatar
skysurfer
Dark sky rules !

skysurfer is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: 52N 6E (EU)
Posts: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
While you may not like the price, Canon’s 200mm F2.0 L series is one of the sharpest lenses, if not the sharpest, Canon make. It’s an awasome piece of glass.
But the slightly dimmer (but yet bright 70mm aperture) 200mm f/2.8L is a very good performer for only a fraction of the price.
New about A$1000, but lots of second hands.

I have had it, but sold it to help fund my more versatile 100-400L.

An alternative is the 70-200 2.8L, ultra sharp, but costs more than double.

And here example pics I made in 2016 with the Canon 6d and this lens: Crux - LMC - Gamma Cygni Nebulas.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (Crux-23x2min-20160301.jpg)
205.6 KB24 views
Click for full-size image (LMC-16x4min-20160301.jpg)
215.8 KB29 views
Click for full-size image (sadr-200-20x120sec-20150723.jpg)
224.4 KB24 views
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 27-10-2018, 11:03 PM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Hi all,
What a lot of replies! Thanks a lot!

One thing I must say about advantage to have a camera lens with built in motor. It's very pratical when you control it from a smartphone. No vibrations and the motor is already there without extra cost. I recently started to use this remote controlling app, now adicted to it :-) This is only when I travel with the equipment, for permanent setup I have others.

But still, do I get better performance from a telescope, then lets say the Canon 200 2.8L ?

Most telescopes that I have looked at have about the twice focal length so there is a difference so it can't be compared directly.

@Greg,
I have a 3" focuser on my TS130 APO refractor, from the beginning it was equipted with a 2.5" field flattener with reducer, very sharp but didn't work at all with a full frame sensor. Now I have a 3" field flatter without reducing. Sharp all the way out to the corner and more. Almost no vignetting. Very satisfaid. So I will say that at least a 2.5" focuser but better with a 3" to be prepaired for the future.

@Rick,
The Borg intstruments has always faschinated me, but no of my friends have one and can't tell how well it perform. Let us know when you get it delivered!

@Peter,
Yes! But can I use it at f/2 or do I have to set it down to f/2.8 or f/4 when using full frame to have it under control for shaprness and vignetting? Anyone used it for astrophotographing?

@Skysurfer,
Maybe I one day by that Canon 200 f/2.8L lens. It could be very interesting to see a full frame master flat from a lens like that, with different apertures, f/2.8 and f/4. Very interesting to see your astrophotos with the zoom lens.

Once I had the Sigma APO 70-200 mm f/2.8 zoom, it was very sharp, almost as good as my Sigma APO 150 mm f/2.8. But it was of a older design, maybe not the optics but the electronics that control it. It had problem with digital cameras. It was heavy, but with that lens I only had to brought with me one lens, very pratical. But my mind say to me, don't use zoom lenses for astro, in this case I was maybe wrong.

This is a lens that I for many years had have thoughts over to buy, the Pentax 67 300 f/4 ED lens:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensrev...m-F4-Lens.html

I don't get the focus motor then and the motor is something I'm today appreciate a lot.

Now I'm very eager to do a test with my Pentax medium format lens. Not for the sharpness, more other aspects that give me more experiences for the future.

I have added more text and photos about my vignetting test here:
http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/...vs-pentax.html

/Lars
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-12-2018, 11:06 PM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Hi,
What I have seen from my very simple test all 35 mm lenses has not so good vignetting at f/2.8 on full frame camera. At least if I compare what good result I get from my medium format Pentax 67 165 mm f/2.8 lens.

When looking at the data of the Canon 200 mm f/2.8L lens are about the same as my Sigma APO 150 mm f/2.8 lens. And a bit too expesensive to buy just to see if there are any differences, the focal length is almost the same as the one I already have.

The last weeks I got my Star Adventurer to be much better polar aligned with help of an angled viewer connected to the polar scope. Maybe I shall have a complement with a 300 mm lens instead?

The viewfinder test:
http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/...iewfinder.html

I have many times looked at the Canon 300 mm f/4 L lens. But not sure if it's perfect for astro photographing, anyone with experience from that lens? I must work at full opening, f/4. I don't like the rays I get when stopped down the aperture, maybe I can stop down with an external hole in front of the lens, but I need all light I can get with high quality.

