Sure, not all 135mm lenses are lightweightSigma's new 135mm F1.8 is rather heavy at 1130gbut if you look at the Samyang 135mm F2, which is pretty much flawless optically, it weighs only 830g. No telephoto lens I tested, nor my TSAPO65Q, was suitable for use with a DSLR "clear glass" modified to include deep red and IR. The closest Ive been to the 135mm range is 105mm on my Canon 24-105 zoom. Flip on through what we found, and see how the lens performs in the real world in our sample gallery. 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. In this new review, I focus exclusively on the unprecedented Samyang 135mm f/2, which is primarily designed for portrait and wildlife. Material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted or otherwise used without the prior written consent of The Imaging Resource. One thing I am most stun is its AF performance. 30-35% diameter reduction is usually necessary on "good" lenses. Digital camera types . This lens is one of canons finest lenses i have ever used. Some lenses are incurable. (purchased for $900), reviewed November 2nd, 2015 The focuser adjustment rotates roughly 270 degrees, meaning fine-tuning on a bright star is more precise. For some objects a reflection can take away from the photo because it covers interesting details of the object (Think Alnitak in the Horsehead Nebula). When i just judge by the indicator line as i click through, it seems like its 19 that gets skipped wondering if there is anything more definite? The spec sheet for the Rokinon 135mm F/2 boasts a number of qualities, with the ones listed below being the most important when it comes to night photography and astro. If experience has taught me anything, its that the practical, pain-free equipment that gets the most use under the stars. Let's unbox, review and test this lens to find out why it is one of the best bang for your buck deals in astrophotography! As if absolutely clueless Youtube instructors who have no idea what they are talking about weren't enough. And because you can shoot between F/2 and F/4, plenty of light reaches the sensor in a relatively short exposure. The 135L is half the weight of the 70-200 2.8IS. The EOS R6 II arrives in one of the most competitive parts of the market, facing off against some very capable competition. Writer Anno Huidekoper takes a look at what this manual SLR can do and how it stacks up to its contemporaries. The Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 includes a lens hood, lens pouch, front and rear lens caps, and a 1-year Rokinon manufacturer warranty. Recently, the FAA announced that recreational drone pilots in the USA can request LAANC authorization to fly in controlled airspace at night. This is great news if you like to photograph small things up close. Jordan has a simple fix camera manufacturers could implement to improve their video autofocus. As you'd expect from a premium prime lens, both maximum and average chromatic aberration is very low across the aperture range, with the maximum CA on the order of 0.02% of frame height regardless of aperture. In these situations, a portable, wide-field imaging rig wins. The duck and cat are really the only good shots. I disagree. Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. I can only guarantee that the TSAPO65Q would work very well. 1. It's not a bad lens, probably a great one, even if it doesn't seems really as sharp as a basic 85mm f/1.8 (used at f/2.8) , but it's a bad idea to work wide open if you don't need to. 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. 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. Focus end stop. Beautiful portrait lens. I'll walk you through all this inc. Part of it might be that they were designed for film photography and modern digital sensor are far more demanding in terms of optical quality. CAs: a little in the OOF area - not disturbing anyway. I hope that this post has provided some practical insight into a popular camera lens for astrophotography. Over the years, I have tried more than two dozen telephoto lenses, until I finally found three or four perfect solutions. Really like the large focusing ring. Using the lens's diaphragm interferes with the light path and results in diffraction spikes which I find unattractive. Bokeh == Visual character of the lens optics to render light and color mixing together. A tiny bit of fringing, but that would only be noticed by pixel-peepers. Photos posted are pleasing but I'd be into seeing something new. I already did some trials with the Samyang 12mm lens. 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. These include canon lens for night photography along with good budget lenses for astrophotography. I also tested 200 f/2.8 tele and it is one of the most perfect lens in existence, as well as the 135. The one and only 300mm lens I tested is the Zeiss Tele-Tessar 300mm F4. Perhaps it's not a big thing, but for a L-graded lens this feature should be expected. This way you get both lenses with only one! Target for bortle 9 astrophotography? Is it possible to get good results on a Baader filter modifed Canon 450D and a good telephoto lens, or do I need to get a good APO? 