about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
166 323749 Sep 3, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
95% of reviewers $609.56
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.77
9.71
9.8
1ef200mmf_28_1_1_

Specifications:
Telephoto lens boasting high image quality and carrying ease. With two UD-glass elements and rear focusing to correct aberrations, image delineation is extremely sharp. Background blur is also natural-looking, as was simulated by Canon. The lens comes with a dedicated, detachable hood.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
          
n_utting
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 11, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2
Review Date: Mar 21, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp. Solid construction. Good finish. Lightning-fast AF. Did I mention sharp?
Cons:
Nothing yet

Well, the 200mm f/2.8 arrived this morning and I had a hard time waiting until lunchtime to take some test shots. From earlier reviews I had expected a superb lens, nor was I disappointed.

Physical construction is solid with a practical crackled paint-type finish. The lens definitely looks the business, but how does it perform?

AF is lightning fast with a 20D body and focusing on fast-moving birds was easy.

The following links are to a full-frame handheld shot of a starling at about 2m distance ( http://www.utting.org/images/nigel/Canon/starling.jpg ) and a 100% crop of the bird's head ( http://www.utting.org/images/nigel/Canon/starling-head.jpg ).

12 hours' ownership is hardly an in-depth test, but first impressions are that the 200mm f/2.8 is worth it's not insubstantial cost.

This is my second L series lens (the other is a 17-40mm) and I doubt on experience to date that it will be my last.


Mar 21, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add n_utting to your Buddy List  
IraGraham
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 622
Review Date: Feb 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $575.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very Fast focus, sharp as a razor, awesome background blur. Made well with nice black finish.
Cons:
No IS (Image Stablization)

Since I bought this lens, I am now turned on to sharp Canon L series fixed focal length lenses. I can't wait to buy the Canon 135mm 2.0L. I hear it is even sharper then the 200mm 2.8L.

Feb 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add IraGraham to your Buddy List  
Bowman1
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 14, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Feb 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Price, image quality
Cons:
none

I have only owned this lens for about five months now, but I am very pleased with it. Provided I hold up my end of the bargain, the images I get with this lens are always clear and sharp. These things are practically a steal on ebay right now. For the money, this is a remarkable piece of glass that deserves a home in your camera bag.

Feb 14, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Bowman1 to your Buddy List  
RichieHatch
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 24, 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 131
Review Date: Jan 17, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $450.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, great colour and contrast and well built. Also not to heavy and is well balanced with 20D and Grip.
Cons:
None

Bought this lens (MK1 version) from a friend and have been very impressed so far. Its my first Canon Prime L lens and I am amazed at the sharpness, contrast and quality. It focuses very quickly also. The out of focus quality (bokeh) is extremely milky and smooth. I would say that this is a sharper lens than my 50mm f1.8. Good portrait / close wildlife lens. Highly reccommended....!

Jan 17, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RichieHatch to your Buddy List  
Doug Vann
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 18, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 50
Review Date: Dec 21, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $700.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: f2.8, good solid feel, sharpness
Cons:
nothing

I bought this lens used about 2 years ago. I have had several other lenses come and go over the past couple of years but this one I have kept. Nice lens to use if you are out hiking with very good sharpness. You can feel confident when shooting with this lens that you will get results that can be enlarged with good results. Bargain price for L lens quality.

Dec 21, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Doug Vann to your Buddy List  
damonfff
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 9, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 662
Review Date: Dec 9, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Beautiful bokeh, creamy colour, looks great on a 10D.
Cons:
Heavy. Heavy.

This lens makes me feel good. The photos I get from it are amazing. I'm a new prime person but now I only shoot with 3 primes and it's good. This one is a definite must have.

Dec 9, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add damonfff to your Buddy List  
bka20d
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Sep 17, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1762
Review Date: Dec 3, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $620.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: quality of the glass, size& weight, aperture
Cons:
none

all i can say is wow! the quality of the images taken with this lens blows me away! i had purchased a 70-200 2.8L and found it too heavy and large for causal shooting outings...took it back and got the 200 and have been smiling ever since.

Dec 3, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add bka20d to your Buddy List  
neilgundel
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 2, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 31
Review Date: Dec 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $675.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Size & weight. Sharpness, Color, Bokeh Price
Cons:
Doesn't zoom. Doesn't have four-wheel drive.

This lens is a little better than the 70-200/2.8 and WAY smaller and lighter.

Images from this one are virtually identical to those from the 135/2 - the only reason to stop down is to get depth of field.

Nearly perfect performance, fast autofocus, excellent color, bokeh, you name it. I'm still using film and scanning it, but I suspect that this lens would be truly remarkable on a 1Ds MkII.


Dec 2, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add neilgundel to your Buddy List  
CarlG
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 11, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 6355
Review Date: Nov 23, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $530.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Super sharp, great contrast and accurate colors. It is not white and very easy to handhold - well balanced with the 1D Mark II
Cons:
Not as sharp at f/2.8 as I would have hoped but at f/4 and smaller - stellar!

What can I say but I fell in love all over again after shooting with this lens! My first love affair was with the 135 f/2 (which is still my first love - apologies to the wife, of course) but the 200 f/2.8 is right up there. I performed a very unscientific comparison of the two lenses and found that at f/5.6 and smaller, very tough to tell them apart.

My other concern was how does the 200 f/2.8 stack up against the 70-200 IS at the same focal length? Although the 70-200 IS copy I have is excellent, the 200 f/2.8 is better at this focal length. The difference is not earth shattering but enough to notice.

All in all, a super lens and a REAL SLEEPER in the "L" lens lineup - a steal, IMHO, for what they are selling for used on FM.

Highly recommended!!

Carl


Nov 23, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add CarlG to your Buddy List  
joe mama
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 4618
Review Date: Nov 17, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $535.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Small and light, super fast AF, excellent IQ (image quality)
Cons:
None

I use primes pretty much exclusively (except for the Sigma 18-50 / 2.8 -- a *great* lens!), so I have a bit of a bias towards them. The reason I prefer primes is due to their smaller size and weight and their speed. In the case of the 200 / 2.8L, however, there are equally fast 70-200 zooms but they are much more bulky and the AF is slower.

Anyway, primes make you suffer the fixed FL. However, and this could just be a personal thing, it's amazing how small of a problem this is for me. If you're locked in at 200mm, sure, you'll miss some shots at other FLs, but you'll find other shots you wouldn't normally have looked for. It would be interesting to compare how many shots I would take in a day with just a 70-200 versus just a 200. I bet they'd be close!

Primes are easier for me to use, too. I don't have to waste precious brain power trying to frame with the added variable of FL. I can use those freed up brain resources to concentrate on sex instead! : )

Seriously, there are times a prime will cost you a shot. For some people, it might be most of the time, and for them, primes are not an option. But, for me those lost shots are easily outweighed by the convenience of a smaller and lighter lens. Also, since the AF is a tad faster, I get some shots I would have otherwise missed (yes, even at 200mm!).

Anyway, this is a great lens, no doubt about it, and I use it often. Some say to use a 135 / 2L with a 1.4x TC. Well, I have a 135 / 2L (another great lens that I also use often), but haven't used it with a 1.4x TC (since I don't have one). My feelings are that the IQ would be close, but I bet the AF speed would suffer. That's just an unsubstantiated opinion, however.

So, my recommendation: get this lens if you need 200mm and are comfortable with primes! You can see pics with it on my pbase account: http://www.pbase.com/joemama.


Nov 17, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add joe mama to your Buddy List  
miles0823
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 11, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1265
Review Date: Oct 30, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $519.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Everything except the big hood
Cons:
Nothing except the big hood

I have had a few L lenses. This is the best one I have had yet. Someday I hope to be able to afford a 135 2.0 also. I am sure I will be just as happy with that lens. I do miss the zoom of my 70-200 2.8, but not the weight. I LOVE THIS LENS.

