8 mm circular fisheye IS L USM
OK, I am in a bit of a sarcastic mood I admit, so perhaps my reasoning is not up to normal standards. However, I never really followed the hype request for wide aperture normal focal length IS lenses – they sort of do not mix well as far as I am concerned. How can you fit in an IS mechanism in an optical formula that is already compromised by being wide aperture – a 50 mm f/1.4 IS seems as a freak to me – make it 2.8 and IS or make it 1.4 and no space for IS.
Yet, we have seen a recent surge of wide angle lenses fitted with IS – first the 24 and 28 f/2.8 IS’es. Now the 35 mm f/2.0 IS. IS is a fine thing and I enjoy it in many of my lenses, but I just can not fathom why it should be put in wide aperture wide angle lenses. Choosing between a 35 mm f/2.0 with IS and a 35 mm f/2.0 optimised for optical performance I would chose the latter any day of the week – why? For the intended use of such a lens, you will either have to put it on a tripod anyway or if you need to stop motion you will have to shoot under the 1/f limit any way … grunt!
So, perhaps the next thing we will see is a 8 mm circular fisheye with a 4 stop IS mechanism
|Umbrellas by pleytime|
from An A to Z of Subjects- Week 21, U
|Glass ball on a perforated metal plate _2 by harubux|