Archive 2008 · Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
p.1 #1Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
Anyone heard when this will hit the market and at what price?
Jan 16, 2008 at 10:12 PM
p.1 #2Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
I was just speaking to a Canon rep Wednesday night...no news on release date or price.
PMA is just around the corner...be patient.
Jan 17, 2008 at 12:09 AM
p.1 #3Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
PMA is only 14 days away. It would be safe bet to expect an announcement at, or just prior to, the show.
Jan 17, 2008 at 03:23 AM
p.1 #4Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
March 2008. Price unknown.
Played with one today - very nice.
Played with one today - very nice.
Jan 17, 2008 at 05:34 AM
p.1 #5Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
cwphoto wrote:
March 2008. Price unknown.
Played with one today - very nice.
You lucky dog.
Now, Christian, what's the MFD on that lens ?
What did its weight feel like relative to, say, 300 f/2.8 ?
March 2008. Price unknown.
Played with one today - very nice.
You lucky dog.
Now, Christian, what's the MFD on that lens ?What did its weight feel like relative to, say, 300 f/2.8 ?
Jan 17, 2008 at 06:20 AM
p.1 #6Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
cwphoto wrote:
March 2008. Price unknown.
Played with one today - very nice.
Wow, seriously?! Nice!
Did it feel very front-heavy like the 200 1.8 or more balanced like the 300 2.8 IS?
Thanks,
~Travis
March 2008. Price unknown.
Played with one today - very nice.
Wow, seriously?! Nice!
Did it feel very front-heavy like the 200 1.8 or more balanced like the 300 2.8 IS?
Thanks,
~Travis
Jan 17, 2008 at 11:31 AM
p.1 #7Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
Maybe it felt a bit like the Nikon 200mm F2.0?
Jan 17, 2008 at 03:27 PM
p.1 #8Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
cwphoto wrote:
Played with one today - very nice.
As the girls in Grease (the musical) sang: Tell me more, tell me more...
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Edited on Jan 17, 2008 at 03:52 PM
Played with one today - very nice.
As the girls in Grease (the musical) sang: Tell me more, tell me more...
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Edited on Jan 17, 2008 at 03:52 PM
Jan 17, 2008 at 03:51 PM
p.1 #9Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
I call it fake until you send one too me for further inspection. lol
Jan 17, 2008 at 04:58 PM
p.1 #10Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
A hooray for that lead-laden beast! 
Edited by AGeoJO on Jan 17, 2008 at 03:00 PM GMT
Edited on Jan 17, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Edited by AGeoJO on Jan 17, 2008 at 03:00 PM GMT
Edited on Jan 17, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Jan 17, 2008 at 04:59 PM
p.1 #11Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
PrecisionPhoto wrote:
The f/2 is only a dream and the one below is real, faster and mine
Holding it like that.....if you droppped it, you would have ended up with an instant nightmare on several levels.
However, one could always sell a broken 200 f/1.8 for parts, I suppose.
Edited on Jan 17, 2008 at 05:05 PM
The f/2 is only a dream and the one below is real, faster and mine
Holding it like that.....if you droppped it, you would have ended up with an instant nightmare on several levels.
However, one could always sell a broken 200 f/1.8 for parts, I suppose.
Edited on Jan 17, 2008 at 05:05 PM
Jan 17, 2008 at 05:02 PM
p.1 #12Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
PetKal wrote:
Played with one today - very nice.You lucky dog. Now, Christian, what's the MFD on that lens ?
What did its weight feel like relative to, say, 300 f/2.8 ?
MFD is 1.9m with the limiter at 3.5m.
Weight feels signifcantly less than the 200/1.8, say a little lighter than the 300/2.8 IS - but not much.
It comes in the same lens trunk as the 300/2.8 IS, and is quite a bit smaller than the 300/2.8 IS - certainly much smaller than the 200/1.8.
Which brings me to the biggest drawcard - the handling. The compact nature and the balance on the 1D Mark III is a huge improvement over the 200/1.8. The slight loss in lens-speed certainly is relayively painless (to me) when one considers how much the handling has improved with the 200/2 IS.
Speaking of IS, it feels a little improved over the other super-teles - but didn't 'feel' like it was 4-stops worth based on my brief test.
Price: I got the feeling it will be a little less than the 300/2.8 IS in the Aus market. Which puts it at about AUD8k RRP.
Availability has been pushed out to April here due to the Olympics, probably late March if you are Stateside.
Sample shot:
ZB info:
100% crop:
Edited on Jan 18, 2008 at 01:56 AM
cwphoto wrote
March 2008. Price unknown.Played with one today - very nice.
Now, Christian, what's the MFD on that lens ?What did its weight feel like relative to, say, 300 f/2.8 ?
MFD is 1.9m with the limiter at 3.5m.
Weight feels signifcantly less than the 200/1.8, say a little lighter than the 300/2.8 IS - but not much.
It comes in the same lens trunk as the 300/2.8 IS, and is quite a bit smaller than the 300/2.8 IS - certainly much smaller than the 200/1.8.
