Celebrities Who Live In Rhinebeck, Ny, Articles C

You may need to stop down to control star bloat, and thats exactly what Ive done with this 135. Deserves to be in the camera hall of fame. I almost bought one, but couldn't manage that focal length and DoF with moving subjects and manual focus. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. The lens shows a very slight pincushion distortion, but it's well under 0.1% of frame height, an excellent performance by any measure. The 135mm f/2.0 ED UMC Lens for Canon EF Mount from Rokinon is a manual focus telephoto prime lens useful for portraiture and all medium telephoto applications. In fact, a light-weight 200/2.8 seems more interesting to own (e.g., the Minolta 200/2.8). Still, all things considered, I prize this lens very highly and can not imagine giving it up. Recently, the FAA announced that recreational drone pilots in the USA can request LAANC authorization to fly in controlled airspace at night. I have an old 135/2.5 Takumar that is not bad at all, for the price. Not rude at all, a fair comment. It is good to know that the 200/4 SMC Takumar is good. Looking forward to allow purchasing the Canon 200mm f/2.8L II USM. 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. There is no agreement about what Bokeh means. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. I am telling them - don't! If the telescope mount is precisely aligned to the celestial north pole, unguided exposures of one to two minutes are possible. Used with a FF body the DOF can be unforgiving, but if you nail focus the results can be magnificent. Every different lens design has different "bokeh" even when the lenses are by specs same, like Canon 135mm f/2 vs Samyang 135mm f/2 are both same, but both render differently, even when both have same DOF. One way to combat potential soft images and chasing perfect focus all night is to stop the lens down to F/2.8 or even F/4. Digital camera types . Zoom lenses are entirely unsuitable for astrophotography due to prominent aberrations of every kind. In between interviews with executives of the major companies, Dale Baskin took to the show floor to bring you this report. They seem to be really good for NB work. - Actually though, it's performance is so good that you really have to consider it a bargain, even at the $800-900 street price. Even if I wanted a 135mm lens (and the 70-200mm f/2.8 is more versatile) it would be the Nikon 135mm f/2 DC lens. Read on to find out which you should be using and why! @juksu - you're such a hypocrite. The interest of a f/1.4 is to be able to be perfect at f/2.8, while a f/1.8 or f/2 might need to be on f/4 to have the same sharpeness and overall IQ.They are not meant to be used wide open, except in rare moments. Over the last ten to fifteen years excellent apochromatic telescopes have become available for visual use and photography. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. Its a no brainer if you use this focal length. This leaves you with a buttery bokeh and an object in perfect focus. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality. This article was originally published on Micael's blog, and is being republished in full with express permission. Test Notes Seems to me that Michael is pretty new to using long telephoto lenses, he writes that the Samyang is the first he has owned. Did anybody use this lens for DSLR astrophoto? Meanwhile the ol' Canon 135/2 is still commanding a higher than average price on the used market (70%+ of MSRP isn't common), I guess the low weight and super easy resale have almost made it a high end commodity. I have taken some of the coolest photos with this lens on a canon mark III which shoots ten frames per second. I also find the other photos not very good. You can also find him as @mwroll on Instagram and 500px. If you want the best possible image quality, and you must have autofocus, and you don't care if it is a bit heavy (maybe you need it for studio use), buy the Sigma. Sony has added a full-frame 50mm F1.4 prime to its premium 'GM' range of E-mount lenses. Well saturated but neutral. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. Some people do not like this and consider Bokeh to refer only to the rendering of out of focus points of light. 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. Interesting that ancient, low-tech (no ED glass, no special coatings) non-apo telephotos could produce decent results compared to something modern. The screws should be set sufficiently tightly to prevent shift, yet not so tightly as to interfere with fine focusing. Bye Light falloff (vignetting) gets pretty high (0.73 EV wide open, but drops to 0.3 EV at f/2.8, and only 0.17 EV at f/4. To see even more example photos using the Rokinon 135mm lens (or Samyang branded version), go ahead a perform a search on Astrobin or Flickr, with the appropriate filter. If canon puts an IS on this lens, it would be perfect! But you just know that there is the professionalism that is lacking here -- and the writer's Instagram page confirms that. It would not surprise me if modern lenses were useable at full aperture. