New lens but which one?

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Hi all,

I'm in the market for a new Canon or Canon fit and thought maybe you could help me decide and share some info about which lenses you think are good and not so good for AP.

Basically I have a budget of around $500AD but would most likely be spent in Euro or Sterling and if needs must I can add a little bit more to that but more than half. I'm also willing to get second hand if it would bring a lens down into that price bracket.

What I have in mind is a choice of two types of lens, a fisheye or a 200mm+ fixed/zoom but I have a few questions as well.

The fisheye seems to be the easiest to figure out as something like the Samyang 8mm is bang in the price range and is certainly something I want.

However....

• .....am I right in thinking that other brands like Vivitar, Bower, Polar, Falcon, Pro-Optic, Rokinon, Opteka, Walimex, etc are the exact same lens?
• Does the price differences between these have any effect on the optical quality or the build quality and is there any reason not to get one of the other brands?
• Also is there any other reson to consider a different fisheye lens that that?

The longer lens is where I have more difficulty narrowing it down, ideally I'd like a fixed length lens but that si starting to get pricey so I would consider a zoom if it was better than my current EOS EF AF 75-300mm 4.0-5.6 III Lens, which to be honest can't be all that hard. Something with less lens artifacts like CA, bloated flared stars,edge distortion etc. It doesn't have to be the best but just better than bad.

So I don't know here really as there is a lot of choice so the questions are a bit broader...

• Does anyone have the Canon EF-S 55-250mm and is it any good for the price?
• What other lens would be a good choice?
• Is it worth getting an older make lens with an adaptor maybe? Which one and what adaptors do they use?

That's all I can think of for now apart from what would you prefer to get if you had neither, short and wide or a longer focal length?

Thanks for reading.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

I assume this is all for astrophotography purposes or is it (also) for terrestial subjects ? They may not be complementary.

For purely Astro I'd be looking for an older APO. You'd be running the camera in manual mode regardless so all the fancy stuff is useless but a piece of good preloved Canon prime or even zoom APO glass is top notch. 135mm would be my ideal setup in that case. I'm not a Canon man but they do make some damn fine lenses.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Yes it's for astro work for the most part. I assume I'd assume I would try it out at one point or another or terrestial shots but if I'm honest I'm not worried about it's daylight performance. The fisheye maybe more so but it's probably more forgiving anyway.

I'll have a look around for some of the APOs, that's the L series no? Do the older models go by another name?
I take it by the price difference the Sigma APOs aren't up to the same standard.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Ok, I have found a few lenses that will fit into my price range and roughly the lengths I'm after. Does anyone have any info about these lenses and are there any there that I should steer clear of?

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

Are these two going to be any better optically than my current cheaper version or am I just paying for IS?

Canon EF 55-200mm f/4-5.6 II USM
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC - Canon Fit

Sorry for the list I'm just hoping I can whittle it down. Also are macro lenses any good for AP?

[naskies (Dave)]

In general, zoom lenses don't perform as well as fixed focal length lenses for astrophotography - especially amongst the consumer range of zoom lenses.

Almost all DSLR lenses (even the super expensive ones) will perform much better with the aperture stopped down by at least 1-2 stops. Thus, another disadvantage of zoom lenses is that if your maximum aperture is somewhat slow, such as f/4, you won't get good performance out of them until a very slow aperture such as f/8, and the subs will become too noisy.

Given your budget, here are a few good picks for astrophotography in my opinion:

* Canon 50 mm f/1.8 - very cheap, but performs surprisingly well
* Canon 85 mm f/1.8
* Canon 100 mm f/2.8 macro non-IS (the IS version is somewhat better, but also more expensive)
* Canon 135 mm f/2L
* Canon 200 mm f/2.8L II

These lenses are mostly within your (extended) budget, especially if bought second hand. Here's an example of what I've taken with the 135 mm:

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=91077

You'll find many, many more examples online of great astrophotos being taken with the above lenses.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

I have been considering the 200mm as well but it is at the upper, upper of my limit unless I can find one on ebay.
I do have the 50mm already also, which like you say is good for the price.

I realise that a fixed lens definately the better option but if I can find a reasonable zoom in budget I have to consider it so if I can find the best of a bad bunch then that's a start.

Or it leaves me with the fish eye and hold off of a longer lens until I can gather the funds.

[naskies (Dave)]

If you're keen to find a telephoto zoom, then I'd highly recommend the Canon 70-200 mm f/4L (non IS) - should be within your (extended) budget.

It's a very, very good lens that will blow the socks off all the other zooms you were considering.

You'd probably want to get a tripod collar ring too; the genuine Canon one is ridiculously expensive but you can get knockoffs pretty cheaply.

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

I know that these aren't actually in the focal range you are looking at, but......
In my stable of budget lenses, the ones I use for astro work are the Canon Nifty Fifty F1.8 and the Tamron 90mm Macro F2.8.

Both lenses are capable of capturing very good astro images when stopped down a couple of notches.
The 50mm needs a dab of blue tak on the focus ring to achieve fine focus. But hey, it works a treat especially when you consider how inexpensive the lens is.

I also love my 17-200mm Tamron as a day to day lens.( or dust cover as H. would call it. LOL ) When I go bush walking I pack it and the Tammy 90mm Macro.

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

Another option that you might not have considered for astro are Nikon manual focus prime lenses with a Nikon to EOS adapter.

For example the 200mm f4 AI lens that I have is a very nice lens that I have used for astro work (see here and here). By all accounts the 180mm f2.8 ED AI lens is even better (although more expensive).

I sourced my Nikon to EOS adapter from here

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Excellent images Richard and Dave

Thanks all for your suggestions, I have been thinking about it and the idea of a 100 or 135 fixed lens has grown on me, I have decided at least to cut it down to those two.
I've got till the end of the week to decide between that or a fisheye so I need to give it a bit more consideration yet.

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

A second hand Nikkor 135mm AI prime with a nikon-eos adapter also yields very nice images with a canon camera.

See here, here and here.

This lens also has a hard focus stop at infinity. Rotate the focus ring to the infinity stop for factory laboratory set infinity focus. Too easy.
(I checked mine with a Bahtinov mask just to make sure)

[pluto (Hugh)]

Originally Posted by naskies

then I'd highly recommend the Canon 70-200 mm f/4L (non IS).

Agreed, these lenses are very sharp and very well built.

[rmuhlack (Richard)]

Originally Posted by pluto

Agreed, these lenses are very sharp and very well built.

Agreed