(purchased for $1,625), reviewed January 27th, 2010 Just like the above samples, most are just bad. However, all the reviews were made by nature and sports photographers, and I would like to find out more about their performance in astrophotography. A promising start, no doubt, but not a master yet! Amazing sharpness wide open at F2.0 and the focus ring is nice and firm not tight you don't really need to tape it down for astrophotography. I actually have to walk 1/2 way up the stairs to be able get folk in the frame. Samyang should definitely make 135 f2 with the same optical formula and AF for Sony EFF and also Nikon F plus Canon EF mount if possible. Perhaps this impression of unreal sharpness is strengthened by the contrast to the extremely creamy bokeh you typically get in the same photo. I would never shell out hundreds of euros for a 135 prime let alone one with manual focus. Images that sing. Heh, it's amazing how far Samyang has come since this article (I'm loving their 45 & 75 f1.8), and kinda amusing that they ended up delivering exactly what you asked for Kinda reminds me of that article by Roger Cicala about how long lens development takes. I would recommend buying it used if you want to save some money, with the added benefit that you can re-sell it at the same price as you bought it for, effectively giving you the opportunity to "rent it" for free. I need fast auto-focus, predictable focus lock and natural, vibrant color rendition. No telephoto lens, and no apochromat, is sufficiently corrected to accomodate such a wide spectral range. In the highest contrast situations there's a hint of both purple and green fringing but both are minor and easy to remove with software. Definitely now on my to-buy list. Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. Perhaps I missed it, but did you use a clip-in light pollution filter with your 60D and this lens? By far the best one is the Tiffen Haze 2 filter. People mistake "Bokeh" to blurry background, what is very very common mistake. It seems they are now quite comparable in quality to prime lenses. At least not in my camera (Sony A6000), the focal length in a crop sensor does not make it very suitable for portrait, the photo detail is something else, but without AF that type of photography with that focal distance and at least 80 cm of the subject it requires too much dedication, with how comfortable the DMF approach mode is for that type of photography Also in my mount it does not have any communication with the camera (it does not have a chip, it only has it for Nikon). I think the readers would welcome contributions from other members' experiences. thanks for the tiring patronising lecture and then agreeing with me. Particular properties of modern 135/2 lenses are resolution with e.g. After a three-year hiatus, we've been at the return of the CP+ camera show in Yokohama, Japan. One thing I am most stun is its AF performance. f/2! Super Sharp.Super Fast AF. f/2, fast-accurate-silent focus, (relatively) small & light, super sharp!! I just purchased a very lightly used Canon 200mm F2.8L II USM for $620 from a great online dealer and can't wait for an opportunity to try it out with my Astronomik CLS clip on a T4i at a dark site. Take care not to confuse this lens with the 200mm F4 SMC Takumar 6x7 which has a different optical configuration, and which I have never tested. 1. Excellent build quality, fast auto focus, and its fast. If You can afford it, buy it! Thanks.. In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. Used on a crop body the results are still splendid but you gain on DOF, making it a great combination for wedding/event and ambient/available light. Sure, if you scroll through his page there are quite a few lens tests on starshttps://www.flickr.chotos/ytoropin/, Community Forum Software by IP.BoardLicensed to: Cloudy Nights, Article: The Best Telephoto Lenses for Astrophotography, This is not recommended for shared computers, Review of Explore Scientific First Light 8, COUNTING SUNSPOTS WITH A $10 OPTICAL TUBE ASSEMBLY, Hubble Optics 14 inch Dobsonian - Part 2: The SiTech GoTo system, iStar Opticals Phantom FCL 140-6.5 review. If you want autofocus and great value for money, buy the Canon 135mm, as it has almost the image quality of the Samyang, and you can get it for under $1,000 new. The Rokinon 14mm F/2.8 was the first lens I had ever used like this, and these aspects do not hinder the astrophotography experience whatsoever. Or is there a use case for fitting the Samyang 135mm to a Panasonic gx85 (or Panasonic gh5) ?? But you just know that there is the professionalism that is lacking here -- and the writer's Instagram page confirms that. I am not really looking at buying