Sorry, I should have never mentioned anything about the 200/2. I don't Need the 200/1.8, it's more of a want. Therefore if a spend 5k plus on a lens i will just pick up a first gen 500/f4 like i use to own and will be far more useful. I will just give it some time and if i come across a smoking deal on a 1.8 i will pick it up.
GoGo wrote:
Just to add a little info to this thread I would like to add;
I bought a really nice copy of the 200 1.8 in early 2006 and used it very happily until the new lens came to market. being a responsible business person I didn't think twice about selling the old lens (200 1.8) and buying the new 200 2.0 IS.
Well guess what, after about a year and a half of using the new lens extensively I was consistently reminded that something was missing. The IQ that I was used to was gone!
There is no other way to put it, the new lens is not even close to the original, something is missing. Something about the design or the materials used make the original 200 1.8 is magical, there is nothing in the known universe to equal this lens and if you shoot one you will find out what I am trying so pathetically to explain. It stands alone, nothing that Canon, Nikon or Ziess has ever made comes close to this lens.
I have been interested in a Canon 200 1.8 for some time and have come very close to pulling the trigger.
I read that Canon is no longer servicing these lenses, which is the main reason holding me back. Would it be worth the investment to get the 200 f2 instead? I had the USM assembly go bad in a 12 year old 500 f4, so i'm kinda hesitant with lenses this old, especially ones without a chance a being repaired. It's kinda hit and miss but I'm sure a minty 1.8 would give me years of trouble free fun.
Just curiuos if any one had any issues with the 1.8's and there thoughts if they were in my shoes?
If I were to consider buying one today, I would certainly source repair centers and contact them first and ask if they had a good stock of parts and what appears to be the most common repair on this lens. I would make sure I had at least two or three sources of repair before I made the leap.
Check with KEH in Georgia. They used to sell a lot of theses and they might have been able to strip down old ones for parts. I would give them a call or email just to find out.
Just my own opinion. I wouldn't get the 1.8 unless it was really cheap. I would be too worried that after paying a price that is similar to the new version having it break and ending up with an extremely expensive paperweight. Once these things are discontinued there is little repair shops can do for parts unless another one dies (and not for the same reason yours stopped working) and is sold for parts.
dadgummit wrote:
...Besides, is 1.8 really that different than 2.0?
That's pretty much the same as asking, "is f/1.2 really that different than f/1.4?". There is no "right" answer.
For me, yes f/1.8 is really that different than f/2. IMO, a one-third stop difference (f/1.8 vs. f/2) at 200mm is at least as significant as a half stop difference (f/1.2 vs f/1.4) at 50mm or 85mm.
The 200 f/1.8 is an amazing lens. And so it the 200 f/2.0 IS.
I once did a survey on FM concerning older Canon glass to learn who had bought an expensive lens, it broke, and they ended up with an expensive door stop within the first 3 years of ownership. To my surprise no one said they ended up with a lemon in the first 3 years. No doubt it happens but the failure rate was very low.
If you do your homework and buy from a reputable person there shouldn't be too much concern.
Grant
This has been my expereince as well with my 300 2.8-non IS. I've owned a few of them over the years, and have never had a problem, even with one in particular which appeared to have not been taken care of at all. As long as the glass is clean it seems to be built for the long haul and then some.
Also, on the "paperweight" discussion, I've seen 300 2.8's that are listed on auctions as "broke, for parts" still go for over a thousand bucks. Either the parts are worth that much, or someone is willing to take a gamble that they can figure out what parts are necessary, source the parts, and fix it, ending up with a perfectly working lens for a steal of a price.
Agreed, the return policy and potential to buy a warranty is why I linked it. I bought mine there and they were happy to send photos. The condition was also better than I expected.
I am pretty sure there are some spare assemblies for 200 f/1.8 still floating around.
Less than two years ago, an electronics parts company had several of these critical parts (brand new) selling on ebay:
(1) protective meniscus
(2) focusing lens unit
(3) main flexboard
(4) EMD
Someone cleaned up that stock real good, although the prices were very high. For example, the AF unit was selling in the range $500- $800.
Then, there are parts salvaged from lenses which have been written off and sold for parts.
It stands to reason that a company such as Midstate Camera might have stashed away some of those spare parts for older high value lenses.
If I were to buy a 200/1.8 I would also buy spare parts for it already. FM has a lot of threads on the 200/1.8 and they describe what parts are often looked for for replacement/repair.
If I could turn back the clock by a decade I would have bought the last brand new copy of the 200/1.8 with my 10D.
Because they can't get ny spare parts from Canon