With my new experience with remote controlling of the Canon camera from smart phone I must say: For lenses I use when travelling with astro equipment I must have a built in focus motor. A telescope will be too complicated with an external focuser and heavy.

http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/...e-control.html

/Lars

Last edited by Astrofriend; 12-12-2018 at 06:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 15-12-2018, 03:30 PM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,356
I’m experimenting (so far, only one night!) with a WO Z61+flattener on my Star Adventurer. It’s pretty lightweight yet well built, and relatively inexpensive compared to many alternatives.

Initial results are promising although I need to work on the balance situation, which will hopefully help it guide better. Guiding being necessary because the scope is f/5.9.

I also use a Canon 70-200 f/4, which is versatile but no match for a good prime. On my (so far only one) aforementioned experiment, I used the 70-200 as the guide scope...so the SA would have been pretty close to its payload limit.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 16-12-2018, 12:00 AM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Hi Dunk,
It will be interesting to follow your experiment. Do you have full frame or C-crop sensor?

I think full frame can be difficult with small telescopes. At least I had a lot of problem until I got it correct with my 5" telescope.

/Lars
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 16-12-2018, 09:27 AM
that_guy's Avatar
that_guy (Tony)
Local Korean Millennial

that_guy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gold Coast
Posts: 1,845
I'm getting up to 4 min guided shots with my evostar 72ed with flattener + 5d mk ii. I use the minizwo 30f4 guidescope which weighs nothing. Not bad pretty good.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 16-12-2018, 11:02 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14,793
I have used similar. The Pentax 67 55, 75, 165, 300mm.
I currently have the 300mm 645 F4 EDIF and its a wonderful lens.
I am using it with a FLI camera which has an APSh sensor:

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/167787458/large

Its cheaper than 67 300mm F4 EDIF. I also got the extender for it to extend it to about 420mm.

I may at some point get the 300mm 67 ED version as it may suit my Proline 16803 better. I have the 300mm 67 non ED version and its fine for narrowband.

Greg.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Astrofriend View Post
Hi all,
What a lot of replies! Thanks a lot!

One thing I must say about advantage to have a camera lens with built in motor. It's very pratical when you control it from a smartphone. No vibrations and the motor is already there without extra cost. I recently started to use this remote controlling app, now adicted to it :-) This is only when I travel with the equipment, for permanent setup I have others.

But still, do I get better performance from a telescope, then lets say the Canon 200 2.8L ?

Most telescopes that I have looked at have about the twice focal length so there is a difference so it can't be compared directly.

@Greg,
I have a 3" focuser on my TS130 APO refractor, from the beginning it was equipted with a 2.5" field flattener with reducer, very sharp but didn't work at all with a full frame sensor. Now I have a 3" field flatter without reducing. Sharp all the way out to the corner and more. Almost no vignetting. Very satisfaid. So I will say that at least a 2.5" focuser but better with a 3" to be prepaired for the future.

@Rick,
The Borg intstruments has always faschinated me, but no of my friends have one and can't tell how well it perform. Let us know when you get it delivered!

@Peter,
Yes! But can I use it at f/2 or do I have to set it down to f/2.8 or f/4 when using full frame to have it under control for shaprness and vignetting? Anyone used it for astrophotographing?

@Skysurfer,
Maybe I one day by that Canon 200 f/2.8L lens. It could be very interesting to see a full frame master flat from a lens like that, with different apertures, f/2.8 and f/4. Very interesting to see your astrophotos with the zoom lens.

Once I had the Sigma APO 70-200 mm f/2.8 zoom, it was very sharp, almost as good as my Sigma APO 150 mm f/2.8. But it was of a older design, maybe not the optics but the electronics that control it. It had problem with digital cameras. It was heavy, but with that lens I only had to brought with me one lens, very pratical. But my mind say to me, don't use zoom lenses for astro, in this case I was maybe wrong.

This is a lens that I for many years had have thoughts over to buy, the Pentax 67 300 f/4 ED lens:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensrev...m-F4-Lens.html

I don't get the focus motor then and the motor is something I'm today appreciate a lot.

Now I'm very eager to do a test with my Pentax medium format lens. Not for the sharpness, more other aspects that give me more experiences for the future.