anything else, though. Youll never have to worry about losing your position just by touching the lens, but you can always tape the position down to be sure. Taking images at this focal length from the city will swell issues with gradients, especially when shooting towards the light dome. But even better BOKEH is the SAL-135F2.8F4.5 STF (Smooth Trans Focus ) which has even better BOKEH, albeit a manual focus lens. They were not however designed to be bokeh monsters though that was just a side effect of making them fast and people bought them for speed with bokeh being the afterthought so not Bokeh for the sake of Bokeh as he said. It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. (purchased for $890), reviewed October 21st, 2005 Sure, that would be swellbut it doesn't matter with regard to how it performs. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. The Precious - sharp images, fast focus, perfect weight, reference-quality build. In this review, however, I am using the lens on a crop sensor (APS-C) Canon EOS 60Da, which puts the field of view at 12.4 degrees. A single, 90-second exposure using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. One of my very best lenses! When the aperture is stopped down to 37mm using step-down filter rings, this lens produces incredibly tiny pinpoint star images from edge to edge. Canon CR-N700 4K PTZ Camera with 15x Zoom. Yeah I agree that the sentiment that they were designed to be used stopped down is wrong as they were designed to be used wide open because they had to be for speed (my point above). Sigma 105/2.8 DG EX Macro (very sharp at infinity) I have had a blast with a samyang, but a used 135mm f2.8 is VERY . This allows for less aggressive camera settings for night photography such as using a lower ISO setting and shorter exposure. This is one of my all time favourites. Colour and contrast is great. The lens has 14 stops when turning the aperture. Any experience with this camera and would this lens be a good fit? Several functions may not work. Amazing colours, contrast, bokeh, everything! Defocus control enables the photographer to use an aperture of f/4 for the subject and to adjust the amount of background blur or the amount of foreground blur. In this review, however, I am using the lens on a crop sensor (APS-C) Canon EOS 60Da, which puts the field of view at 12.4 degrees. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. In fact, a light-weight 200/2.8 seems more interesting to own (e.g., the Minolta 200/2.8). Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. No telephoto lens I tested, nor my TSAPO65Q, was suitable for use with a DSLR "clear glass" modified to include deep red and IR. Typical L construction. I have the Sony SaL 135F1.8 Zeiss Lens and think that is excellent. FULL FRAME TELEPHOTO 135mm F2.0 The Canon 135mm f/2 is no less impressive on a full-frame camera. This lens is available on Amazon for most camera bodies. I know this is a very old article but I was re reading as I mulled over this very point (85/1.4 vs 135/1.8) and I've gotta point out this math is all wrong First off 85->135 is a 1.6x crop and a 1.6x crop will yield 16MP on 42MP bodies (42 / (1.6x1.6) ), ~20MP on the A1, and ~24MP on the A7R IV. As rest you do just by cropping or stitching. Let's the games begin! Crazy fast AF! What is it like shooting with one today? What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? I have found myself shooting wide open almost all the time. You can use Stellarium to preview the image scale with the 135mm lens and your DSLR. You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. An h-alpha filter would still be useful for your D500, but much more so if it were modified! I love this lens, The Sharpest Lens available for Eos cameras IMO Bottom line, this is just an outstanding lens by any measure, one that makes clear why you'd want to pay the freight for expensive prime glass. To me it is a dead spot between 85 and 200. As soon as e.g. I use it routinely in preference to many other multicoated filters I tested, including the new Hoya MC UV. Focus throw. Thanks to you I got a Rokinon 14mm f2.8 and a 24mm f 1.4 and am considering this lens at the moment, but wonder how it compares to the Canon 135 mm f/2. I have a Nikon d 500. Canon's 700-200 zooms have IS and are weather sealed two features that the 135 f/2 lacks. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC is one of the most affordable and practical lenses for astrophotography on the market. This photo was captured with the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens using a UV/IR cut filter and a QHY168C dedicated astronomy camera. Also type the lens you are interested in into the search window on Astrobin to see examples shot with that lens. This is perhaps because I'm more of a zoom guy (I have the trio of Canon f2.8 L zoom lenses, with coverage from 16mm to 200mm), and I didn't see that big a difference between my 70-200 f2.8 and my 135 f2except I could cover a lot more with my zoom than I could with a prime. (purchased for $650), reviewed June 6th, 2008 I think they are an outstanding value for any wide-field astrophotographer, and are particularly suitable for newcomers. They account for much of the disagreement that we see on-line (but not for the rudeness and viciousness of some of it). Rudy, why didn t you include any L lenses from canon? when you hold the lens in your hand you know you are holding a fine peice of optical equipment. Any good ones apart from the Big Boys. The original poster is right that it was a compromise though and stopping down was necessary for critical sharpness and a better image. Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. For my purposes, this is a spectacular lens. For portraits and with a high MP body I'd be more inclined than ever to just go 85mm, and for other uses it's hard to pass up the zooms' versatility, but I still there's still room for 135s in some kits and some formats. It's small, light, cheap and extremely wide but is it any good? Beware others critical comments here about how flat these images look, the author has chosen specific topics and viewpoints to highlight f2 with this lens, so see the wow review for what it is please and the negative comments need placing in context. A coupe of stage shows, one very recent, and a random collection using this lens exclusively Here is a recent ones taken with the canon xs and a lens. We take OM System's new 90mm prime F3.5 macro lens out and about around Seattle, in search of sunlight, people and very tiny things to get up close and personal with. http://www.astrovale-f-2/index.html, Hi Lord_Vader, Thanks.. or.. Clear Skies! Another article that I read only the headline and saw a couple of samples then jumped directly to comments. Chris referred to the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM as 'a little gem'! Test Notes It starts out very sharp at f/2.0, gets even sharper at f/2.8, and softens only slightly at f/11. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). Must have if you're serious about portraits. Without the blurb I would have taken it as a 24 hour news studio shot with back projection or a cut and paste layer.The other stuff is really nice though. Focal length is great. I understand the optical design is quite old. Litepanels Studio X2 Bi-Color LED Fresnel Light. The few occasions I use a 135 FL usually are landscape shots (where I have no use for f2) and childrens playing (where I need zoom and fast af). The best of them, Nikon's 70-200E, is just as sharp all but the very best primes - ie, already too sharp for most portrait work. I think prime users get too used to the idea of bokeh as the only answer. Panasonic 35-100mm f2.8. Nice image, andysea. Thats quite a jump from 135mm, so the camera body you use with this lens may change the types of targets you shoot. 21P Giacobini Zinner NGC1499 California Barnard 8 Cr399 Coathanger North America and Pelican Veil nebula HORGB M11 cluster area I cant seem to find this documented anywhere. In 3 months I got loosy focus ring. If this was used to shoot video you would think that the first image was using a green screen. I liked the extra versatility of the zoom and the ability to shoot at 200mm. OK guysTOS rule number one "Posts that are not respectful of other individuals (be they members or not) are not welcome here.". If I got this lens, would it make more sense long term to get the Canon mount with a E mount adaptor so I could fit it more easily to a dedicated astro camera later? This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. @ Juksu - you're pathologically clueless. With weather sealing this would be a 10. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. They create a beautiful, mesmerizing dreamscape in their photos, and their secret weapon, besides an impeccable sense for aesthetics, is the 135mm F2 lens. I'm thinking a modern (but expensive) Nikon 200mm f/2.0, 300mm f/4 or f/2.8 or a Borg telephoto/telescope would all be very good. Last time I used a 135mm f2 was decades ago on a Canon F1. (purchased for $890), reviewed July 17th, 2006 There's literally no story!