Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Astrophotography and Imaging Equipment and Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 18-09-2007, 10:09 PM
[1ponders]'s Avatar
[1ponders] (Paul)
Retired, damn no pension

[1ponders] is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Obi Obi, Qld
Posts: 18,778
I just thought that if he brought it up here we could do a side by side with the 135 f2L and see if you still wanted the 100 after that
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 18-09-2007, 10:15 PM
dugnsuz's Avatar
dugnsuz (Doug)
to baldly go...

dugnsuz is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by [1ponders] View Post
I just thought that if he brought it up here we could do a side by side with the 135 f2L and see if you still wanted the 100 after that
You are a cruel man Paul!!!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 19-09-2007, 07:51 AM
Garyh's Avatar
Garyh
Amongst the stars

Garyh is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Glen Innes, N.S.W.
Posts: 2,839
Don`t know if you have seen these reviews Doug but I find them very good and in depth.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

All the lenses you have mentioned all look like keepers..
I went for a 200 2.8L and its a beauty! Would love to get the 85/1.8 or the 100/2. I don`t think you can go wrong with any one you get..
cheers
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 19-09-2007, 07:52 AM
davewaldo's Avatar
davewaldo
SE QLD

davewaldo is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Australia - Brisbane
Posts: 727
I'd love to come for a play and do some wide fields Paul! I'd also like to test our 70-200 f4L lens and even our 16-35 2.8L II lens (although I think the latter would be crap for astro).

Doug, the macro is the only non L lens we use, which is saying something. I have no experience with the other lenses you mention sorry.

Canon does however publish MTF graphs for all their lenses... if you look up these you should get an idea of the performance. Perhaps look up some L lenses so you can see what sort of graph you are aiming for.

Here is a link to the US canon site which has MTF graphs for their lenses:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...5&modelid=7400

Enjoy!

Dave.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 19-09-2007, 08:25 AM
dugnsuz's Avatar
dugnsuz (Doug)
to baldly go...

dugnsuz is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,200
Thanks all for the help,
It all now depends on someone buying my pentax DSLR on ebay!!!!!!
I think it's down to the 3 I mentioned above - 85mm, 100mm f2 and 100mm f2.8
Cheers
Doug
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 19-09-2007, 11:34 AM
dugnsuz's Avatar
dugnsuz (Doug)
to baldly go...

dugnsuz is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,200
Thanks Gary and dave for the links
Doug
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 20-09-2007, 07:09 PM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
Doug,

I've heard the 100f2 is very slightly better than the 85 f1.8 (a number of people on the digital_astro list have commented about this, I don't actually have either lens). Between the 100f2 and 100f2.8, if you didn't have a requirement for macro I would problably go with the 100 f2. Although the 100f2.8 is very sharp, it is quite a long bulky lens (its nearly the size of the 200 f2.8).

Terry
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 20-09-2007, 08:52 PM
dugnsuz's Avatar
dugnsuz (Doug)
to baldly go...

dugnsuz is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hahndorf, South Australia
Posts: 4,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by CometGuy View Post
Doug,

I've heard the 100f2 is very slightly better than the 85 f1.8 (a number of people on the digital_astro list have commented about this, I don't actually have either lens). Between the 100f2 and 100f2.8, if you didn't have a requirement for macro I would problably go with the 100 f2. Although the 100f2.8 is very sharp, it is quite a long bulky lens (its nearly the size of the 200 f2.8).

Terry
Agreed Terry,
the 100 f2 has a very small footprint() compared to the f2.8.
But I am still worried about the "horrific CA" commented on in many of the web reviews - those guys are commenting on bright objects in daylight, the stars are even more critical on lens flaws...so I worry!!!.
And, as IIS member Dave has stated - the f2.8 is the only non L lens they'll use at his pro studio...And!! that pic you took is a beaut!!!
Signed
Confused from Hahndorf
Doug
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 21-09-2007, 04:21 AM
CometGuy's Avatar
CometGuy
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
Doug,

Well I don't think you will be dissappointed with the 100 macro.

Terry
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 10:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement