backup
Photoshop actions
 
 

Search Used

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
174 354085 Nov 23, 2016
Recommended By Average Price
95% of reviewers $614.16
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.72
9.65
9.7
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
          
Lani Kai
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 3, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 782
Review Date: Apr 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, light, inexpensive, great colors, inconspicuous
Cons:
Built-in hood a little too shallow (MkI)

This was my first L lens. In the three months following my purchase of this lens, I bought the 70-200mm f/4L and then 300mm f/4L IS... I think I've caught the L fever but I don't have any problem with that... Though my wallet does. In the end I decided to keep the 70-200mm f/4L and sell this because I don't really need the f/2.8 and the loss of IQ wasn't too bad. And I don't have anything else that covers between my 50mm macro and 200mm. Anyway, this is not to say this is a bad lens because it is a fantastic lens. A great value, too. Very sharp with excellent colors, and very portable. My copy was a UH--made in 1993--but it was as smooth as a new lens.

Apr 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Lani Kai to your Buddy List  
Cristian DM
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 3, 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Apr 3, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $400.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: VERY SHARP, great build, great feel, smooth focus ring, light and discrete compared to white L tele-zooms, extra fast AF, very good with Teleconverters, heavenly bokeh.
Cons:
Less flexibility than a 70-200 F2.8 zoom.

This is an amazing lens.

Image quality is no short of exceptional. This is a lens you don't need to stop down to increase sharpness.
Color and contrast are as good as it gets.

Build quality is excellent, but note that the lens is not weather sealed.

If you need a fast telephoto for poorly lit sports, this is the one for you. It only lacks the flexibility of the zooms, but if you need this focal lenght, it really can't be beat (with the exception of the discontinued 200mm F1.8L of course).

It gives VERY good results with both 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.
On a 1.6x crop body it acts like a 320mm F2.8... a bargain if you can find it used!

I definitely recommend this lens.


Apr 3, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Cristian DM to your Buddy List  
CameraGeorge
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 30, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 82
Review Date: Mar 31, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Fast Focusing, Great colour and 'feel' to images!
Cons:
None!

This is my first 'L' lens and I am very impressed with the quality, both physically and in the images it produces. It focuses a lot faster than my cheaper lenses, and feels about the right weight. The bokeh is smooth, and I am pleased with the high percentage of great photos straight from the camera.

It isn't a cheap lens, but when used on a 1.6x crop body, like the 350d it becomes a f/2.8 320mm - great value for money!
The only problem with buying it is that you will want to get more and more L series f/2.8 lenses!


Mar 31, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add CameraGeorge to your Buddy List  
Bobbo Clark
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 343
Review Date: Mar 30, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, good color and contrast, well-built, fast focusing, lightweight for a 200mm/2.8, built-in hood is either a godsend or a PITA, black color doesn't attract attention like the white lenses
Cons:
None, except maybe the lens hood, but I haven't had a problem with it.

I am reviewing the Mk.I variant. This is optically identical to the newer Mk.II. The only difference between late Mk.I copies and the Mk.II is the Mk.I has a built-in hood which is smaller (good for portability, some-what bad for flare protection). Some people like it, some people don't. Call me crazy, but I'm apathetic.

I shoot for newspapers. I don't make huge enlargements, and I don't "pixel-peep", so when it comes to absolute sharpness and photos of brick walls, I'm not the best person to ask whether the 135/2 or this lens has better resolution by 1 or 2 l/mm. Photography is where I get my income, and I don't have the time or the money to waste on testing 4 copies of a lens like some people on this forum.

I bought this lens for a special hockey game (it was the last regular season game in my college's 40-year-old rink against their archrival, so it was kinda important). I kept getting lots of out of focus shots, but I luckily found the focus limiter early in the game, and that made the AF almost perfect.

This is the best EF-mount lens I have ever owned. It is leaps and bounds above the 100-300 zoom I had before.

The tripod collar is not needed, especially if you have a grip on your camera (either an add-on or built-in). I keep it because I think it looks naked without it. I will say this: The tripod collar makes handling on a monopod infinitly better. I will never own a telephoto under 135mm ever again if it doesn't have one available.