Oct 30, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add miles0823 to your Buddy List  
pdhonte
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 11, 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
Review Date: Aug 5, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $600.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sturdy but not too heavy, super sharp and beautiful bokeh
Cons:
Not included expensive tripod mount

I bought this lens instead of the 70-200 4L which was out of stock and I don't regret it. The prime aspect is a little difficult at first but one learns to get used to evaluating the distances before hand. Great of course for head shots, gives also - with a bit more of effort - very nice full body portraits. Perfect for the kids at the beach.

Couldn't recommend it more.


Aug 5, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add pdhonte to your Buddy List  
Olsen
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 4, 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 147
Review Date: Aug 2, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $850.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Reaonably priced for high performance, lightweight and usefull for just anything from portraiture, landscape and wild animals. Just excellent with a 1,4x converter and very good with a 2x converter. Not to say a 25 mm extender ring which makes it a versatile macro tool.
Cons:
None, really, possibly with the exception of the rude and unsofisticated sun shade which can be troublesome to get off and on sometimes.

The only reasonably priced pro (L) tele lense on the EF menue. Beond this the lenses gets exessively expensive, heavy and bulky. Performance far better and a lot cheaper, a lot more compact and lighter than most of the zooms bought by most EOS system users. Possibly one of the best lenses that Canon makes. I reccommend this 200 mm 2,8 L II USM, - together with just any converter and the 25 mm extender and you have virtual photographical toolbox with a wide application range. - Far, far better buy than any zoom lense on the EF menue. One of the few lenes I have that I originally bought new together with my first EOS camera, the EOS3.

Very sharp, beautiful bukeh, fast AF, light and relatively compact to carry around. I use it a lot. Like on birds with a converter on snakes and insects with the extender and the plain lense on moose (from a car). I carry it along on long mountain treks, - it weighs practically nothing, on city tours and vacations to Asia. A 'must have' for any serious EOS shooter.

In comparison, my 300 mm 2,8 L USM hasn't been more than 500 meters from my car.


Aug 2, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Olsen to your Buddy List  
Argyle Monkey
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 258
Review Date: Jul 30, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp across the aperature range, quick AF, very compact
Cons:
None

Bought a used MK1 version of this lens. I couldn't be happier with the quality of this lens. I've never experienced flare even with the short hood. This lens produces buttery smooth bokeh wide open with thremendous sharpness. I use this lens wide open the majority of the time unless I'm trying to get more DOF.

Jul 30, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Argyle Monkey to your Buddy List  
rebel300
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 30, 2001
Location: United States
Posts: 13833
Review Date: Jun 23, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $625.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: extremely sharp on mk2
Cons:
none i can see

Very very sharp on the MK2...I see no difference between it and the 135/2...very nice lens and an easy carry...like the all black color also...

Jun 23, 2004
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Add rebel300 to your Buddy List  
Unregistered
Offline
Location: United States
Review Date: Mar 31, 2004 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Really sharp, Fast, Value for money for a L lens
Cons:
None (except is is not a zoom)

Built quality is excellent. Photos taken are really sharp and of excellent contrast, much better than the non L zooms. Lens speed is fast to enable higher shutter speed, which is necessary for a non-IS telephoto lens. USM focus speed is very fast and it is relatively light to carry around in outdoor trips. Lens quality is as good and with no noticeable difference even with a 1.4X extender. This means that with a combined weight of less than 1kg you got both 200mm F2.8 and 280mm F4 lenses.

I really have no point to complain about, except that it is not a zoom and therefore not as versatile. If a 200mm prime is what you are looking for, you will not be regret having this lens.


Mar 31, 2004
Edit/Delete Message

   



Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
166 323749 Sep 3, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
95% of reviewers $609.56
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.77
9.71
9.8
1ef200mmf_28_1_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next