Astrophotography at f/0.95! Laowa Argus 35mm f/0.95 FF Lens Review

[@tachyon3.14]

Week 16 of appreciating Five Minute Fridays

[@progshark]

I have the 15mm f2 and really enjoy it. Quite a different experience to have that focal length w/o going fisheye. Laoewa glass is astonishing. Even wide open the coma is pretty minimal. I would consider the 35 if my budget wasn't dedicated for a telescope.

[@mattlabrecque1265]

Crazy how this channel only has almost 86k subscribers. Should be wayyyyyy more!!

[@NebulaPhotos]

Thanks Matt

[@rogerbarnett8412]

@@NebulaPhotos It's now 205k...See my post above, just now!

[@barrymak421]

Love it when you do gear reviews! There is so much "stuff" on the market, and for us mere mortals who don't have the knowledge to know what we should be looking for in different lenses and kit sets it gives a nice starting point. I may not buy this exact lens, but I now have some numbers to compare if i want to look for a fast lens at 35mm. So this was great! Thank You!

[@koolkrazy1]

Wow.. never thought such lens exists.. I learned something new today! Thanks Nico for the knowledge and amazing job on another awesome #5MinFriday!

[@justindame]

That's crazy! I didn't think you could get a lens that fast. That is super neat! Thanks Nico!

[@Jayling]

Nice review, Nico. I'm so glad you showed a video with the lens also - that was quite impressive in your Bortle 3 area. Thanks again for testing and putting this together for us. :)

[@NebulaPhotos]

Thank you, glad you thought so! I was a bit hesitant about including the videos as I wasn't sure if anyone other than me would care about such a feature, but that was truly my impetus for wanting to try this lens!

[@Jayling]

@@NebulaPhotos Yeah, I mainly shoot videos of the night sky, stars, planets & moon, with various lenses on my Canon R & RA cameras so it was nice to finally see something other than just photos. For some reason even though the cameras are so similar, the RA has better low light than the R does - at least my version does. Thanks again :)

[@jveitchmichaelis]

@@NebulaPhotos It's extremely helpful. There are very few truly low light videos online. Most people walk around a city where you can get away with a relatively low ISO with street lights for illumination. There are a couple of aurora videos floating around on an A7S and some crazy video from a Blackmagic PCC4k with a Leica Noctilux under full moonlight - but even then the moon is so bright that it feels like cheating. You can see stars in some of the shots though. I'd be really interested to see how far you can push this - can the Ra do faster than 12800 for video? I think most of us don't care about noise at this stage, but for the sheer insanity of shooting live video under starlight. I'm thinking about getting one of these manuals for 4/3, but it's unclear whether the Olympus Pro f/1.2 line would be a better choice since you also get top tier A/F, superb optics and it's got the weather sealing. That extra 2/3 of a stop is nothing to sniff at, but maybe you can push the Olympus at a higher ISO. That said, you can pick up 2-3 used lenses for the RRP of the 17/1.2 (for example there is also the Voigtlander 10.5/0.95 which is ridiculous).

[@brianaddison2828]

Great review, I want to try some astrophotography with it now! By the way, the lens hood is removable. Just twist it 90 degrees. I did this to re-attach with the logo down. Also you can put it on reverse apparently for storage, etc.

[@ruiner101]

Videos of this lens have been following me around all week. I guess I'm gonna have to buy one.

[@potatofuryy]

Laowa make great lenses, bought their 105mm 2.8 and it’s amazing.

[@harrison00xXx]

I was even impressed by a Canon 50mm 1.4 USM i got for cheap. On APS C the vignetting and CA was not as bad as on Full Frame i have to say, but the effective 80mm was also a problem for wide angle photos of the milky way I ended up selling the 1.4 again and now i enjoy a 1.8 RF for the Eos RP, the RF 50mm is also a LOT BETTER (no annoying CA and barely sharpness lost at the corners) Wondering if using APS C Cameras with 0,7x speed booster or using FF directly, which is the better option?

[@narayanancn8831]

Five minutes Friday is great

[@Veptis]

LAOWA Argus is interesting, but the FF one isn't APO like the crop one. So hope is the MFT version are APO again. Maybe they get better results again. The only video about fast lenses for astro I found. But I was actually looking for the Voigtländer Super Nokton which is f/0.8, hower it's more like T1.2 and has massive fall off. I got a 150mm f/1 lens (supposedly T1.15) which I am trying to use for doing observations with a thermal camera in 8-12μm.

[@gabewrsewell]

been waiting for this lens for so long! thanks for trying it out in exactly what i want it for!

[@deltahat880]

it's nice that a few companies have produced a greater than f1 optic at this point, I'm guessing tracking down a noctilux f0.9 would be too difficult at this point, but it'd be a closer look. might not be as sharp as modern glass though.

[@AgnostosGnostos]

The metal lens hood can be removed. According to other reviews it is just very stiff and at the beginning others too didn't use much force to turn the hood.

[@andrewwellum6472]

Awesome lens and video, good work Nico, stunning single shot milky-way.

[@vivienrajz798]

Based on the small example was shown, I believe my Sigma Art 35mm DG HSM performs better in larger aperture. For 35mm is already in the territory to having a tracker is beneficial.

[@NebulaPhotos]

That's definitely one I want to compare. I have the Sigma Art 40mm and it's incredible, but quite a bit more expensive than this lens.

[@rogerbarnett8412]

@@NebulaPhotos I got the Siggy 35 Art from a fredmiranda seller for $450. Great lens! As was the 28 Art before it rolled out my tripod hammock and landed in 2.4" of water...was shooting the MW and didn't notice it for a couple hours...Sigh...

[@kethhekel]

Answered my questions exactly. Thanks!

[@crisp.6341]

Damn, Derek beat me to it

[@peterlaubscher3989]

Thanks for this review - would be interesting to see some more results form this lens. Great overview.

[@southernexposure123]

Thanks for this, another, interesting and helpful video. I have a Lawoa 7.5mm f2.0 made for Lumix mirrorless. At 200% I see the same star distortions at f2.0 that you showed from your lens at f2.0 and wider. I shot well over 1,000 light subs at ISO 800 10 seconds and a few more darks than lights. I used it just one night Sept 8/9 and wondered if the distortione were from the lens or from poor focus. Also, being relatively inexperienced, I was surprised to see so many stars. That caused me to wonder if some stars were noise - hence why so many darks. Now my questions are enswered. Thanks again. (( - :

[@NebulaPhotos]

Glad it helped! Yes, it's amazing how many stars a modern camera with a fast lens picks up.

[@Marcos-qq8dz]

Great video as always. Thank you! I have a doub though, to take a photo of, let's say Andromeda, what is better, to use a 200mm at f5.6 or to use the same lens but 85mm at f4?

[@RelaxingDisney]

Hey Nico, I had a quick question and I know that your the best one for this. I have a Celestron AstroMaster 114 EQ and a Canon T7, the camera that you used in the shootout video. Is there a way to connect the 2 for Astrophotography? That's the only telescope I have and the only camera I have.

[@AstroCloudGenerator]

Super interesting Nico. Love the tangential reference to Stanley Kubrick I always learn something unexpected in your videos

[@carltanner9065]

I have a 50mm f0.95 lens (a 7 Artisans lens) I have for my EM-1. Haven't used it for astropics, yet, but I will do.

[@imadreamer9526]

I just love your voice..

[@astronomylivestream]

I’ll check this lens out…! Edit: Just emailed Hunt’s Photo and Video. Can’t wait to try this lens out!

[@nervenerd]

Great review. In your comparison at 5:30 of corner stars at 0.9 and 5.6 the number of stars is almost the same. Is that because you used different exposures or ISO?

[@NebulaPhotos]

Different exposure length, I tried to keep the level consistent by looking at the histogram. I find this is a better way to gaugue star distortion.

[@doxfie.]

nice product for studying coma n astigmatism.

[@Poppinparties]

Hello hello, I have the lens and just wanted to mention that the metal hood does come off. Lens has a surprisingly solid all around build. It will come off with just a little extra pressure with your turn. Scary 👻 😱 lol

[@NebulaPhotos]

Thank you! I realized after the review that it comes off, and was kicking myself that I got that wrong. How do you like the lens so far?

[@Poppinparties]

@@NebulaPhotos I do like it. It's forced me to slow way down to make sure I'm getting things right. Playing around at the 0.95 makes it super easy to miss focus. I also have the Canon rf 85mm 1.2 DS. my goal was to grab somewhat similar bokeh without having to back away 10 miles lol.

[@alivia4907]

Awesome! There's not alot of rf mount glass that does good ASTRO. May be getting this in the future for my r6

[@kylezeringue5673]

Thanks for the review, Nico. It leaves me on the fence. Not sure I'd be happy with milky way shots from it. I guess in order to be sold on the lens I will have to see reviews of the lens in terrestrial tests as well. Interest peaked, but not yet sold.

[@beastff6239]

Pls post a video on the top 10 best telescopes for beginners

[@piwko4]

If budgets didnt exist, Could you run multiple cameras with the same lens and stack the live video to capture a live milkyway?