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. For the rest there is Sigma 135 /1.8 Art also fantastic value lens. The focuser adjustment ring on the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is excellent, but fine-tuning your critical focus on a bright star at F/2 will take some trial and error to get right. Image quality is great, it is tack-sharp wide-open even though for partraiture, a little bit of softness is needed. CANON LENS FOR ASTROPHOTOGRAPHY. "Bokeru" is a verb, and it can apply equally to to optical and psychological effects, including the reduced mental clarity that can some with age. This lens flares easily and the flare can be especially ugly if a sun or flash are in the frame. This lens has a long focus adjustment ring, with great tension. For those of you that like to pixel-peep, have a look at the single image frame captured using the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 ED UMC at F/4. If so, which one? Would you recommend a collar/support for the lens? Is there a reason why a 135/2.8 or even 135/4 would provide significantly different images? What you need to know is the author is a hobbyist and hands his images over to px500, the bottom of the barrel so of course he is impressed, he doesnt use top flight gear day in, day out to earn his pay. 200mm Astrobin photos (not taken by me): https://www.astrobin.m USM F2.8 L II However, these APOs have a couple of drawbacks. 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. Let's the games begin! In photoshop I love to zoom 200, 300 and even 400% to see the extreme details it is an absolutely amazing lens, great backround blur, great for low light weddings with available light. The latter are designed for crop sensor cameras and the back of the lens sticks too far into the body of the camera and would hit the EOS-clip filter. Build quality: excellent. however i started to realise how every subject might actually be a cardboard cutout being photographed. To fit the Heart and Soul Nebulae in a single frame requires an extremely wide field of view (compared to the magnification of most telescopes). in the rain. Sharpness, contrast and the natural vignetting on full-frame cameras is awesome! The Rokinon 135mm F/2 was Built for Astrophotography In the middle of the OM System lineup, the OM-5 promises yesterday's top-tier performance in a lighter, more compact body. This is huge for me, as it allows me to be much more nimble with getting the right composition and angle. Manually focusing a lens for astrophotography is nothing new, but the manual aperture ring adjustments may feel a little strange at first. Preaching to the choir! when you hold the lens in your hand you know you are holding a fine peice of optical equipment. Another example is the 100mm (or sometimes 90mm) F2.8 macro lens. 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. There is no doubt that the 135L deserves it excellent reputation for image quality. Fit and finish are first-rate as well, with very smooth manual focus operation, and very fast autofocus on the camera. Could use a few updates. IQ will rival any other lens. It's bokeh is comparable to the 85mm 1.2 but IMO not as nice. Not too heavy. The Rho Ophiuchi Cloud Complex by Eric Cauble using the Samyang 135mm F/2 lens. A series of such images can be digitally stacked to produce excellent results. 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. I had both for a while. The Heart and Soul Nebulae captured using a DSLR and the Rokinon 135mm lens. They are by nature designed to compromise by magnification and distance, and are therefore not optically optimized at any single setting. Im getting a samyang to use with my 60D. For comparison, no other lens I know of would earn more than 8/10. All of them are extremely sharp and produce mouth-watering bokeh, and all of them are reasonably priced for what you get.". it is crisp, fast, and awsome. As a complete beginner in Astrophotography should I buy Rokinon 135mm lens or Canon EF 75-300mm lens with Canon EF 50mm lens? You're sour grapes man, you wish it were you who wrote the article. It's kinda curious how topsy turvy things have gotten since this article, just 4 years later, I think 135mm is possibly more niche than ever yet Samyang finally delivered an AF version of this concept at a lighter weight for E mount, but also at a higher price. (37% is difference, so you get little more, about 15.5Mpix). Reg. Im so new to all of this so thank you for your insightful and educational posts. It's just "girl" in front of blurriness.#2: Plants on a pond.It's okay. This is a very popular lens, and I am sure there are a ton of lens test reports for it available online. I was very happy for this reason to eventually get a full frame DSLR in 2007 and sell the 85mm lens and buy a 105mm one to replace it. The 70-200L being a much more useful lens. Now I have only the Nikon but I can try to take a photo of the same subject fully open Although this lens feels solid, it is rather light when compared to a telescope. Do you have a link to Yuri's photo stream? tanie i dobre opinie 9 opatek lub Biznes HUMAN Sport Insect Architektura Specjalne Krajobrazy Martwa natura Podry People 2023 Obiektyw o staej ogniskowej In this buying guide weve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best. Exposure uniformity (vignetting) is also really excellent, reaching a maximum of 1/4 EV (on a camera with an APS-C size sensor) at f/2, and dropping to well under 1/10 EV at f/2.8 and above. 85 Is a different story, my 85 gets used a lot. A higher-res Blackmagic Studio Camera just dropped. I have done a review comparing the sharpness and quality of bokeh to the Canon 70-200 2.8. So I sold it for nearly what I bought it for and chalked it up to a learning experience. I use it routinely in preference to many other multicoated filters I tested, including the new Hoya MC UV. I took a few shots with the lens on my way home after buying it. My guidescope is a 5in F5 Jaeger's achromat with a 2.3x Barlow, and a 9mm illuminated reticle eyepiece. 45 minutes. I just wish this lens had IS for low light and portraits with flash. But I sold it and went back to using a 70-200 (alongside a 24-70). What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? It improves slightly stopped down. Round one of polls are now open, pick your winners and share your voice. Light weight and robust. What I see is a photographer who should maybe instead stick to the kit lens, and learn composition first. (purchased for $900), reviewed August 22nd, 2008 How well do Fujifilm's film simulations match up to their film counterparts? My Nikon focus and aperture rings are a thing of highly finessed engineering beauty! lol, nice images, and i nearly bought this lens myself a few years ago. Otherwise I might not achieve focus? Such "full spectrum" cameras are somewhat more sensitive in the ultraviolet, but much more sensitive in the deep red and infrared. The flat lens hood design allows you to easily take flat frames with the Rokinon 135mm using the white t-shirt method or using a flat panel. Juksu, your point is well taken. The California Nebula. Prime means that this lens is fixed at 135mm, it is not a zoom lens that allows for focal length adjustments. I've tested some of the old Pentax 6x7 lenses with a friend. I ordered this lens on Amazon, utilizing my Amazon Prime membership. 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. Also, when shooting the heart nebula, is the sky tracker a must or not required? (purchased for $900), reviewed April 15th, 2011 To shoot indoors under typical gymnasium lighting, you often need f/2.0 or wider to get a shutter speed high enough to stop the action. Best lens for portraiture I've ever tried. The other one is the inevitable and persistent regret that, because of chromatic aberration, the full 75mm aperture of this beautiful lens can not be used in full visible spectrum photography. The flawless image quality is only half the story though. Another article that I read only the headline and saw a couple of samples then jumped directly to comments. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed January 1st, 2007 Reducing aperture with the built-in aperture iris interferes with the light path, and results in eight diffraction spikes around bright star images. (purchased for $1,000), reviewed February 4th, 2010 The 135mm f2 is by all accounts one of their better and more reliable lenses however I believe the chance of a defective lens is lower with the Canon. It really is about talent, creativity, and vision, not gear. 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. enlarge. Any experience with this camera and would this lens be a good fit? In the right hands this lens really does have "magic pixie dust", as a friend once described. Over the years, Ive shot deep-sky targets at varying focal lengths from 50mm to over 1000mm. 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. However, all the reviews were made by nature and sports photographers, and I would like to find out more about their performance in astrophotography. 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. However, I am convinced that its large aperture and fast F ratio would perform exceptionally well in three color or narrow band H-alpha and OIII photography. That whole rig comes to about $1200, minus the mount. Today I want to talk about another such lens design: The 135mm F2 lens. Several functions may not work. Chris referred to the Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM as 'a little gem'! Samyang 85mm f1.83. RATING. All lenses mentioned below are adaptable to Canon EOS cameras with slim EOS adapters which allow the lenses to focus just slightly past infinity. Many lenses lose their appeal after time, but not this one. thank you for that great review and also the explanations. 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. But ppl should know there is much better advice in the forums. On a full frame body, I rely upon this lens and it does not disappoint. sigh, overdone bokeh and centre sharpness bear little relevance to the art of this hobby. Overall, spectacular lens. Really, just an amazing lens, easily worth the $800-900 it commands on the street. I have heard others mention that this lens has a plasticky build quality, but I believe this aspect has been improved. 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. Colour and contrast is great. Here is a short list of great astrophotography targets to shoot at 135mm with this lens: Below, is an incredible example of the types of projects possible with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 lens. My only complaint about this lens is that the depth of the lens shade forces me to remove the shade in order to remove or replace the lens cap (my hands are fairly large). You don't have to worry about shopping for a better lens anymore. I cant decide whether to clean it up in processing or let it be. Since I am interested in wide field astrophotography, I bought a new, unmodified, Canon 600D body for use with telephoto lenses. 