#6: Purple Flower.The isolation works because it's the only color. The article was based on the numerous lenses with which I have personal experience - that is naturally limited. All content, design, and layout are Copyright 19982023 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Along with improvements in telescope mounts, camera technology, filters, and digital image processing, these have allowed amateurs to produce astrophotographs of nearly professional quality. Because of some residual chromatic aberration even with the aperture stop, the best focus lies not where the star image is the smallest, but rather just slightly away from infinity, at the point where the star image barely begins to enlarge. I find neither the cat nor the duck particularly good. Build quality: excellent. Whats the best camera for around $2000? The RedCat is deeper at 250mm, and after that, youre into 300-400mm territory which pulls galaxies and nebulae even closer. But that 10Mpix is more than enough to make a very good A3-A2 size print, but your technique needs to be very good as even slight misfocus is even more visible and the rendering faults as well. They're heavy, and expensive, but you can carry one lens instead of three, and can vary the compression and field of view to a significant degree - from nearly normal, to long portrait focal lengths. Several days ago another member posted a stunning telephoto image of the Snake Nebula, Barnard 72, taken with a Canon lens which costs $12,000. There are only a handful of foolproof strategies for making a great photograph. My tests on it are described on http://pikespeakphoto.com/tests/canonlens135.html, i have never been a prime lens fan, just seems to leave you feeling trapped in a single dimension. - Actually though, it's performance is so good that you really have to consider it a bargain, even at the $800-900 street price. You get what you get.#4: Cat in Underbrush.That's pretty good.#5: Woman with Blanket.It's like a snapshot. Juksu, your point is well taken. Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. (For Nikon users there's the new 105mm too.). Samyang 135mm F/2 ED UMC Review (Camera Labs), Does a F/2.0 lens become F/2.8 when used on a crop sensor camera? Which is the better buy? A camera tracker (or star tracker) is necessary for long exposure deep-sky astrophotography, but a compact model such as the iOptron SkyTracker or Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer will do just fine. Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. So there - it is not a perfect object. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbrigham/314771597/ Rokinon 135mm F/2 Lens for ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. I had of course heard that this lens is supposed to be very sharp, but I had never before had such a full blown "wow" experience when reviewing the sharpness of a lens. I've been using a vintage FD 135/3.5 on my A7R IV as a compact tele option, often alongside a tiny Samyang 75/1.8. In this post, Ill explain why I think the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is the perfect addition to an arsenal of astrophotography lenses. Weight. (purchased for $800), reviewed March 15th, 2010 I really don't want to count all the pores - and the hairs coming out of them (eeeew!) enlarge. in the rain. Thanks, Chris, hi Trevor my name is sagar i have same lens but i have one question why lot of stars are appearing in my image which is taken thru rokinon 135mm, Your email address will not be published. Digital sensors are roughly 5 times as sharp as 400-speed film. The best 200mm lens is precisely the older 200mm F4 SMC Takumar, which comes with the M42 camera thread, and requires the M42-EOS adapter. There are, of course, outlierssuch as the legendary unicorn lens Canon EF 200mm F2but that one isn't a great alternative unless you are cool with spending $5,700 and carrying around something about as wieldy as a fire hydrant. There is no doubt that the 135L deserves it excellent reputation for image quality. I'll take photo of Orion as soon as possible. The only downside with that lens is that it is manual focus, which might not be suitable for photographing sports or children. In fact, it might be fun to try! I found this highly restrictive for shooting indoors where there was seldom enough distance between me with my camera and my subject(s). These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best. It is so sharp it makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. :). Try to have eyes and nose / lips all in focus. And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? When i check a F stop chart, i see 15 stops if i count the main, and the secondary ones: 2, 2.4, 2.8, 3.3, 4, 4.8, 5.6, 6.7, 8, 9.5, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22. They seem to be really good for NB work. Large focus ring. (purchased for $900), reviewed December 14th, 2006 I love the lens for my modified Sony a6000! I have an old 135/2.5 Takumar that is not bad at all, for the price. I had a 70-200 f/4 that i used unstopped at 200 with awesome results. Another drawback is the focal length. Large hood. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.No disagreement here. It's not the most versatile lens, but it's very great for tight portrait shoots; background blur is creamy IMO; one of the best 'bokeh' lens. The EOS R6 II arrives in one of the most competitive parts of the market, facing off against some very capable competition. Contrasty but not harsh. SIx months on from buying it this has become my favourite lens ever, beating my previous favourite (Leica's 4th version of the 35mm Summicron for its M-series rangefinders). Back in 1999, Sony released the F505, their first digital camera with a Carl Zeiss lens. The lens hood is not petal-shaped, which is great news for those using this lens for astrophotography. A higher-res Blackmagic Studio Camera just dropped. The lenses I listed are certainly not the ONLY exceptional lenses made over the years. Read on to find out which you should be using and why! I've owned a few L lenses and while their USM motors have always been quick to snap in focus, this 135mm is on a different level. I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. I own a 135 since the film days (because you "had to have one" and could not afford much else), still have the zeiss Jena f3.5 M42 and even jumped for the zeiss f2.8 for my yashica when they were sold for next to nothing. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. If You can not, buy Canon EF 85/1.8, which delivers quite similar results. Not only does the Rokinon 135 add additional reach, but I can also now shoot at F/2, instead of F/4 on the Canon. Just place your subject against a distant background, and half of the job is done. I seems many people he are confused about the meaning of the word. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. its useful to keep in mind these bokeh circles are the result of light sources bright lamps from autos Christmas lights streetlamps etc and are seriously overused in articles on lenses with strong subject\ backround seperations, they approach parody in the way they characterise subject separation, for most purposes and in most portrait situations its less highlight dominant backrounds that grace a photo. Voting ends March 8, 2023. If you can afford it buy this lens, you will love it. There have been a lot of Tele-Tessars over the years. Some lenses are incurable. tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej Check them out for yourself! wew.. But this lens changed my mind. Im so new to all of this so thank you for your insightful and educational posts. On the 135/2 all you've got is the bare metal. I got mine for $60.00 on Craigslist but seen them on eBay for $100 and less all the time. Focal length: 135mm Maximum aperture: f/2.0 Lens construction: 10 elements in 8 groups Angle of view: 18 degrees Closest focusing distance: 3 feet Focus adjustment: Rear focusing system with USM Mount: Canon Filter size: 72mm Dimensions: 3.2 inches in diameter and 4.4 inches long Weight: 1.7 pounds Warranty: 1 year See more This summer I'm going to try the lenses out for LRGB images to see how they perform. Yes, each can produce different results (And that's why I keep and use several different lenses), but my point is that sharpness or bokeh are not the only factors for portraits -- sometimes it just comes down to convenience or price! Hey! You currently have javascript disabled. Simple fact is the Samyang 135/2 is a remarkably good lens for the price, and it offers a set of optical characteristics that typically cost 2-4x more. But I hardly used it in the 30+ years. This way you get both lenses with only one! Why take a step back from 250 to sit between the RedCat and the 24-105? Preaching to the choir! On a full frame body, I rely upon this lens and it does not disappoint. A lot of lenses today are better than anything money could buy in 1980. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. My work requires auto-focus. Selecting between it and the 200mm Takumar was not an easy choice but, in the end, I chose the Takumar because it seemed to have slightly better contrast. this lens typifies modern design being confined to sharpness, colour & bokeh. No rear seals - since the 17-40 Canon has added rear seals to L lenses, to help in weather sealing. When I got home and loaded the photo into Lightroom I was blown away by two things. You will get perfectly round star images if you use an aperture stop in front of the lens made of a series of filter thread step-down rings. Lots of older lenses no longer satisfy. Sharp without being harsh. modest cost for "L" series, wonderful optics and fast speed, nitpicking, but not a circular aperature and no weather sealing. Explore the sky, try frame some targets and see what works well with your DSLR and lens combination. But again i am just at the beginning and i also do not want to use now a telescope. Large emission nebulae like the California Nebula (pictured below) are a great choice for this focal length. Im a newbie at astro.. and photography in general really! You won't get the excessive background blurr -- which for the beginning photographer may actually be a good thing. I don't know about other photographers but I do not have many applications for this focal length. The aperture ring is marked with each f-stop, and you need to manually click through F/2 F/22 and watch the blades do their work. I hear great things about the Canon 200/2.8 L but do not have one. When stopped down to 49mm it really is indistinguishable from an APO, except it shows red chromatic aberration with modified cameras even with the UV/IR block or CLS-CCD filter. Built quality is wonderful, focus ring is well-damped. How about the sigma 50mm f1.4 Art? He loves photography, and runs a YouTube channel with tutorials, lens reviews and photography inspiration. Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. What I am trying to avoid is spending another $1,100 on a quality APO, and instead using my existing Nikkor 180mm ED lens with a Baader-modified Canon 450D that I just obtained. I own Samyang 135 f2 for Nikon Mount and indeed it is incredible value lens. Thanks for the fine article and the thought you put into it. Don't know what the young man uses as his camera, and if he has tried to keep the noise under control, or even tried to focus on the eyes of the mallard, or the cat (their eyes are not truly in focus). Whatever lens you pick in the end, you will make a great purchase. The OP admits he limited experience with lenses other than what he has. In the middle of the OM System lineup, the OM-5 promises yesterday's top-tier performance in a lighter, more compact body. Write your own user review for this lens. This is an amazing lens.Very sharp wide open and no improvement when stopped own. (purchased for $899), reviewed March 19th, 2012 This looks to be an excellent lens with fantastic results. The flat lens hood is great for taking flat frames after a night of astrophotography. I recommend the author change the title of his article from "The Best Telephoto Lenses." to "Some Inexpensive Telephoto Lenses I Have Tested" The original title generates a claim and expectation in the reader that his article can't support that leads to reader frustration and just more questions; why didn't you test this one or do this etc. The 135mm Rokinon with the Canon Rebel seems like a pretty good setup. Great looking lens, if you ever saw it from the front. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens. And if you want autofocus, I would recommend the Canon 135mm f2.0L, which is incredibly light for its performance at just 750g. The Rokinon 135mm F/2 ED UMC lens. "If you are a Nikon user, of course have a look at the Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC and compare it to the other lenses mentioned in this article. Im getting a samyang to use with my 60D. For example, the legendary Canon 85mm F1.2L weighs in at 1025g, and the Sigma 85mm F1.4 Art isn't too light either at 1130g. As it is it is earns a 9. Only con I can think of, and that may be a big one depending on how you plan to use the lens is the lack of weather sealing. Really, just an amazing lens, easily worth the $800-900 it commands on the street. Or just get a zoom that is 24-200mm and you are covered. These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. Creamy smooth bokeh. As you can see, the magnification of the lens used will dictate the type of projects you shoot. Samyang 85mm f1.83. I really wanted to use, and like, a 135mm f2 lens so I bought the Canon version. Although if Bokeh and sharpness is your thing and you can live with MF the Laowa 105mm f/2 Smooth Trans Focus (STF) is amazing. #light_bulb I would disagree. This creates an effective focal length of roughly 200mm, a useful magnification for a wide variety of astro-imaging scenarios. And you can even crop a 135 efl with today's sensors should you actually need it. I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. Image quality is great, it is tack-sharp wide-open even though for partraiture, a little bit of softness is needed. You might never need another lens in the overlapping range at 135mm there isn't much difference between the separation afforded by f/2 vs f/2.8, and the latest 70-200s are plenty sharp.