Which brings me to the biggest drawcard - the handling. The compact nature and the balance on the 1D Mark III is a huge improvement over the 200/1.8. The slight loss in lens-speed certainly is relayively painless (to me) when one considers how much the handling has improved with the 200/2 IS.
Speaking of IS, it feels a little improved over the other super-teles - but didn't 'feel' like it was 4-stops worth based on my brief test.
Price: I got the feeling it will be a little less than the 300/2.8 IS in the Aus market. Which puts it at about AUD8k RRP.
Availability has been pushed out to April here due to the Olympics, probably late March if you are Stateside.
Sample shot:
 |
||
| http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=32539&stc=1&d=1200641945 | ||
|
ZB info:
|
||
| http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=32540&stc=1&d=1200642440 | ||
|
100% crop:
|
||
| http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=32541&stc=1&d=1200642673 | ||
|
Edited on Jan 18, 2008 at 01:56 AM
Jan 18, 2008 at 01:34 AM
p.1 #13Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
cwphoto wrote:
MFD is 1.9m with the limiter at 3.5m.
Weight feels signifcantly less than the 200/1.8, say a little lighter than the 300/2.8 IS - but not much.
It comes in the same lens trunk as the 300/2.8 IS, and is quite a bit smaller than the 300/2.8 IS - certainly much smaller than the 200/1.8.
Which brings me to the biggest drawcard - the handling. The compact nature and the balance on the 1D Mark III is a huge improvement over the 200/1.8. The slight loss in lens-speed certainly is relayively painless (to me) when one considers how much the handling has improved...Show more →
Those are very promising features and news, Christian. Thank you very much.
The 1.9m MFD is a significant improvement. Also, handling of the 200 f/1.8 feels like wrestling with a small but heavy pig. Awkward positioning of the strap lugs does not help either.
The lens that you shot with: was that one of the initial prototypes or
some sort of a first production unit ?
Edited by Fred Miranda on Jan 19, 2008 at 04:17 PM GMT (Reason: fixed page layout)
Edited on Jan 19, 2008 at 03:17 PM
MFD is 1.9m with the limiter at 3.5m.
Weight feels signifcantly less than the 200/1.8, say a little lighter than the 300/2.8 IS - but not much.
It comes in the same lens trunk as the 300/2.8 IS, and is quite a bit smaller than the 300/2.8 IS - certainly much smaller than the 200/1.8.
Which brings me to the biggest drawcard - the handling. The compact nature and the balance on the 1D Mark III is a huge improvement over the 200/1.8. The slight loss in lens-speed certainly is relayively painless (to me) when one considers how much the handling has improved...Show more →
Those are very promising features and news, Christian. Thank you very much.
The 1.9m MFD is a significant improvement. Also, handling of the 200 f/1.8 feels like wrestling with a small but heavy pig. Awkward positioning of the strap lugs does not help either.
The lens that you shot with: was that one of the initial prototypes or
some sort of a first production unit ?
Edited by Fred Miranda on Jan 19, 2008 at 04:17 PM GMT (Reason: fixed page layout)
Edited on Jan 19, 2008 at 03:17 PM
Jan 18, 2008 at 04:24 AM
p.1 #14Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
Wow that 100% crop you posted was pretty impressive... Thanks for sharing the info.
Jan 18, 2008 at 08:11 AM
p.1 #15Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
PetKal wrote:
Weight feels signifcantly less than the 200/1.8, say a little lighter than the 300/2.8 IS - but not much.
It comes in the same lens trunk as the 300/2.8 IS, and is quite a bit smaller than the 300/2.8 IS - certainly much smaller than the 200/1.8.
Which brings me to the biggest drawcard - the handling. The compact nature and the balance on the 1D Mark III is a huge improvement over the 200/1.8. The slight loss in lens-speed certainly is relayively painless (to me) when one considers how much the handling has improved with the 200/2 IS.
Speaking of IS, it feels a little improved over the other super-teles - but didn't 'feel' like it was 4-stops worth based on my brief test.
Price: I got the feeling it will be a little less than the 300/2.8 IS in the Aus market. Which puts it at about AUD8k RRP.
Availability has been pushed out to April here due to the Olympics, probably late March if you are Stateside.Those are very promising features and news, Christian. Thank you very much.
The 1.9m MFD is a significant improvement. Also, handling of the 200 f/1.8 feels like wrestling with a small but heavy pig. Awkward positioning of the strap lugs does not help either.
The lens that you shot with: was that one of the initial prototypes or
some sort of a first production unit ?
A production unit I am told.
I can't stress enough how the new lens' handling has improved. The old 200/1.8 needed so much more 'commitment' than the new lens IMO.
Edited by Fred Miranda on Jan 19, 2008 at 04:17 PM GMT
Edited on Jan 19, 2008 at 03:17 PM
cwphoto wrote
MFD is 1.9m with the limiter at 3.5m.Weight feels signifcantly less than the 200/1.8, say a little lighter than the 300/2.8 IS - but not much.