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. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. To achieve creamy bokeh, a lens should have a wide maximum aperture and a long focal length. This lens provides all of these requirements. Must have if you're serious about portraits. Tiring. (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. You can't really ask them to stand still while you move around. the EOS-clip filters are compatible with all EF lenses but not with the EF-s. USM works so quickly and accurately, it puts my 24-70/f2.8L to shame. I was expecting a lot more of an article that says "the best telephoto lenses for astrophotography". 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. However, as I have no actual experience with the Baader filter, I would suggest that you consult other members on the particular APO - Baader filter combination you have in mind. It would not surprise me if modern lenses were useable at full aperture. SharpStar Askar ACL200 200-mm f/4 astrographic telephoto lens, Astrotrac 360 tracking platform first impression, FIELD TEST: CARL ZEISS APOCHROMATIC & SHARPEST (CZAS) BINOVIEWER, Deus_Ex_Mamiya and Michael Covington like this. When coupled with my Canon DSLR camera, the entire system weighs just over 3 pounds. I have a vintage Nikon135mm f/2.8 AI-s which produces virtually the same bokeh and weighs a quarter of this or any other 135mm AF lens. 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. Check out I have a 135mm f2.8 lens I've used for wide DSOs but mostly I use 200mm. Diffraction from the cheap EF-s kit zoom lens was uneven. But the Rokinon f/2 version fits into a different market. The Rokinon website lists this lens as being useful for portraiture photography, and most telephoto applications. However, when my Canon "L" lenses are used at f8 they are all very sharp and the 135L does not blow the others away. I found with the 70-200 made me lazy. Sharp but smooth at the same time. 2. Thats quite a jump from 135mm, so the camera body you use with this lens may change the types of targets you shoot. In this post, Ill explain why I think the Rokinon 135mm F/2 is the perfect addition to an arsenal of astrophotography lenses. (purchased for $900). Some APOs can be fitted with pricey telecompressors, but those invariably result in vignetting and coma. The model I use feels solid and the barrel is constructed with metal. In general, prime telephotos should outperform zooms. We think it rises to the challenge. Whos Afraid of a Phantom: Istar Phantom 140mm F/6.5, that is? Add To Cart. In this configuration, the lens is still a very fast F3.4. It is really thanks to another commentator pointing out something that finally makes sense out of this mess: This article is by someone who just got his first first telephoto ever, and is writing about how he feels when he is trying it out. One of the prime examples of such a design is the "nifty fifty"the 50mm F1.8 lens construction that many lens manufacturers provide. Sigma 105/2.8 DG EX Macro (very sharp at infinity) Neutral yet very nice colours. These lenses go about as close as you could get without a dedicated macro lens. On FF I use this lens for both tight portraits and landscape shots. Which is the better buy? And with our first long lenses we were all impressed were we not? Adam007,"a headshot is exactly where I want to see all those megapixels"No thanks. Creamy smooth bokeh. A specialist lens, at best, though I did enjoy the cat image. 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. parts of your main subject extend beyond the DOF range it will never look flat. Thanks Gary! It's Film Friday, so let's take a look back at the film format that gave APS-C sensors their name! It actually makes my eyes water as I try to resolve how bad the blurriness is. Rain or shine, it's hard to find a camera that does all the OM-5 can for the price. The Rokinon 135mm F2.0 is considered to be a full-frame lens because it can accommodate a full-frame image sensor with its 18.8-degree angle of view. I have only owned my 135mm for less then a year, but already it is one of my top three most used and most fun lenses. I used Canon's 135 f/2 for ten years. Its fast f/2.0 maximum aperture is effective in low light and enables shallow depth of field control. https://www.dpreview.com/news/7777572944/video-using-the-5-700-canon-200mm-f2-on-the-new-sony-a7r-iii, DPReview TV: We share our 2021 predictions while freezing our asses off, Video: Here's how Adobe Lightroom Mobile works on the Zeiss ZX1, DPReview TV: How to set up Sony's 'Real-Time' autofocus tracking, 7Artisans releases a $195 35mm F5.6 golden pancake lens for Leica M mount cameras, OM System M. Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro Sample Gallery, Fujifilm X-T5 production sample gallery (DPReview TV), DPReview TV: Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM Review, DPReview TV: Sony 50mm F1.4 GM vs Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG DN Art, The best cameras for family and friends photos in 2022, Best affordable cameras for sports and action in 2022. You may need to refocus your subject as the temperature changes throughout the night. A lot of us have been saying this for years. I got many great shots from this lens but also missed ton of shots due manual focus only. If you can tolerate vignetting, there are many normal 35mm lenses that are great wide open. In 3 months I got loosy focus ring. ", I'd no problem with that. http://www.idyll.com/laney2014 My Canon EOS 60Da with the Rokinon 135mm F/2.0 mounted to a Fornax Mounts LighTrack II. Thanks & Cheers 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. Widefield Astrophotography with the Samyang 135mm f/2 Lens Now I wonder why people are never happy even on 3rd day of a new year :) Come on guys just think "Micael Widell" was working over holiday period to publish this free article ;). Valerio, I sold my Canon Lens because in Nikon Lens there is a Defocus control option, very usefull in a daylight photos, as portrait. It turns out that this. Comment * document.getElementById("comment").setAttribute( "id", "a0721c0ca7d0974fd27b5d0ceb81918a" );document.getElementById("cfd2c22fe2").setAttribute( "id", "comment" ); Your email address will not be published. It always happens to me with Samyang, it makes good glasses, fast and sharp, I want to have them, but they are not comfortable to use, not in Sony E, their focus is not precise, and they are not "so" cheap. Both the 135 and 200mm Canon l lenses are winners IMHO. Sharp wide open, wonderful bokeh, fast AF in dark conditions. For this reason, a combination of a good light pollution filter, and the use of flat calibration frames are recommended. Canon 60Da DSLR and Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L2 lens at 135mm, f/3.2. Most of these APOs have F ratios around 6.5, and are unable to comprehend in their field of view large celestial objects such as the Andromeda galaxy, the North America nebula, and comets. But again i am just at the beginning and i also do not want to use now a telescope. 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. Now i have the f2.8 version, and while the resolution is better it s under no circumstance as good as the f/4 one. (purchased for $860), reviewed March 9th, 2017 One of Canon's best lenses for a reasonable price. Asahi Optical's Pentax KX was one of the first cameras with this lens mount, acting as a midrange model in the lineup. One very popular lens for bokeh fiends is the Canon 85mm F1.2it can produce extremely creamy out of focus backgrounds. The next 200mm lens of excellent quality is the 200mm F4 Nikkor F which requires the Nikon F to EOS adapter. Focus throw. The 135 L handles this well. It's small, light, cheap and extremely wide but is it any good? I have the Sony SaL 135F1.8 Zeiss Lens and think that is excellent. 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.'. Ironically all the sample images in this post are painfully soft. Bye It can isolate subject while being tack sharp with beautiful creamy bokeh when used at f2. Zeiss Jena or Oberkochen? If you have pictures taken using the Rokinon 135mm F/2 lens, please feel free to share your results in the comments section (links to Astrobin, Flickr or your personal gallery are fine). These lenses can be had on eBay in mint condition for around $70, and are probably the most price efficient optical instrument in the world. Far from being a generic run-of-the-mill image hosting website, it was created and is still operated by an astrophotographer, and boasts features that are very specific to astrophotography. This lens has the Pentax K bayonet mount, and requires the K-EOS adapter for attachment to Canon EOS cameras. Dear Trevor, Also, I used to have a Nikon 180/2.8 ED IF AF and 300/4 ED IF AF. One of them is simplicity: A clear, simple subject that constitutes a shape, standing out and contrasting against a calm and simple background. 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. 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. With an effective focal length of roughly 216mm when coupled with a Canon crop sensor body, the field of view is nearly identical to the one youd find on a full-frame camera with a 200mm telephoto lens. You can barely tell it's a pond.#3: Duck.Birds with bokeh are fine. 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). Camera tech for video has come a long way in recent years, with faster autofocus, subject tracking, eye tracking and smarter lenses that stabilize the frame. No telephoto lens, and no apochromat, is sufficiently corrected to accomodate such a wide spectral range. 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. I've seen several listed but here are more to consider. @ Juksu - you're pathologically clueless. Mr Ericsson makes a very good point, and to go and dig irrelevant background info on him to discredit him is just well THAT is trolling. As rest you do just by cropping or stitching. I wanted to add my experience with some lenses that I thought worthy of being considered too, and some of the equipment that I have used. At around $900 US very good price for quality no IS. 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. If you want the best value possible for your money, and can survive without autofocus, buy the Samyang. Begun in 1975, the Pentax K-mount legacy continues to this day. I do not like this. Canon 135 mm is really E X T R A O R D I N A R Y lens. Digital Cameras & Digital Camera Kits | Camera Gear | B&H Given the spot on DPR front page, lots of 'what-lens-should-I-buy' newbies will be spending their money on this one. The diameter of the lens is 77mm, with a non-rotating filter mount on the objective lens.