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. modest cost for "L" series, wonderful optics and fast speed, nitpicking, but not a circular aperature and no weather sealing. 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). Write your own user review for this lens. Often need f2.2 to f2.8 to gain sufficient DOF for human subjects. 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. The first telephoto lens of choice, especially recommended for beginners, is the 135mm F2.5 SMC Pentax. It really is about talent, creativity, and vision, not gear. I have done a review comparing the sharpness and quality of bokeh to the Canon 70-200 2.8. 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. In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. Already wide open this lens produce some high quality photos. This is one of the sharpest lens i've ever owned. As a complete beginner in Astrophotography should I buy Rokinon 135mm lens or Canon EF 75-300mm lens with Canon EF 50mm lens? Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. Geometric distortion is lower than one would expect, at 0.15% pincushion maximum, with an average of 0.07%. Unfortunately it is not manufactured in a multicoated version, and produces prominent internal reflection artifacts on very bright stars. When coupled with my Canon DSLR camera, the entire system weighs just over 3 pounds. The CA is pretty low wide open and it rivals my 200mm L lens. Sharp wide open, wonderful bokeh, fast AF in dark conditions. [emailprotected]. 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? Yes, there is some sharpness added when stopping down to f4 or f5.6 but after that it doesn't get better. Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? All content, design, and layout are Copyright 19982023 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. The image shown below covers 4.96 x 5.98 degrees in the constellation Cassiopeia. One thing I am most stun is its AF performance. AF is accurate and very fast. f/2! The background blur is amazingly creamy with this lens. This is a stunning lens, clearly one of the very best lenses that Canon produces, this is in the same world class as the 35 1.4, 85 1.2 L lenses. I had a 70-200 f/4 that i used unstopped at 200 with awesome results. But do some experimenting before you decide. If you own an EOS Camera - It's a no Brainer, Buy one Lagoon and Trifid wide field IC1396 nebula in Cepheus - wide field image. To me it is a dead spot between 85 and 200. Nice image, andysea. 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. In fact, it might be fun to try! Canon 60Da DSLR and Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L2 lens at 135mm, f/3.2. Great reach for street shots. (Dpreview), Use the 500 Rule to find the Perfect Exposure Length for Astrophotography, Use a DSLR Ha Filter for Astrophotography, AstroBackyard | Astrophotography Tips and Tutorials2023, Optical Construction: 11 Glass elements in 7 Groups. f/2, fast-accurate-silent focus, (relatively) small & light, super sharp!! 135mm F2.0 The optical design includes one extra-low dispersion lens element to control chromatic aberration, contributing to sharp, color-accurate imaging, and each of its lens elements features Ultra Multi-Coating to improve light transmission and reduce ghosting and flare. Canon 135mm is a great lens. This way you get both lenses with only one! Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. Best lenses for astrophotography: 50, 85 and 135mm - DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging - Cloudy Nights Cloudy Nights Astrophotography and Sketching DSLR, Mirrorless & General-Purpose Digital Camera DSO Imaging CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. The presentation and hands-on look and feel of the 135mm F/2 lens is impressive considering the reasonable price of this lens. We revisit a classic DPReviewTV episode in which Chris Niccolls and Jordan Drake shoot a few rolls of Fujifilm's Acros 100 II, and a few frames on the X-T3 in Acros film simulation, to find out. I purchased this lens for the purposes of wide-field deep-sky astrophotography from my light-polluted backyard (shown below), and when traveling to a dark sky site. Hi Trevor, i also have the 300mm f4.5 non ED nikkor which is quite nice . Plus it is harder to attach than other lens hoods. The logic of this article can be applied to a 200/2.8 as well. I bought my lens in mint condition for $350 from Japan, but I see that some retailers are asking significantly more. (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 There's just nothing there. Is this Nikon already, Astro modified, without need for H alpha filters or any further modifications? These lenses go about as close as you could get without a dedicated macro lens. Its a trade-off, and one that seems to surface time and time again in this hobby. One of my very best lenses! The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC lens is a fantastic companion for the Canon 60Da, as it offers a useful "mid-range" focal length for a variety of deep-sky projects. After several years off, the venerable magazine has held a public open call photo contest and selected nine finalists and one winning image for its 'Photos of the Year.'. Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. FULL FRAME TELEPHOTO 135mm F2.0 So I feel I'm being cheated. Agreed. This lens is simply lighter, cheaper & faster (f/2.0 vs f/2.8). When stopped down to 37mm, F5.4, it is almost identical to the Takumar except that on highly enlarged images it shows a hint of coma in the distant corners. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. Equipment used was an astromodified Canon 700D, Samyang 135mm f2, SkyTech Triband filter, Star Adventurer 2i, ZWO mini finder with ASI120MM, guiding with PHD2 and polar alignment using sharpcap. Contrasty, saturated, nice colours. ", I'd no problem with that. But like a glitch in the matrix, an anomaly that shouldn't exist, you can get the Samyang/Rokinon 135mm for as little as $430 brand new. Also, we ought never question or diminish the joy of others. However, for $15 I also bought an old Tamron Adaptall 2, 135 mm f2.5. Ive spent a handful of nights testing this lens in my Bortle Scale Class 6/7 backyard, and my results live up to the hype it gets in terms of astrophotography performance. My goal for this article was to show some great example photos and share some ideas for projects this lens is a good fit for. But for many of us, somewhere in between, are plenty of short to mid-tele lenses that will deliver solid service (in terms of subject separation) without carrying around still another kilo for the sake of more blur. You can use Stellarium to preview the image scale with the 135mm lens and your DSLR. I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. Jordan's twin brother Gordon is back to review the cinema-focused Canon EOS R5 C! Lenses with extreme sharpness and bokeh tend to be heavy. I cant wait to try this lens out during the winter months on some wide-field targets in Orion. This free website's biggest source of support is when you use these links, especially these directly to it at Adorama or at Amazon, when you get anything, regardless of the country in which you live. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. 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. The second best, is the Hoya Pro One Digital MC UV(0) filter. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. The F/2.0 maximum aperture of the Rokinon 135mm lens offers a chance to collect a serious amount of signal in a single shot. Definitely now on my to-buy list. Yes, because it is not f/2. It's gross, all is a matter of balance and the perfect one, given you want sharp and fuzzy elements in your picture, is in the blend, and the way details seems to disappear gracefully (while keeping a level of readability). The foolproof image seems to be more a case of how a bright fuzzy cluttered moving background can completely detach from the offset dark subject matter and overwhelm it. Due to the weight, at times I didn't move my shooting position and just zoomed to a composition that worked. I really don't want to count all the pores - and the hairs coming out of them (eeeew!) The thing is, on my APS-C body the 100mm is challenging enough. @ Juksu - you're pathologically clueless. It's just "girl" in front of blurriness.#2: Plants on a pond.It's okay. Lior, I have done a lot of reading on modern zoom lenses. Lots of older lenses no longer satisfy. tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej Juksu, your point is well taken. i too use the 135mm nikkor[ with a MB speed booster on fuji x for outstanding separation], also a samyang 85 mm 1.4 nikon mt with speedbooster also gives excellent separation, yes, I think I have read that the old Nikkor 135mm f3.5 was even sharper than the f2.8. 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. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix) ". An update to the Mini 11, the new camera adds parallax correction capabilities, automatic flash control and a multi-function twist lens. Can I assume that this article applies only to full frame & not to micro four thirds? It allows to push your main subject matter into abstraction wide open and get very detailed images stopped down. The Bokeh includes as well all that is in the focus, but mainly talked about how it comes visible in out of focus areas. Please send your photos of the Andromeda galaxy. Of the 150 images I considered fit to publish, only 4 were made with the 135. I think the bokeh won me over with the cat, as well as the fact that I like animals; the case for the duck was the same. It's March, and in America that means it's time to start arguing over which college athletics team is the best at basketball. 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. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. You won't get the excessive background blurr -- which for the beginning photographer may actually be a good thing. I think youll find that this lens is behind some of the most amazing wide-field astrophotography images online! Wonderful, smooth bokeh. Round one of polls are now open, pick your winners and share your voice. This lens is very sharp, corner to corner wide open. I'll walk you through all this inc. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? In this post, Ill share my results using an affordable prime telephoto lens for astrophotography, the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC. CAs: a little in the OOF area - not disturbing anyway. 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. I used this lens quite a bit years ago as my main working lens. I've recently started using 135 and 200mm lenses from the 1970s with my mono CCD and they've proven very useful for imaging large emission nebulae. Aside from being much more affordable, telephoto lenses are easier to transport, easier to mount and easier to guide, and are much more likely to produce encouraging results to a beginner. For example, a friend recently recommended Pentax 6x7 prime lenses which were designed for a large format flat field, and are also adaptable to the EOS system. Ive set the f-stop to F/2.8, to sharpen up the stars a bit. Star parties or dark sky excursions are another great time to use a camera lens in place of the telescope. 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. (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 I thought I would miss shooting at 200mm, but 135mm is long enough for most portraits and gives a decent amount of compression. enlarge. 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. He's better than I am on BS, I got to give him that. From the moment I reviewed the first sub-exposure on the display screen of my camera, I feel in love with the mid-range magnification of a 135mm lens. A series of such images can be digitally stacked to produce excellent results. For DPReview, it's also an opportunity for a good old-fashioned camera fight. :). If you buy a nifty fifty or a 100mm macro lens you simply cannot go wrongyou will get a great and handy lens for your money, with great image quality. Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. I found with the 70-200 made me lazy. EF-mount only, this packs more megapixels, a bigger sensor, and a high max ISO. A single, 90-second exposure using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. Focal length is great. That setup will give you all that you really need. Now we have to read this kind of ignorant misinformation on DPR articles. For the rest there is Sigma 135 /1.8 Art also fantastic value lens. I need fast auto-focus, predictable focus lock and natural, vibrant color rendition. 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). Definetely the most sharpest lens which I have ever seen. Its actually kind of neat to watch! 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. Also, the lens can only be operated when aperture is set to 22, wondering how I could use F2. How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? Nice article for beginners.It's all in the eyes of the beholder. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. Has a good weight to it. DPReview March Madness, round one - vote! To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. If you're using or are looking to buy the Samyang or Rokinon 135mm F/2, please let me know what you're imaging with it or any questions you may have in the comment section below. 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. Generally, prime lenses have a reputation for being slightly sharper, and I have found that to be true whether I am shooting a nebula or a Scarlet Tanager. Oh yes, and it leads to lusting after other primes! 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. Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens. The original poster is right that it was a compromise though and stopping down was necessary for critical sharpness and a better image. I thought I had to sell my 100/F2.8 macro L but thanks for letting me know I can keep it. One is the price, which starts around $800 for the smallest units, and rapidly climbs into thousands of dollars for larger apertures. There are quite a few other excellent lenses out there, and nowadays, quite a few that can be used wide open. The following image was captured by Eric Cauble using the Samyang branded version of this lens. Testing on an EOS-5D, we see that it's sharpness is almost as good wide open in the corners as on the EOS-20D with its smaller sensor. There is no such thing, in my opinion. Amazing for portraits, easily fast enough for indoor sports. Canon 300/4 ED IF AF (non-IS) I use the word design, because although the available 135mm F2 lenses aren't the exact same optical formula, they share many important traits. On FF I use this lens for both tight portraits and landscape shots. (purchased for $1,100), reviewed October 5th, 2008 It is worth of it's price?Any links to astrophotos with this lens?Thanks. Im getting a samyang to use with my 60D. And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? Nothing else like it and the reason the two DC lenses have remained in production since they were introduced in 1993. https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1180017085/photos/3721717/bokeh. I got this lens because of portraiture. Otherwise, on FF body this lens is wonderful. Another drawback is the focal length. The first shot I ever took with this lens was of my neighbor's cat, as it was sneaking around in a bush. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 includes a lens hood, lens pouch, front and rear lens caps, and a 1-year Rokinon manufacturer warranty. It is NOT extremely sharp wide open, it often requires massive AF adjustment on DLSRs (sometimes beyond what the body allows as micro-adjustment) and AF is not reliable enough to consistently ensure sharp focus at full aperture. Super sharp and renders beautiful creamy bokeh. My Rokinon 135F2 on my crop body is fun to play with.. a budget lens with budget construction on a discontinued camera system.. but hey im just a ham and egger https://flic.kr/p/21nj82V, I had a Canon 135/2 for a while, but I decided I preferred the 100 L used not as a Macro but a normal lens (which my non-L USM 100 Macro was quite poor for). Canon CR-N700 4K PTZ Camera with 15x Zoom. For some reason Samyang makes lenses nobody is asking for. Also, when shooting the heart nebula, is the sky tracker a must or not required? At under 900USD, it's a steal. Many lenses lose their appeal after time, but not this one. f2, very sharp, virtually without CAs, contrast, colour, lightwight, buildings. Although your target audience is beginning DSLR imagers, much of your advice also applies to using lenses with CCD cameras. It is fantastically sharp, can make beautiful blurred backgrounds and bokeh, and is both light and inexpensive for what you get. CP+ 2023: Sigma has announced it is bringing its trio of DC DN APS-C prime lenses to Nikon's Z mount: its first lenses for Nikon's mirrorless system. Of the old teles I've had, Nikon's 400mm f/3.5 was decent, Olympus's 300mm f/4.5 was good (it had a precursor to ED glass) Pentax's 300mm Takumar was TERRIBLE, Pentax's 500mm was terrible, Nikon's 135 f/2.8 Q was ok, and Sigma's 400mm f/5.6 "apo" was satisfactory. That means that it doesnt require a robust equatorial telescope mount as a larger, heavier telephoto lens would. You are entitled to your opinions, and I respect that! It's a trade off. 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. thank you for that great review and also the explanations. Here are our top picks for the canon lenses for astrophotography. Magical images, great AF, great close focusing abilities. I heard it's very sharp and well corrected. Thanks.. or.. Clear Skies! You just panned the subject for his photos and then turn around and needle thematic for looking into Ericsson. AF ring feels loose compared to my other L lenses. It has just a hint of chromatic aberration on very bright stars and, if highly enlarged by 400-800%, the stars in the very corners barely begin to show a touch of astigmatism. You may need to refocus your subject as the temperature changes throughout the night. Yuri toropin tests a bunch of lenses on Flickr which is a great source. Best lens for portraiture I've ever tried. Today I want to talk about another such lens design: The 135mm F2 lens. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. No one yet mentioned a zoom lens, I had an opportunity to test my Canon 24-105L f/4 on M31 Andromeda Galaxy and received wonderful results with Canon 60D unmoded, I set it to 105mm, No vignatting, slight coma on the corners and no false color on bright stars. With the high megapixel cameras, most people are going to ideally want to shoot at 1/200 or faster. If you must have autofocus, and care about weight, buy the Canon. I mainly use for head shot photography. A con is that it really makes you rethink the use of your zoom lenses. What is it like shooting with one today? To remedy this, I reduced the star size in post, and I started shooting at F/4 to really tighten things up. I've done comparisons between my brand-new Samyang 85/1.4 and the old big Apollo 135/1.8 lens I had lying around, and the shots were for all practical purposes identical (exept, obviously, for the pixel count once cropped). Available 03/21/23. The North America Nebula captured using the 135mm lens with a clip-in Ha filter. Maybe try a 400mm f/2.0 to see it that one's got enough blur. So so far the best that I have used are the 200f2.8L and the 400f5.6L. What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? I really wanted to use, and like, a 135mm f2 lens so I bought the Canon version. The 135mm F2 lens design is truly special, and in this article (and the video I made), I want to try to convince you as well. These are affordably available on eBay, and result in perfectly round star images, the way nature intended them to be. OM System's latest lens is a whopper of a macro, featuring optical stabilization, full weather sealing, up to 2x magnification and a whole lot more. The Rokinon website lists this lens as being useful for portraiture photography, and most telephoto applications. Ironically all the sample images in this post are painfully soft. Extrapolating from this, minimum recommended guidescope power is 120x for the 300mm telephoto, 80x for the 200mm, and 55x for the 135mm.