p.13 #1 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
Rober > it is a lucky guess !
I new the subject is difficult from the past year Jidai Matsuri : she is walking (you cannot follow her, too many people), the uchikatsugi (hat) tends to catch the AF very quickly, and the light is very very difficult (hat gives a lot of light) ... not an easy subject !
because she moves quite fast inside the procession, you do not have time to reconfigure the camera for this particular character
so I decided to use AF on her mouth only, it is far enough from the hat so AF is not fooled even if subject is walking, and I closed the aperture just a little because I wanted to make sure her eyes would be in focus, at f2.0 you somehow need a perpendicular face to have eyes in focus if you got for the mouth ... I only had one try because I wanted to have the look and it is difficult to catch, so I just closed a bit and hopped the image I had in mind would come up ! (most of the time I focus on the eyes)
if you look at the HD on my site you will see the right eye is in focus, but the left one could be sharper, next time I will close it a little bit more, maybe f2.8 would have done the trick !
p.13 #2 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
Alain,
when doing the head shots with my 200 f/2, using 2.0 is tough to get (eys in focus)on a moving subject and going to 2.8/3.x usually gets the job done nicely but even then it can be a " crap shoot ". I can see what you mean now by the hat catching your AF. I never would have guessed this until you pointed it out. It truly is a great capture !
Thx for the reply back.
p.13 #5 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
Breitling65 wrote:
Not sure what is so special about? For 11 pages I checked in this thread maybe 3-5 shots are good ...
I believe this is a bit of an over statement here, I have seen some very nice images here from talented people, and feel the critic is not deserved for the vast majority.
And yes I looked at your work before writing that.
p.13 #8 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
Even though the photographer is the most important determinant of image quality, I guess when you have a lens like this you get held to a higher standard of quality, rightly or wrongly.
Breitling's comments I think are quite constructive - 200L users why not respond to the challenge and blow Brietling away?
p.13 #9 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
Dawei Ye wrote:
.
Breitling's comments I think are quite constructive - 200L users why not respond to the challenge and blow Brietling away?
Breitling is an excellent photographer and he knows his equipment and this is his way of convincing himself he does not need the 200L IS.
As an owner of the 135L and 200L 2.8, I must admit the 200L IS is not $4K better,
until you need the IS at 1/60th or you are on the sidelines working next 300L and 400L shooters.
p.13 #10 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
I believe this is a bit of an over statement here,
Do you think this is not:
"God #$%$ it!!!...I shouldn't have clicked this thread."
I like most Canon L's, however can't figure meanings of statements above. What is so special in this thread?
There are some good shots but also lots of not as good too. Lets be honest about ...
p.13 #12 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
Psychic1 wrote:
Breitling is an excellent photographer and he knows his equipment and this is his way of convincing himself he does not need the 200L IS.
As an owner of the 135L and 200L 2.8, I must admit the 200L IS is not $4K better,
until you need the IS at 1/60th or you are on the sidelines working next 300L and 400L shooters.
It is membership into the club.
Thanks, my point is a bit different. I like my new car too , also I am happy as any other new owner of same car. However at least some details of it should somehow shine to other people (not owners). Or you like cats faces made with $5K lens? ...
p.13 #13 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
The Canon 200 f2 IS is way over priced at the moment. Its the only reason I moved over to Nikon. It should have been priced at the same price as the 300mm F2.8 IS or just below. Though, I can understand people buying a 200mm F2 IS/VR prime lens to replace 85L, 135 F2, 300mm F2.8 IS/VR because it does. And it does, in some style. Also, ultra sharpness is from f2.2 to F2.8.
I agree, some of those photos does not do that lens any justice but this lens is not hype. Its a joy to use, at least for me. Its not called a super tele for nothing.
p.13 #16 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
PetKal wrote:
I guess that would bring it to the 28-300L, or 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, or 5DII price.
Sure, why not.........give 200 f/2 IS to the people.
Well, other you mentioned should be twice cheaper too ... Actually, do you know already how much 70-200 f/2.8 IS II would be in US? I can't find this info.
p.13 #18 · Post your Canon 200mm f/2 (200/2) shots!
PetKal wrote:
No, I haven't heard a thing on it yet either. I am guessing now..... somewhere in the price range $2.3k to $2.6k for starters ?
I agree with Peter's guess. It'll closely match Nikkor's 70-200VR2.
, also I am happy as any other new owner of same car. However at least some details of it should somehow shine to other people (not owners). Or you like cats faces made with $5K lens? ... 