[@stolguy]

RA user here, I am interested in the lens…Did you shoot those examples with the Astronomik L-2 UV-IR Block Clip-Filter EOS R XL? Thanks for your reviews

[@NebulaPhotos]

Yes, I did!

[@stolguy]

@@NebulaPhotos thanks… it’s on order, might be time to get that 135mm f2 as well

[@beastff6239]

Is the Celestron Astromaster 130eq suitable for deep sky visual astronomy

[@humanflightproductions2113]

Ahh yes. The Kubrick - NASA connection 👀👨🏼‍🚀🌝

[@PeterSchurte]

would also be great for northern lights Videorecording!

[@mattcero1]

What are your thoughts on turning off the anti-red eye function on cameras such as my Fuji X-S10? I would guess that would allow more of the hydrogen gas spectrum in from nebula but I'd love to hear your thoughts? Thanks man.

[@NebulaPhotos]

I usually turn off all those kinds of auto processing functions: Noise reduction, anti-red eye, auto rotate, etc. just in case. Sometimes they only effect the JPEG and not the Raw, but it varies from camera to camera.

[@derik_niez]

Really wishing this lens was coming out in L Mount

[@JericTamayo]

It was such a deal breaker when you mentioned that the hood is undetachable. A really interesting lens nonetheless

[@NebulaPhotos]

I was wrong! I just wasn't twisting hard enough. It is is removable

[@JericTamayo]

@@NebulaPhotos okay sweet!

[@kalef1234]

Man,this in an a7s would be amazing

[@pescarull]

Sigma 40mm 1.4 still the undisputed king. Thank you for testing this lens.

[@adrianrcarr]

For video, would the R6 (or R5) give noticeably better lowlight performance than the Ra?

[@NebulaPhotos]

From what I've seen on KZbin, yes. Of course all low-light stuff is hard to judge in KZbin since it's compression on dark scenes is terrible!

[@rafiexperimental]

please get a a7siii.. A BIG REQUEST

[@hadex666]

Actually, if you do the math, f0.95 is exactly 1 stop more light than 1.4. At low F, it does not scale linear anymore. Next stop would be at f/0.58 or so.

[@mobilechaosyt]

Would astrophotography work on a Sony ZV1 or Canon M50 with Kit lens? I have both and I suspect many people have cameras similar in price range and would want to know what type of astrophotography photos they could get from them.

[@NebulaPhotos]

Yes, both should work well. If they don't have intervalometer ports or internal interval timers, you may need to use an app to control them, but that's not the end of the world. I'd be interested in trying out both, but I already have too many cameras and lenses as-is. :)

[@bhastro9959]

the problem with this lens for Milky Way timelapses (without tracking) is that the MW quickly moves out of the FOV. I prefer a wider angle fisheye.

[@rogerbarnett8412]

I disagree, partially and have a correction: 1, I shoot the MW, untracked, from 14 to 85mm. All those focal lengths can work. 2. Depending on the foreground subject size, I do prefer 14-24mm, as exposure times are workable. . The correction. This lens is rectilinear. Fisheye lens are vastly different. I have an 8mm circular fisheye, which creates an 180 ° circular image (with EF-S, it produces a 12.8mm rectangular but still fisheye) I also have a Venus Laowa 4mm 210° circular fisheye. I like it, though it is gimmicky.

[@damirkvajo]

Could you combine this lens with a metabones speedboster to get even more light into it?

[@NebulaPhotos]

No, at least not with my setup. This is an RF mount, so native glass meaning there is no room for an adapter

[@DSOImager]

Interesting. How would the stars look with a smaller sensor (CS or 4/3)? I'm assuming there's a way to connect an astro camera to this lens?

[@NebulaPhotos]

Yes, that would be fun to try. I've looked for RF lens adapters for that purpose and haven't found much yet, but I should look again as this was months ago.

[@DSOImager]

@@NebulaPhotos Cool. I'll keep an eye out too. This application is something I'd be interested in. I was considering a rokinon 14mm to use with a spare asi533 or asi1600mm but I haven't pulled the trigger yet.

[@narayanancn8831]

According to the quality of your content you should haveore subscribers 👍👍

[@horizonastronomiaargentina7593]

Terrible que apertura tiene 😍

[@tombraley8152]

@4:43 Really random question: was this shot at Spruce Lodge cabins in Lakeville, Maine?

[@NebulaPhotos]

Nope, private farm

[@tombraley8152]

@@NebulaPhotos Figured, but those pine trees really stood out to me :) Cheers from Maine!

[@Sheilagene2]

So I’ve been struggling with this one. I actually shoot with my Dedicated Astro Camera (they are ZWO brand) and I use a Cannon (eos) adapter. If the lense is all manual no connector isn’t the RF and EOS mounting the same?