Will I keep this lens? No. I need the flexibility of a zoom, and the quality of the Sigma and Canon 70-200/2.8 lenses are almost as good. I will look at Canon L lenses from now on, and I will probably never buy a lens for a DSLR that isn't one ever again (unless my 50/1.8 II dies...great lens that's lasted me 4 years of hard wedding and P/J work and has yet to let me down).


Mar 30, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Bobbo Clark to your Buddy List  
Jesper
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 9, 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 817
Review Date: Mar 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Extremely sharp wide open, good colours and contrast. Fast AF. Good build quality. Relatively light and small. Black, so it's not as conspicuous as other L tele lenses. Good price for such a great lens.
Cons:
It would have been even better with IS. No rubber weather sealing ring.

I wanted an L tele lens and considered the following options:

70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM - Great lens, but very big, heavy and expensive.
70-200 f/4 L USM - Also very good, but f/4 and no IS. I wanted at least f/2.8 or IS.
300 f/4 L IS USM - Ofcourse also very good, but big and heavy.

So I chose 200 f/2.8 L II USM because it's f/2.8, it's relatively light and small (only half the weight of the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS) and it's not too expensive (about the same price as the 70-200 f/4 L). I also got a Canon EF 1.4x extender with it, which makes it a very good 280mm f/4.

Ofcourse IS would have made this lens even nicer.


Mar 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Jesper to your Buddy List  
yanka
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 17, 2005
Location: Latvia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: sharp, fast AF
Cons:
maybe no IS

http://www.pbase.com/janisjrj/test_ef200_28l

I look narrowly at anothers prime L lenses


Mar 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add yanka to your Buddy List  
mal233
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 398
Review Date: Mar 13, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $560.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: very sharp, very fast.
Cons:

A dream to hold and shoot with. Oh, and did I say very sharp, yes!! It differs from the original by only the change in the retractable hood, which I like. Purchased refurbished from B&H. If you can find one like this and like primes you will be extremely pleased especially with a 1.6 mag factor on a digital body - how about a 320mm/2.8 lens for under $650!!!

Mar 13, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add mal233 to your Buddy List  
udoo
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 16, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 220
Review Date: Feb 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $500.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very sharp wide open, beautiful colors, very nice bokeh, price
Cons:
no IS

This is the sharpest lens I own. The best part of this lens is it is very sharp even wide open at F2.8. This is my first L lens and I can understand why most of the folks love the pro series. The colors out of this lens are really nice and saturated(looks more natural then when you boost it in PS). The bokeh created is simply breath taking. I have to get used to this as and stop down a bit as sometimes the DEF is too shalow.

It does feel heavy on my 10D. With the multiplier factor of 1.6x. The 200 gets converted to 320mm which is really long especially when shooting without a tripod and your subject keeps moving. I wish this lens had an IS on it. I think that is my only complain. But for this price I should'nt be complaining.


Feb 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add udoo to your Buddy List  
incdigital
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 226
Review Date: Feb 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $425.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Quick AF, Sharpness is outstanding in the center and on the extreme borders, Lightweight enough to hand hold
Cons:
tripod ring optional

Shocking lens...i went in the camera shop to buy a new 70-200L IS 2.8 for my other camera body...when i saw this little used gem on sale for $425.00...i put it on my 5D and compared the 2 lenses @ 200mm at several stops. I knew the prime would perform better but i was surprised to see the extra sharpness extend all the way to the borders....from what i could see...border sharpness is 90% of the middle wide open...what a performer. Cant argue w/ results so i now own the 200L.

Feb 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add incdigital to your Buddy List  
Liscia
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 13, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1470
Review Date: Feb 4, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: SHARP, fast focusing, balances well on my 20D (w/o powergrip), image degradation almost nil with 1.4X teleconverter and remains easy to handhold, relatively very little money for one of Canon's sharpest L's. Oh yeah, did I forget it's SHARP?
Cons:
Why did Canon delete the built-in lenshood originally available on th Mk.I version? Would like to have had that instead of fiddling with the bayonet mount hood it comes with-which I changed out for a rubber Hoya Multihood.