I have added more text and photos about my vignetting test here:
http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/...vs-pentax.html

/Lars
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 16-12-2018, 03:56 PM
RickS's Avatar
RickS (Rick)
PI cult recruiter

RickS is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 10,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astrofriend View Post
@Rick,
The Borg intstruments has always faschinated me, but no of my friends have one and can't tell how well it perform. Let us know when you get it delivered!
Hi Lars. Here's the first light image for the little Borg: http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...d.php?t=171498

Cheers,
Rick.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 17-12-2018, 07:52 AM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Hi,
@Tony:
What field flattener do you have? My experience is that it is very difficult to get an image with low vignetting and sharp stars all the way out to the corner at full frame.

@Greg:
The Pentax 67 & 645 ED lenses I always read that they deliver top quality for normal photographing, good to hear that they deliver also in astrophotographing. I know a Pentax 67 ED 400 f/4 for sale.

@Rick:
What a lot of details, no one sales the Borg in Sweden nowadays, have to import then with taxes and customs fees.

Lot of planning here and I have decided to my light weight mount it must be with a focus motor, then only Canon, Sigma etc lenses are avalible.

Earlier I also put in an offer on a Canon 400 mm f/2.8, very used but with good optics, didn't get it. I don't think this lens is usable at f/2.8, more f/4 at full frame. But this is also a bit to big to my portable equipment. Max 300 mm and f/4. It was more that it had been fun to have a lens like that once a lifetime.

My permanent EQ6 and TS 130 f/7 I maybe can have an extra shorter telescope or lens in parallel with. In that case I can have a separate focus motor when the weight and simplicity is not that important. Here the Pentax 67 ED 400 f/4 lens fit perfect.

I have been prepared now one week to take photos of comet 46P/Wirtanen, clouds every night.

Luckely I have other hobbies than astronomy :-)

/Lars
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 17-12-2018, 02:33 PM
Camelopardalis's Avatar
Camelopardalis (Dunk)
Drifting from the pole

Camelopardalis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astrofriend View Post
It will be interesting to follow your experiment. Do you have full frame or C-crop sensor?

I think full frame can be difficult with small telescopes. At least I had a lot of problem until I got it correct with my 5" telescope.
Hi Lars, I have both, but so far only tested with APS-C. Next experiment, when the clouds go away, is for the full frame. The scope was designed with a full frame flattener so itíll be interesting to see how it looks.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 17-12-2018, 04:09 PM
that_guy's Avatar
that_guy (Tony)
Local Korean Millennial

that_guy is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gold Coast
Posts: 1,845
The flattener i use is the dedicated flattener that screws on to the focuser. It seems to be the same model as the ed80 with a different thread adapter. It has an imaging circle greater than full frame so vignetting is minimal to none existant (depending on spacing)
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 17-12-2018, 05:27 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14,793
Autofocus is not useful in doing nightscapes nor deep sky. Its all manual focusing.

Will your 6D focus in the centre point in near darkness?

That would be handy but not really that valuable with mirrorless. Its very easy to focus on bright stars with a mirrorless camera with magnified view and high ISO. Takes only a few seconds in manual focus.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 17-12-2018, 10:05 PM
Astrofriend's Avatar
Astrofriend (Lars)
Registered User

Astrofriend is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 128
Hi Greg,
Was it I who said I used the autofocus? Couldn't find it.

When I doing autofocus with my Canon 6D I can only use the inherent autofocus system in Canon camera and auto foucus lenses on Moon and get good results. Other wise I use ATP that control the camera and the focus motor and take photos one by one and compare and analyze them for best focus position. Never tried that method with camera lenses even if some people say it should work. But I can see when I using my Sigma APO lens which is sharp that it's very sensitive to temperature changes.

Here how I focus with Canon and ATP, in this case just manually but with the important temperature compensation:
http://www.astrofriend.eu/astronomy/...tor-focus.html


/Lars
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
apo, canon, full frame, lens

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Interest Free Finance
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Atik Horizon
Advertisement
SkyWatcher WiFi Adaptor
Advertisement
SkyWatcher 2018 Catalogue
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
FLI Cameras and Imaging Accessories
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement