KINGOFKNGS Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
It's a remarkable lens. I've gotten some really nice glass over the last several years, and I feel like my 200 1.8 is probably my favorite lens I "get" to use. I do primarily bird photography, so I have used my 600 IS a whole lot more, but there's just a little extra something with the 200 1.8 compared to my copy of the 600. (I've recently acquired a 400 2.8 IS version I and can't fairly speak about it yet since it's so new, but the 200 1.8 seems to be every bit as good as the 400.) As saneproduction stated, the lens is exceedingly sharp. My copy is very sharp wide open, and improves only slightly in sharpness stopping down. As saneproduction mentioned, vignetting is the major thing that seems to improve. I got my UM date coded copy off of here about 3 years ago. At the time, the lens was absolutely mint. You literally couldn't tell it from new. Now, there is a little bit of wear around wear the hood mounts and there is a tad bit of paint wear on the foot.
There ARE times when I think IS would be helpful, but I don't know that it's worth an extra $2K plus the loss of max aperture from 1.8-->2.0. If I put the lens on a monopod, I'm generally completely comfortable with it, although I'd probably still prefer to have IS if possible.
@1.8 on 1Ds2
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6218/6232445669_7ae34652cb_b.jpg
@1.8 on 1Ds2
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5140/5483201769_ed7205459f_b.jpg
@1.8 on 1Ds2
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6108/6232958950_c6cd8b13de_b.jpg
Ryan
|