It comes in the same lens trunk as the 300/2.8 IS, and is quite a bit smaller than the 300/2.8 IS - certainly much smaller than the 200/1.8.
Which brings me to the biggest drawcard - the handling. The compact nature and the balance on the 1D Mark III is a huge improvement over the 200/1.8. The slight loss in lens-speed certainly is relayively painless (to me) when one considers how much the handling has improved with the 200/2 IS.
Speaking of IS, it feels a little improved over the other super-teles - but didn't 'feel' like it was 4-stops worth based on my brief test.
Price: I got the feeling it will be a little less than the 300/2.8 IS in the Aus market. Which puts it at about AUD8k RRP.
Availability has been pushed out to April here due to the Olympics, probably late March if you are Stateside.
The 1.9m MFD is a significant improvement. Also, handling of the 200 f/1.8 feels like wrestling with a small but heavy pig. Awkward positioning of the strap lugs does not help either.
The lens that you shot with: was that one of the initial prototypes or
some sort of a first production unit ?
A production unit I am told.
I can't stress enough how the new lens' handling has improved. The old 200/1.8 needed so much more 'commitment' than the new lens IMO.
Edited by Fred Miranda on Jan 19, 2008 at 04:17 PM GMT
Edited on Jan 19, 2008 at 03:17 PM
Jan 18, 2008 at 09:34 AM
p.1 #16Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
Christian, if indeed that was a production unit you had in your hands, then Canon may be in a position to start shipping within a couple of months.
Superior handling is a step in the right direction. Combine it with a superior performance and we should witness another legendary lens being born.
Superior handling is a step in the right direction. Combine it with a superior performance and we should witness another legendary lens being born.
Jan 18, 2008 at 10:41 AM
p.1 #17Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
Thanks for all of the great info and the test shots. It has helped me decide to wait to test the new 200mm lens rather than buying a used 200 1.8 which is available locally.
Jan 19, 2008 at 11:35 AM
p.1 #18Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
What do you guys think would be better (more versatile) on a 40D: the 200mm F/2 or the 135mm f/2 ?
Jan 19, 2008 at 11:45 AM
p.1 #19Any News on Canon 200mm F/2 Lens Release
SoundsGood wrote:
What do you guys think would be better (more versatile) on a 40D: the 200mm F/2 or the 135mm f/2 ?
What are you planning to shoot?
I currently use 200/f1.8 and 135/f2 on the 40D and on a 1D-series body. The 135/f2 will be more versatile than the new 200/f2 on the 40D for indoor sports/portrait use unless you have distance issues in large areas. I can get a gymnast head-to-toe on the beam from ~90ft away with the 135/f2 on the 40D. On the gymnastics floor routines, even the 135/f2 can be a bit long at times on either body, so the 200/f2 would be out of the question unless shooting far distances.
Thinking of night time football, the 200/f1.8 and, I assume, the 200/f2 are outstanding for freezing action for night field sports with a 40D not to mention the nicer bokeh from the wider aperture. The 200/f1.8 takes a 1.4xII converter without noticeable quality loss (not even "measurebators" find any) so I would expect the 200/f2 to yield the same result. The 135/f2 also takes converters well with no noticeable loss using a 1.4xII and -very mild- softness wide open with the 2xII.
So, it depends on how much reach you need and how often you need it. If you are ONLY using a 40D and plan on lots of indoor low-light work, I suspect you will get more use out of the 135/f2 on the 40D. The decision is harder when considering the 1.3x crop of the 1D-series where I use the 200/f1.8 more than the 135/f2.
What do you guys think would be better (more versatile) on a 40D: the 200mm F/2 or the 135mm f/2 ?
What are you planning to shoot?
I currently use 200/f1.8 and 135/f2 on the 40D and on a 1D-series body. The 135/f2 will be more versatile than the new 200/f2 on the 40D for indoor sports/portrait use unless you have distance issues in large areas. I can get a gymnast head-to-toe on the beam from ~90ft away with the 135/f2 on the 40D. On the gymnastics floor routines, even the 135/f2 can be a bit long at times on either body, so the 200/f2 would be out of the question unless shooting far distances.
Thinking of night time football, the 200/f1.8 and, I assume, the 200/f2 are outstanding for freezing action for night field sports with a 40D not to mention the nicer bokeh from the wider aperture. The 200/f1.8 takes a 1.4xII converter without noticeable quality loss (not even "measurebators" find any) so I would expect the 200/f2 to yield the same result. The 135/f2 also takes converters well with no noticeable loss using a 1.4xII and -very mild- softness wide open with the 2xII.
So, it depends on how much reach you need and how often you need it. If you are ONLY using a 40D and plan on lots of indoor low-light work, I suspect you will get more use out of the 135/f2 on the 40D. The decision is harder when considering the 1.3x crop of the 1D-series where I use the 200/f1.8 more than the 135/f2.
Jan 19, 2008 at 12:13 PM