[@Thefuror38500]

A bit late, but backfocus is not the same. If the adapter is made for EF lenses, it take inot account a 44mm (or 44.5, one is canon EF, one sony A, always mess them up aha) back focus. An RF mount have a 20mm back focus, so it will not work

[@northwestlife_9]

Wow, that's expensive! It would be nice if the government would subsidize lens purchases.

[@xe1zlgg]

This is best 0.95 lens in the world

[@hondaxl250k0]

What’s the fastest best lens I can use on a Nikon d3100?

[@NebulaPhotos]

If money is no concern, I'd go for the Sigma Art 14mm f/1.8, which is available for Nikon F mount and is one of the most impressive wide angle fast primes I've tried

[@hondaxl250k0]

@@NebulaPhotoshi again. I was just gifted a Nikkor 35mm f/2 . Will that work well?

[@NebulaPhotos]

@@hondaxl250k0 Yes, go for it.

[@StevenSSmith]

comment for the algo

[@MILPICS]

4:09 Astrocinematography

[@SoundGates]

is it 35 or 33mm?

[@NebulaPhotos]

35mm is the new (came out today) full frame version, 33mm is the older APS-C version

[@febinjohnson821]

Im still watching this without a camera

[@nafnaf0]

For Sony Cameras, you could consider the new Sony A7iv (to be released ~next month). It won't be a good of a camera for video as the A7Siii, but will be better for general purpose at 33MP

[@narayanancn8831]

Hai

[@ych8312]

come on rent out the nikon z 58mm Noct f/.95

[@NebulaPhotos]

good idea

[@ych8312]

@@NebulaPhotos I haven't seen anyone doing it on the internet :)

[@Mara-xd7bg]

58 is too wide for MilkyWay shots

[@ych8312]

@@Mara-xd7bg you're too wide for milkyway shots

[@biggerandbetterthings7222]

eww a canon mount, i can see a use for taking pictures of the moon though...

[@maggiethrash]

Speaking of the Kubrick-NASA connection, you know he faked the moon landing, right? jkjkjkj

[@luboinchina3013]

Yeah. But he faked it on the Moon because he was a perfectionist.😏

[@maggiethrash]

@@luboinchina3013 lmaoooooo!!

[@chrisw5742]

"All of the ten copies made by Zeiss for NASA was used by Stanley Kubrick to fake the moon landings". There I fixed it for ya. :-)

[@hangerbird]

So, this won't work with a Nikon D5600 then.

[@NebulaPhotos]

No, it won't. It's a mirrorless lens that takes advantage of the shorter flange distance. I'll still mostly review lenses that will work with both DSLRs and mirrorless, but this one was sent to me to check out, and I thought it sounded fun to try

[@DougHanchard]

The company makes a 33 mm 095 lens for $200.00 less. Hrmmmm

[@NebulaPhotos]

It's an APSC lens, this one is full frame

[@DougHanchard]

@@NebulaPhotos Right 👍- the price difference is significant between the two. For older DSLRs, with APSC sensors, i.e. a Canon T3 / 1100D, can they take advantage of the newer features?

[@NebulaPhotos]

Unfortunately, no. The 33mm version is an APSC, but still mirrorless only. Due to flange distance, the theoretical limit for a DSLR is f/1, but the practical limit seems to be f/1.2

[@DougHanchard]

@@NebulaPhotos what makes me think is the black hole of money you talk about. Hypothetical; a buyer of the Laowa 33mm / .095 can get value use for his/her existing older DSLR and then be able to still get very good results when upgrading to a full frame body. This allows the user to extend the use of their existing body until it's worn out. But the 35mm Laowa lens requires a full frame body right from the start. Thus, I wonder what the performance differences are between the two lenses on a full frame camera, potentially influencing when should a buyer upgrade. Saving a couple hundred bucks (or more, the 33mm lens is available in 🇨🇦, for $400 USD) that can eventually used to buy a full frame body while still getting a .095 f stop performance lens might be appealing.

[@eric29707]

First :)

[@AstroNightBR]

it would be nice for you to give away this lens to your subscribers and would like to participate....hug 📸

[@scottneith1]

Lol pixel peeper

[@michaelconnor8319]

A talking head but no cutaways of product that is being described... dull !

[@RandomYogi007]

why the hell would you buy it from an off brand website when you could get it from amazon and get it guaranteed and probably with a warrantee lmao

[@NebulaPhotos]

Hunt's isn't an off brand website, it is my local camera store. I always would rather support my local camera store than Amazon when I can.