Feb 4, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Liscia to your Buddy List  
johnastovall
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 7, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1332
Review Date: Jan 30, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $650.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Everything about this lense is true. It is razor sharp and provides wonderful Bokeh.
Cons:
None.

I got mine in December and it's rapidly become one of my two favorite lenses for shooting rural Texas landscapes from the road side. One shot made with it has already been published. It is also very good for catching people in small rural towns as it lets you keep distance and doesn't stand out like the white 70-200mm f/4.00 I have does.

Jan 30, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add johnastovall to your Buddy List  
George Chew
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 2, 2005
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 11
Review Date: Jan 28, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very very sharp image, even wide open. Very fast focusing. It is light enough to carry around. It is relative cheap.
Cons:
Not as versatile as my dream lens, ef70-200mm f2.8L IS.

Greetings,
I saw this lens on my favorite shop. I wasn't exactly looking for this lens, in fact I want a 135L. But after 1 week of testing, my heart refused to return it, and at this price, its too good to let go.
This is lens is a gems. It is very hand holdable. Most of the photos I took on a local amateur soccer match are very sharp. Trying it on flowers, the saturation and bokeh are excellent.
This lens is not very much appreciated by many photographers due to its in between range. But, I'm in love with it. Next month, I will bring it along for a local paino concert show. I think it will be the best situation for this lens to perform. Enjoy...


Jan 28, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add George Chew to your Buddy List  
opusthecat
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 14
Review Date: Jan 27, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Fastest focus I've ever used. Killer-sharpness. Well-made.
Cons:
Be nice if Canon made an IS version

Best lens I own. Coupled with my 50mm 1.8, 17-85 IS---I've got everything I need. This lens focuses near-immediately. I push the shutter release and it's on it man. Even in low-light, it focuses super-fast. Sharpness is fantastic. Size is VERY manageable. Not too heavy and the metal build is super solid.

I just hope Canon makes an IS version someday as I've lost some good shots hand-holding this lens.


Jan 27, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add opusthecat to your Buddy List  
Digipat
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 3, 2005
Location: France
Posts: 141
Review Date: Jan 27, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Optical quality !!
Cons:

As I decided to buy a 100-400 L for wildlife photos and as I travel a lot, I needed a complement to my 28-75 2.8 for street portraits and a lot more. I started to investigate on 135 f2, 70-200 L (IS or non)... after a long period of tests, I was amazed by its regular astonishing quality (various samples of each lens tested)... even better than the 135 f2!... yes, I remarked this.
According to all my requierements, it came on the top of the list.

In "close" distances, it is really incredibly good.
In longer ones, you may notice, at FULL SCREEN preview, a very very little subtle drop in quality, but "closing" a little the diaphragm, it becomes perfect.

You can search in the corners... they look like the center.

Contrast, colors? Is it a joke? WAOU!!


Jan 27, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Digipat to your Buddy List  
photomarvin
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1789
Review Date: Jan 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $499.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Size & Weight, Color Rendition, Contrast, Bokeh, Price Sharp picture out of the camera...2.8!!!
Cons:
That I didn't get it sooner! Also, I may now want to get more L glass!

What can I say that others haven't! This lense is absolutely incredible, especially for the price. I picked up a MK1 version for just under $500 from KEH, and I really like having the built in hood. The bokeh is so buttery smooth. I highly recommend!!

Jan 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add photomarvin to your Buddy List  
uz2work
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11930
Review Date: Jan 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $660.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: relatively compact size, very nice image quality
Cons:
see below

I find the 200/2.8 to be a very capable lens that produces outstanding images. However 200mm is starting to get into the length where I'd like to see IS on a lens. While the image quality is outstanding, I find that, in most situations, the edge in image quality over that of my 70-200/2.8 IS isn't all that great. Thus, unless travelling light is a priority, I often choose to use the zoom first because of both the zooms range and also because the zoom has IS. If the 200/2.8 had IS or if it was a stop faster, I'd probably be using it more.

Jan 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add uz2work to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
174 354085 Nov 23, 2016
Recommended By Average Price
95% of reviewers $614.16
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.72
9.65
9.7
1ef200mmf_28_1_1_


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