15 replies to this topic

[Whalensdad]

I'm just starting to dabble in timelapse imaging. Last night I did a timelapse using a nifty-fifty on my 60D. I found the view a bit narrow, so I want to get a wide-field lens. I'm looking for recommendations on what lenses I should be looking for.

[triplemon]

Any lens that forms an image would be a good one. A time lapse really adds no new requirement to this.

 

If you ask about astro imaging - I'd recommend to go for a manual focus lens, as many modern, especially the cheaper ones, are not built to hold focus or allow to achieve critical focus manually very well. But that about as much detail as such an vague question would warrant.

 

After that it really depends on WHAT you want to image: meteors, milky way, super deep sky nebulosity whizzing by, geostationary sats, obrbiting sats, dusk/down sky colors, exoplanet transits, moon phases, sunspots - there is a lot you culd make time lapses of. You'd have top be a bit more particular, as each has its own set of quite differing challenges and focal length/FOV considerations.

Edited by triplemon, 03 June 2025 - 09:04 PM.

[rollomonk]

I was looking for a lens for my canon for imaging wide field views of the night sky. Fortunately there are websites out there that test how well popular lenses do with the night sky. I was shocked to discover that many popular wide angle lenses have very poor corner performance such that stars display lots of aberrations (I.e. coma) the closer they are to the corners. Even Canon lenses over $2k displayed these issues. They may be great for daytime photos but night photos put greater demands on the optics. Stopping down the lenses helped to reduce but not eliminate the problems.

 

After lots of study, I ended up getting a Canon RF 24-105 f/4 which does a good job for me but this won’t work on your Canon. There is a variant that may work for you, the EF 24-105 f/4. In any case, I recommend you search for these websites that test lenses and show night sky performance especially in the corners.

Edited by rollomonk, 03 June 2025 - 09:50 PM.

[timelapser]

One standard bit of advice is to use prime (fixed focal length) lenses rather than zooms.  It's harder to make a lens look good over a range of focal lengths than a single one.  At least that's at the same focal ratio (speed), so you may get good quality in a zoom but at a slower speed, so noisier, than a good quality prime.  Of course there are exceptions to the rule.

[Whalensdad]

These are all good suggestions. I'm looking for a recommendation of a specific prime focus wide angle lens that works with a Canon 60D. Somewhere between 14mm and 25mm. I'm not happy with my 50mm due to the narrow view angle and the chromatic aberrations.

Edited by Whalensdad, 04 June 2025 - 09:36 AM.

[triplemon]

Go to Adorama, select Canon EF mount. No need to distinguish between EF-S and EF mounts, as both types will work on your camera. Do not go to the mirrorless section - none of those will work on your 60D.
Then select the 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 24mm fixed focal lengths. The result will be 72 current production prime lenses. They all will "work".

 

You can do similar on Adorama, KEH or MPB for used lenses (I strongly recommend that route, most of the time MUCH better bang for the buck), likely resulting in a similar selection. They all will "work".

 

If you go with manual focusing AND the lens has manual aperture controls, any old school M48, Olympus OM or Nikon F/Ai mount lens will also work via a cheap mechanical adapter ring. Stay away from Minolta/Contax/Canon FD mounts - they can not readily be adapted to EF mount due to shorter flange distances.

 

On top of that, if you want to go super cheap to just try how the framing goes, take your existing garden variety zoom, I guess you have a 18-55mm, set it to 2 stops from maximum and it will work fine. Exposure times might be a bit long if you want to do "super deep nebulae" or "fast transients" like meteors, but for all other purposes they will work. All and any of them.

 

Only if your needs are much more specific or imaging techniques more advanced (like large mosaics) you really need lenses that are super sharp at large apertures. Or have very low vignetting/distortion when stopped down only a little. But they cost a LOT more - like 5-10 times as much. After all - a "mediocre" lens that gets tack sharp only at f5.6 merely needs 8x the exposure time to get the exact same results than a top of the line one at f2.0. And I haven't yet seen a modern lens that didn't get plenty sharp by f5.6 for APS-C and under 25mm. So for a time lapse, think of how much time you have between individual frames and if that allows for those exposure times. In particular if you're under less dark skuies, the answer is likely easy.

