about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
165 317842 May 22, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
95% of reviewers $608.24
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.79
9.72
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
          
out_of_focus
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 16, 2010
Location: Poland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 18, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $900.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: awesome optics (tack sharp!, beautiful bokeh, colors&contrast, no ca), quick af, size, feels really solid even though it's not weather sealed, it's black (does not focus so much attention as white Ls)
Cons:
no mount ring included

Bought this lens 5 months ago, because I needed a fast lens for sports. I was considering between buying this lens or Sigma 70-200. Decided to buy Canon, because Sigma was lacking sharpness on 200mm (and I already had Canon EF 85mm 1,8, so can live without zoom). I know that I missed some shots, because it's not a zoom lens... but on the other hand - this lens is just AMAZING! Before I bought it, I thought, that my 85mm is sharp, but 200 beats any lens I own in terms of sharpness (I take pictures mostly with f/2.8). I shoot sports very often with this lens and when it comes to autofocus, USM is silent and very quick (sometimes not qucik enough, but I blame my 40D body for it). Colors and contrast looks great, as well as bokeh, when I shoot portraits. Pictures does not suffer from CA as they do when I use Canon 85mm.
The only thing I miss is a mount ring. With this price tag, Canon should include it!
All in all - the best lens I own, worth every penny! If you can live without versatility of zoom lenses, this may be the best choice. Can't wait to test it with 1,4x extender...
Some pictures of volleyball I took with this lens:
http://www.damianglowacki.pl/photo/index.php?album=photoreports/Sport1&page=4


Oct 18, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add out_of_focus to your Buddy List  
ManofMustard
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 4, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 7, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Autofocus speed, tack sharp, weight, great colors and bokeh, price, well built
Cons:
no built in lens hood or IS

I am renting this lens for the Seattle Seafair airshow weekend.

I shot over 750 pictures of the airshow practice on Friday. I have fallen in love with this lens. Last year I shot the airshow with a Tamron 200-500 and found I had to pre-focus just to get decent pictures. No more prefocusing baby! My hit rate on the focus was much higher than I was expecting. This lens makes my pictures from last year look like crap. I am truly awe struck on how sharp & contrasty the pictures turned out.

If I didn't need a wide angle lens next I would certainly pick one of these babies up. Anyone want to buy a Tamron 200-500?


Aug 7, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ManofMustard to your Buddy List  
LPrimeFreak
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 29, 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 29, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Tack sharp, great bokeh/colours/contrast right out of the lens, superfast AF, more compact than 70-200, built in lenshood (version I), great built quality.
Cons:
no IS, fixed focal.

The best price/quality & most underrated Canon L!
I have the version I with built in hood, it's almost perfect!

It's produced in the age when IS did not exist, but version II also doesn't have IS, this isn't much a problem cause it's relative compact and stable to handhold.

This was my first L, thanks to this lens I got addicted to sharp primes with low f-values (maximum f2.8).

As I was so amazed by the 200L (and 135L) that I had a problem with the 1.6 cropfactor,they were meant for fullframe.

Therefore I bought a fullframe, especially to get the maximum out of both "beast-L's".

I sold my 17-55 f2.8 IS, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 50-500, Sigma 150. Great rangers, but I hardly used the last 3 Sigma's and left Sigma definitely. I'd rather have image quality than a lot of mm's with less quality.

I used the 200 2.8L for tele/basketball pictures on my 40D & 5D2. So much detail, you can see the sweat on the players foreheads sharp from far away with amazing bokeh of the audience behind!

These pictures can be published immediately in a magazine, without any PS corrections or whatever needed!

It's hard to believe, but this red ring changed my whole photography, crop to fullframe and all L's now :-)

This is the compact Canon black lens with longest mm's, the 300 2.8 is white, I don't like long white lenses practically Smile



Jul 29, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add LPrimeFreak to your Buddy List  
hatch1921
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4546
Review Date: Jul 1, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $750.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Not heavy, super fast focus, great color/contrast and the bokeh is very pleasing.
Cons:
None

Almost the same results as the 135L. Blazing fast focus...bokeh looks great! Super sharp wide open! Sold the 70-200L IS F/2.8 for this lens... no regrets! Sharper than my 70-200 wide open... very nice lens. Best of all it doesn't fell like a tank in my hands.

Well worth the money IMO. Another great prime!

Hatch


Jul 1, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add hatch1921 to your Buddy List  
LeoJan
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 26, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 26, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Optics are top, sharp, color, no CA. Nice bokeh, you can compare this lens with the 135L. Takes the 1.4 extender with very little loss, múch better then the 70-200 zooms.
Cons:
IS would be nice, but the alternative , the EF 200L F2.0 IS cost somewhat more :) and does not have the nice low profile.

Overall a very nice prime, with a lot of value for your money. Not a prime you use all the time, like a 50 or 35 mm, but I use it more then I thought I would. This prime has a lot of competition of the range of 70-200 L zooms from Canon itself, which are already are very good. Biggest reason to buy this lens secondhand was the size, weight, the nice black color. You can walk around town with this lens, I do not try that with my 70-200 L F2.8 IS. Cheap for the quality you get.

Jun 26, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add LeoJan to your Buddy List  
Ektar25
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 21, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 669
Review Date: May 12, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $625.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Awesome sharpness Fantastic bokeh Compact & light compared to other telephoto lenses
Cons:
None

Read a lot of great comments about this lens before buying it. All of them are true. No micro-adjustment was necessary with my 5dII, the lens was sharp as a razor right out of the box. I have other L lenses, but so far this one is the sharpest of the bunch.

May 12, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Ektar25 to your Buddy List  
robert s
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Apr 17, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $980.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Light & Compact
Cons:
none

Excellent sharpness wide open, which improves slightly at f4.
Creamy bokeh. Great for head shots.
Also works well with extension tubes for close-up

see example:
http://www.zealscape.com/photo4544064.html


Apr 17, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add robert s to your Buddy List  
Trevor Sowers
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 14, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 101
Review Date: Apr 14, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $850.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Well built. Fast accurate AF. Very sharp at all apertures. Well balanced and light.
Cons:
not weather sealed.

Wow!

I shoot wide open 80% of the time. If I stop down it is to get greater depth of field not better IQ.

I would buy this lens again in a heartbeat.



Apr 14, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Trevor Sowers to your Buddy List  
mahonet
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 30, 2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 21, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Light, easily portable high quality lens!
Cons:
Actually nothing!

I bought my lens for under 600 €. I came back to this excellent lens after using some years 70-200 f4 zooms (IS and non IS), because I need a fast and light 200mm tele with ef 300 f2.8 L IS -lens with the same picture quality. And indeed, the quality can be compared with ef 300mm 2.8 L IS! One of the best and cheapest lens in Canon L-lens line up.

Feb 21, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mahonet to your Buddy List  
dnauer
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 22, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 11
Review Date: Feb 13, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Weight and build quality for a 200mm is great. Great sharpness, contrast, and the focus is lightening fast.
Cons:
I do have trouble getting the lens hood on this lens sometimes, but that is about all I can complain about -- it is the MkII version so has a removable lens hood.

My first "L", I had borrowed a 70-300 and used it a month and found almost all my shots were around 200mm, and I really didn't like the results with the 70-300 -- it just didn't "feel" right -- so took the leap and tried the "L" prime. I shoot with a 40d. Now I'm hooked. I'm an amateur that is regarded in my local circle of friends, and have had good equipment a long time (my first camera I bought in the mid-70s was an used Canon F-1 with FD 50mm f1.4 -- but I've never been much of a buyer of lenses). My first full day out with this lens resulted in several pictures that rank among my favorites ever -- I am amazed at the capabilities of this lens. I'm reluctant to post on a list like this with true professionals that really are expert, but I can't help it -- it is the best purchase I've made since that used F-1! I think having confidence in your equipment does help with the quality of the work, and I've been trying a lot of things with this lens since I'm motivated to learn how to use it's capabilities -- and I'm not disappointed so far!

Feb 13, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dnauer to your Buddy List  
Jay Adeff
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

Registered: Feb 27, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 344
Review Date: Feb 2, 2010 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Solid build quality. Very sharp at f/2.8. Fast AF. Small, light, and affordable.
Cons:
None

This is Canon's sleeper L lens. It is 99% as sharp as the 300 2.8L IS. I bought it to replace the 70-200 2.8L which was a huge dissapointment to me. The 200 prime is fantastically sharp at f/2.8. The AF is fast, silent, and accurate. One of my favorite lenses of all time.

Feb 2, 2010
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Jay Adeff to your Buddy List  
Phrantic
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 1, 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 1, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $250.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Light, fast, cheap, sharp.
Cons:
Lacks the flexibility of a zoom, but you know that when you buy it.

For me, this is the ultimate lens. I came from a Canon 70-200mm F2.8 which I found too heavy to carry around. This lens is much smaller, lighter, cheaper, and it's coloured black. Its performance is also slightly better, resulting in sharper images wide open. However, don't buy this lens over the 70-200 just for the image quality, because both are superb and there's not much to tell between them.

If you're looking to pick up this lens second-hand, see if you can find a good copy of the discontinued mk1 version. This one's optically similar to the mk2 but has a built-in lens hood. For me this is ideal, because the lens hood is stronger and smaller than the bulky hood that comes with the mk2. Also, you can't lose it. What surprised me is that I could attach 77mm filters to the hood (though rendering the hood useless) but also my 77mm lens caps - handy if you like. I have a tripod ring for the 70-200mm F4 which also fits this lens like a glove.

I have also used the 70-200mm F4 and the F4 IS as well as the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 and ultimately found that I only use the long end of the zoom. So for me it only made sense that I'd go for a prime. And I got it CHEAP.


Dec 1, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Phrantic to your Buddy List  
eWILDz
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 9, 2004
Location: India
Posts: 9
Review Date: Nov 10, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Price, IQ
Cons:
Non-IS ??

Probably the cheapest (and the best) L glass that will perform as 300/2.8 on any crop DSLR !

Nov 10, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add eWILDz to your Buddy List  
ajt36
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Dec 15, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 458
Review Date: Nov 1, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $709.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: IQ, build, weight, most inexpensive L glass
Cons:
Limited use focal length, no tripod collar included, cheaply constructed lens hood - all minor stuff

I've been using this lens for about a month and I think it must be a marketing ploy by Canon to get people sucked into "L" glass. It is the most inexpensive way into L glass, but not an often used focal length (for most people). Still, I'm sucked in! The image quality is first rate... quite unbelievable compared to my 28-135mm and my 50mm/1.8 II (and I like both of these lenses very much). I do very little color adjusting in post with this lens. It is super sharp... for me, even at f/2.8... and the bokeh... just other worldly!!! So, I'm hooked... next on the list is a 135mm/2, which is probably my favorite focal length, but for right now, just a bit much for me to swallow price-wise... so I'll just be taking several steps back with the 200mm/2.8 on my 30D! Smile

Nov 1, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ajt36 to your Buddy List  
rndman
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 10, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 2
Review Date: Oct 4, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $695.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: 1.Sharpest even wide open 2. Light weight 3. Black
Cons:
None

After looking at all the reviews, I could not resist myself to add this to my gear. I bought it new. This is one beautiful lens. Solidly built. Very sharp even wide open. Just did a test run for this. Very highly recommendedYou can see the images below.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rndman/sets/72157622385563687/


Oct 4, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rndman to your Buddy List  
recordproducti
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 215
Review Date: Aug 8, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent lens with superb sharpness, lightness and almost unobtrusiveness.
Cons:
None for the money.

I bought a used mark one version with the built in hood. Brilliant! It's even more discrete than the mkII version with big hood.

After several weeks worth of intensive shooting with it I'm sold. Much lighter to lug around than the 70-200's and I much prefer the bokeh to the f/4 70-200's. It's kind of hard to think of any subjective downsides to this lens, as many other owners have said, it's one of the sleepers in the L range. It's also very affordable and almost addictive, it's on my 5DmkII much more than I expected.

I find this a perfect partner to my 85L (mkII). My 85L is sharper (it's sharper than any 135L's I've tried too so I must have a really good one) and the 85L is more 3D but in a different way. The 200 f/2.8 has a natural look, it's warm and a little less contrasty than the 85L but that's not to say it's not contrasty. I think that the mkII version may have more contrast due to the longer hood but in any case, I absolutely adore the quality of images I'm capturing and the ability to walk around all day and not feel exhausted carrying the zoom.

This is a sadly overlooked and brilliant value lens but I suspect it will be discovered by the masses soon and become one of the hot lenses to own, for good reason.


Aug 8, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add recordproducti to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
165 317842 May 22, 2013
Recommended By Average Price
95% of reviewers $608.24
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.79
9.72
9.8
1ef200mmf_28_1_1_


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