...And by the way, did I make a big mistake with the Big Dragoon? Here Canon has very considerately made a lens of ideal specification for me—35mm ƒ/2, with in-lens IS...and it apparently made it just for me, too, as nobody else seems to be buying them. And there are not one but two wider primes with IS, too. You know me, always gassing on about my finicky lens preferences. I probably should have gotten a 6D with an IS prime or two. I even have a Canon EOS-1v in the house, too. That lens could do double duty.
I need to stop thinking now. It just gets me in trouble. Too few cameras is definitely not my problem at the moment.
Original contents copyright 2013 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Hugh: "5D3 with the shutter set on quiet mode, 3200 ISO, 35mm ƒ/2 IS lens, and you've a street shooter to beat any Leica M. Sorry! :-) "
Rob: "I recently shocked myself by shelling out $2600 for a new Sony RX1 with its superb Zeiss 35mm ƒ/2 lens. The camera is a blast to use, and the images it produces are jaw dropping. I can live with the RX1's obvious limitations as a fixed-lens, single-focal-length camera, but my biggest complaint is that it lacks image stabilization. I understand that Sony probably chose to omit IS because of size and/or cost considerations, but still it is something that I miss. The chief mitigating factor is that the sensor performs very well at ISOs up to 6400 (and above), so one can simply select a fast shutter speed to minimize camera shake. Still, as one who is accustomed to in-body stabilization with my Pentax DSLRs, I know how valuable IS can be. Having it in the Canon 35mm is a big plus for that lens."
Jay: "Now I have to send you some of my photos with this lens :-)"
Mike replies: Yes you do!