Best DSLR lenses for tracked astrophotography?

[Lognic04]

Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone knew what the best (as in sharpness vs aperture) dslr (hopefully canon) lenses for tracked AP is? I have an ioptron sky tracker for my dslr, so wide-field pics aren't limited. I am looking for a lens that can do widefield , and a separate one for more telephoto (150mm +)
:question: :D :question:

[Atmos]

Samyang/Rokinon make some nice lens' for Nikon mounts but I am pretty sure they do EOS mounts as well. Well corrected but fully manual.

Sigma Art lens are also very nice d but very heavy and expensive.0

[JA]

Not sure about astrophotography, but for photographic uses Canon's 300 / f2.8 from least to most expensive (several hundred to several thousand, various types 1980s FD, 90s older L series, post 2000 L series) should be right up there with their best lenses (even their 400mm and 600mm) and are very sharp/contrasty. The 70-200 2.8 is also excellent and useful for other work: sports, portrait, etc... A good buy used also due to their solid mechanical construction. The Nikon 300/2.8 is also fantastic.

Good hunting and

Best
JA

FAMOUS Canon 300 2.8L shot of Henry Kissinger reading Top-Secret Document at UN in the 1970s from Newspaper photographer in gallery:
http://img1.imagilive.com/0516/Kissinger.PNG

[silv]

I have a Bower / Samyang / Walimex 500mm/6.3 (http://www.astrobin.com/search/?q=Samyang%20500mm%20f/6.3&search_type=0&license=0&license=1&license=2&license=3&license=4&license=5&license=6&telescope_type=any&telescope_type=0&telescope_type=1&telescope_type=2&telescope_type=3&telescope_type=4&telescope_type=5&telescope_type=6&telescope_type=7&telescope_type=8&telescope_type=9&telescope_type=10&telescope_type=11&telescope_type=12&telescope_type=13&telescope_type=14&telescope_type=15&telescope_type=16&telescope_type=17&telescope_type=18&telescope_type=19&telescope_type=20&telescope_type=21&telescope_type=22&camera_type=any&camera_type=0&camera_type=1&camera_type=2&camera_type=3&camera_type=4&camera_type=5)mirror lens.
Walimex sells a 2x teleconverter as well.
Pretty sheep. Pretty short. Pretty light weight.

Goes with the advantages and disadvantages of a mirror telescope with obstruction in the middle.
Star colours are fabulously natural.

You'd just need a T2-Adapter. But most brands sell it equipped for specific camera mounts, anyway.
I use it on my Sony NEX e-mount.

Difficult to find stuff through the life viewer, though, without finder scope or goto.
So I got a 14cm mounting plate and a smartphone holder. Now the smartphone sits side by side to the lens and I can use the Skysafari app to locate things and direct the ballhead towards it.

Haven't had the chance to work with that smartphone thing yet. But it should simplify the process a bit - in theory.

[silv]

Oh... speaking of which... same-ish price tag as the Walimex:

Kasai Pico-6 and Pico-8 are the latest astro toys! They're Mak telescopes, 60mm and 80mm respectively. Both with f/11.3 .

!!!

The Pico-6 has the same size as a beer can. :D

Look up on cloudynights. People have posted biutiful planet images taken with a Neximage or Zwo.

European distributor is Okularum (http://okularum.eu/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=42&search=pico)

The US-guys on cloudynights all ordered directly at Kasai (http://www.kasai-trading.jp/PICO8e.html).

Someone on CN assumes that Pico and Omegon MightyMak 60 and 80 are the same make.
Dunno.

[Lognic04]

Thanks everybody!
Colin i was thinking of getting a sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Was looking also at the 16mm /2.8 from rokiyang :lol: :D
JA i have heard good things about the 300mm 2.8. Are those nuclear codes?:eyepop: :P a 70-200 would also be good covering short tele (eg magellanic clouds) and up.
Annette I think the 500 and pico's are a bit tight for what i mainly want to do (nebulae) but i will have a go at galaxies sometime soon.Could come in handy! Cool scope though! :eyepop:

I was thinking of getting a shorttube 80 to get some extra magnification, possibly an ed refractor scope (80mm or something.)
:question::thanx::D

[zenith]

Hi Logan,
Attached are images showing what my 3 lenses captured on the same night from a dark location using a Canon 6D on a tripod (no tracking), and no adjustments to the pics except for downsizing/converting to jpg (they look pretty terrible compared to the originals!).

1) Samyang f2.8 14mm: 30 sec, ISO 2500, f4.
2) Sigma 24-105 Art f4: 20 sec, ISO 6400, f4 @24mm.
3) Canon 70-200mm L IS II USM: 8 sec, ISO 6400, F2.8 @70mm.
4) What they look like.

The Samyang is fully manual and has a fair bit of distortion. The Sigma is a nice lens which lives on my camera 80% of the time. The Canon is simply stunning but is quite heavy. I bought this lens with the plan of getting a tracking mount later on for wide field astro.

Let me know if you want any more info or example shots.
Cheers Tim.

[Camelopardalis]

+1 on the Canon 70-200mm zoom, it gives a nice range of focal lengths.

I have the f/4 version which I don't regret as the aberrations are just getting nicely controlled by f/4.