 

So with that out of the way (again) - if you want "better lenses", your budget would be the single most important criteria. I could easily quote a few of "the best of the best", but they all would be well over $1000. Or those I got used as "best bang for the buck" after two years of waiting to come up for sale. Neither may be of much use to you. I could also quote a few that I have or had and are a LOT cheaper, only to be flamed by others quoting the $2000 lenses and insisting "but these are better, by a full stop". So no, I'm not going there. I would rather suggest you start with looking as outlined above, look at the prices, look if there is a "really good steal" on the used market and once you found one that meets your budget look with the help of google if you can find astro-imaging specific reviews for that very lens, as the ordinary daytime use focus mostly on astro-irrelevant things bokeh, AF speed or color reproduction. Looking up any specific lens on astrobin is also very helpfull to see what you can get with any particular one.

Edited by triplemon, 04 June 2025 - 04:19 PM.

[erictheastrojunkie]

For timelapse, a 14mm or 20mm f1.8 or faster lens. Pretty much all the actual Canon brand lenses are bunk for astro, bad performance in at least one critical category for astro purposes. Look at the Sigma Art 14mm, it's a solid lens for timelapse purposes and is fast. 20mm was about the longest I felt was really useable for decent Milky Way timelapses, longer than that and you'll be having to sacrifice either foreground or sky field of view for the timelapse unless you carefully pick locations that give specific perspectives. 

[JohnH]

I was looking for a lens for my canon for imaging wide field views of the night sky. Fortunately there are websites out there that test how well popular lenses do with the night sky. I was shocked to discover that many popular wide angle lenses have very poor corner performance such that stars display lots of aberrations (I.e. coma) the closer they are to the corners. Even Canon lenses over $2k displayed these issues. They may be great for daytime photos but night photos put greater demands on the optics. Stopping down the lenses helped to reduce but not eliminate the problems.

After lots of study, I ended up getting a Canon RF 24-105 f/4 which does a good job for me but this won’t work on your Canon. There is a variant that may work for you, the EF 24-105 f/4. In any case, I recommend you search for these websites that test lenses and show night sky performance especially in the corners.

I got a 24-105 f4 when I got my 40D, and even with that camera I noticed that it's performance was not all that great. That was confirmed when I got the 7D and now that I have a 6D Mark II, I went and got a 24 to 70 F 2.8, and that lens mostly sat around ever since

My Zeiss 21mm f2.8 and 28mm ARE very sharp. Especially stopped down slightly.

One lens I want to try for astro is my 200mm f1.8, but in the 15 years I've never bothered to try mounting it other than just to see how well it holds up not what it actually performs like

Edited by JohnH, 05 June 2025 - 08:26 AM.

[triplemon]

That hunking big 200mm 1.8L ???

 

Not using it for astro is a total shame. Although not perfectly sharp at f1.8, its absolutely great at f2.0 or f2.2 and it would make most astro imagers drool for nights on end.

 

It actually discovered 118 exoplanets. More precisely 14 3/4 per lens !!!!! https://www.superwasp.org
 

Edited by triplemon, 05 June 2025 - 06:09 PM.

[Whalensdad]

Thanks for all the suggestions!

[Riaandw]

Rokinon/Samyang 14mm f2.8 is an awesome landscape/widefield astro lens. 

Edited by Riaandw, 07 June 2025 - 08:18 AM.

[Rickycardo]

I recommend going with a full manual lens if you can. I do time lapses of weather, Milky Way and landscapes. I mostly use either a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 or a Samyang 20mm f/1.8. Manual lenses work well because you don't want your focus to change in the middle of the run. Auto lenses also have a tendency to change their aperture between each shot. The aperture blades will snap back to a default spot the close or open for each exposure. This can lead to flickering in you final video that will have to be addressed in post processing.

[archer1960]

These are all good suggestions. I'm looking for a recommendation of a specific prime focus wide angle lens that works with a Canon 60D. Somewhere between 14mm and 25mm. I'm not happy with my 50mm due to the narrow view angle and the chromatic aberrations.

The Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 is kind of the "go to" lens for wide field shooting, such as Milky Way, etc. I have one and like it, but I end up mostly using my AF lenses because I can remote control them and don't have to go out to the scope to tweak the focus.

[timelapser]

I second the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, and would add the Rokinon 16mm f/2.  For both you'd have to get a good copy, which isn't guaranteed.

[calypsob]

Laowa 12mm is nice

[Booney3721]

I got the Rokinon 14mm F2.8, I love it for timelapse and nightscapes.