[gregbradley]

Wide angle:

Nikon 14-24 is probably largely still the king.
Sigma Art lenses - plenty of good shots shown here using the 35 Art.
Samyang 14 2.8 is a common choice and plenty of good examples on this site.
Pentax 67 lenses are cheap and with an adapter the 75 4.5, 165 2.8 and 300 4 are excellent. The Pentax 67 300 F4 EDIF lens is around $1000 and is hard to find but see Marco's excellent astrophotos using this lens. Its like a mini FSQ.
Nikon 50 1.8G is good, very sharp.

For Sony Zeiss Loxia 21, Zeiss Batis 18 and Zeiss Batis 25 are great for widefield. The Sony FE 55 1.8 is superb for a narrower view.

Generally speaking fast lenses are a waste for astro as no lens I have seen works ok below F2 without a lot of chromatic aberration and coma.
So don't be lured by fast lenses, they cost more and you have to stop them down anyway.

F4 is starting to get a bit slow for 30 second images but for 90 second exposures they should be fine. Canon 70-200 F4L may have too much CA wide open. Not 100% sure about that. The F2.8 model may be better there or the later F4L IS version.

But to be honest I haven't really seen too many great Canon lens nightscapes. Usually they use Samyang 14 2.8 or Sigma Art 35 or sometimes a Tokina (a bit more aberration though). Also generally speaking zooms are not your best choice, primes are.
Some Pentax Super Takumar 200 or 150 are good as well, Marc has done a lot with those and they look great.

Nikon 180 2.8 ED is good with an adapter for Canon.

Greg.

[Camelopardalis]

The three versions are practically identical at f/4 onwards, CA is low at f/4. IMO the f/2.8 version is a bit too light greedy, at least on a full frame, and vignettes horribly wide open. A couple of minutes is the charm at f/4.

[alocky]

Haven't seen anyone mention the Zeiss Sonnar 135mm. Easily the sharpest and best in this range. They are short enough to be tracked on a polarie. Here's an example.
http://www.astrobin.com/235968/
Cheers
Andrew.

[troypiggo]

If you're after sharpness and aperture and bang-for-buck, I'd go for a prime over zoom. The Canon 135mm f/2.0L is my fav with DSLR. Not sure how your tracker will go with lenses of focal length much longer than say 200mm.

The Samyangs are cheap, but my experience with the 14mm that the manual focus was a pain. I prefer to use APT for capture and focus. No point having a sharp lens if you can't absolutely nail focus, and using software for AF will always be sharper than hand/eye.

Some of my wide fields with 135L:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=123902
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=123928
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=123852
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=123833

[sil]

A thought, but Canon and Nikon each have competing lenses that are pretty much the staple diet of pros, being good lenses in all aspects so they rely on them. The 70-200mmm f2.8 is one such "must have" lens. These are lenses they have always had and they don't get updated often because there is little to improve on, its not like the megapixel race to suck in consumers. As a by product of this pro photographers often upgrade when an updated version does get released, its a tax write off and they get a new lens. Consequently around tax time and after a major lens release bargains of the previous versions can be picked up. I was prompted to make this post since Nikon have just announced an updated 70-200 f2.8 lens, so anyone interested in getting one should keep an eye out on price drops of existing stock of this lens. This phenomena occurs with the "legendary" (not consumer level) nikon and canon lenses, not stuff like Samyang or Tokina but you might get lucky on some Sigma.

[JA]

Here is a great resource to compare various lenses from most manufacturers:
http://www.lenstip.com/index.html?test=obiektywu&producent=&model=&typ=0&moc=0&sort=&szukaj=Search&szukaj=Search&przetest=1

Go to the review and then Section 4 "Image resolution". On some (most?) lenses you will find detailed resolution measurements (in lines/mm v aperture) at centre & edge of frame (sometimes for FF & crop). In relation to the original question of something for your Canon - circa upto 150mm+, and as already suggested the Canon 70-200 / 2.8 L performs incredibly well in resolution/perceived sharpness even when compared to primes in the same focal length range. Of course if you want the widest possible aperture (1 to 2 stops faster) then primes it is.

Best
JA

[GaryPlum]

I use my 14mm 2.8 Sammy for widefield and Aurora
https://www.flickr.com/photos/garphoto/19999195813/in/album-72157641242899133/
24mm 1.4 for widefield too, 8 image pano:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/garphoto/19991249261/in/album-72157641242899133/
And a real gem on a small tracker the 135mm 2.0
https://www.flickr.com/photos/garphoto/20539560168/in/album-72157641242899133/
And:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/garphoto/29920905374/in/album-72157641242899133/
:thumbsup:

[Atmos]

I had my Nikkor 85mm F/1.8G under the stars for re first time last weekend and it performs VERY well. Suffers from a bit of chromatic aberration at F/1.8 but VERY little coma even when wide open.

[DaveNZ]

I have a Zeiss 135mm f2.0 ZE APO. Works very well wide open for astro. It is rather heavy - all metal construction.

I use it on my 5d4 and A7R2 (with a metabones adapter) for terrestrial. Also works well on QHY8Pro. I need to get a canon adapter for my QSI683.