 |
|
|
danb708
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 26, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 282
|
|
Review Date: May 1, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, f/2, sharp wide open, build
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This lens is everything you could want in a lens. Amazing sharpness, thin depth of field and of course built like a tank. I bought the tc 1.4 iii to go with it and the combo is great. *UPDATE - I have had this lens for a while now and all I can say is it has really exceeded my expectations. From shooting sports to portraits this lens will amaze with its razor thin depth of field and lightning fast autofocus. The keeper rate is the best of any lens I have ever owned. The problem now is there is no going back, I want more big whites I just hope they can live up to this beast! If utmost quality of images is your highest quality go sell a car or mortgage your house and buy one.
|
|
 May 1, 2014
|
|
Tom Dix
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 29, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 1963
|
|
Review Date: Aug 13, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Lighter than the predecessor, and better balance than the venerable 200 1.8. Relatively quick auto focus and excellent fore and background blur.
|
|
Cons:
|
AF, with 5 series, not as quick as 2 decades older 1.8. Blur of the 2IS is excellent, however 1.8s blur is exceptional. Resolving ability, color, micro contrast, and overall IQ falls short of the 1.8.
|
|
|
This lens, while excellent is a bit of a disappointment. It has excellent af, both quick and accurate, yet, with the 5 series, not as quick and accurate as its older sibling. The balance and lighter weight, are huge plusses, yet the resolving ability, micro contrast and color fall short of the 1.8. The blur, while exemplary, is not of the exceptional quality of the 1.8
The IS is and excellent addition and allows handholding in the 3 to 4 stop range A welcome advantage when photographing weddings/events.
I really like this lens, with reservation, the IS is so very pragmatic, the balance allows handholding for longer periods, compared to its older sibling. What is inexcusable is the IQ; a significant step back from a 1980s design. IMHO, inexcusable.
I am keeping the lens, however, while I will be using it as a main lens in the wedding/event portion of my business, it will serve as back up, to the 1.8, in portrait sessions.
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2013
|
|
Yudhi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2013
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 500
|
|
Review Date: May 9, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
color, contrast, bokeh, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
price?
|
|
|
best lens ever....
great combo with 5Dmk3...
|
|
|
May 9, 2013
|
|
jamato8
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3199
|
|
Review Date: Mar 31, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $5,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp, great IS, worth the money, built to work.
|
|
Cons:
|
None, I knew what I was getting into.
|
|
|
Pure excellence. This glass to me, is like my finest Leica glass. The 135L and the 200L are just superb performers. IS works fine with extension and with the latest tele 1.4 and 2 extenders, you get very good results.
This lens has traveled the world with me and will continue to do so. There is no substitute for me, not the 70-200 II, nothing. If you need what it does, it is waiting.
I bought this in 2010.
|
|
|
Mar 31, 2013
|
|
jaiprophoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 6, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 7, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Incredibly fast autofocus, razor-sharp images, bokeh to die for, nice IS, and a warranty that Canon supports...
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight, cost...as usual....However, you get what you pay for...
|
|
For indoor sports, this is THE STANDARD!!! The weight, although significant, is workable with a monopod and given the amazing sharpness of the images captured. With the 1DX (please see my review), this is my favorite lens without question. I'm relentlessly amazed at the ice hockey images I can capture across ice with this lens (in a low-light cave-light setting!).
Many of my primary images are captured with this lens at:
http://jalexanderimaging.smugmug.com/
|
|
|
Mar 7, 2013
|
|
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 293
|
|
Review Date: Feb 13, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fantastic lens!
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight & size & price
|
|
|
After owning this lens for two years, I finally decide to review it, after I sold it not long ago.
I bought the lens brand new two years ago. Every praise you read from the previous reviewers is true, period. I am not going to repeat those words here.
However, this is not the lens for everybody. I am not saying this for its price. Rather, I am saying this for its weight and size. It is a big hassle to carry this lens around. Not to mention the glares you get from other people around you.
So I end up only took it out of door once, and shot a handful of times at home. It sits in a dedicated lowepro lens bag for 99.9999% of the time. What a shame!
On the contrary, I carry my Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux ASPH lens, which by the way costs the same as this lens, everyday and shoot lots of pictures. To me, this is the lens to keep because it means to be used!
Reading other reviews of the lens makes me wondering if the sale is a wise decision. I think it is, for me.
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2012
|
|
BostonGreg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 19, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 3224
|
|
Review Date: Dec 11, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $5,700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
bokeh, sharpness, contrast, Image Stabilization
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
The 200 is hands down my favorite lens. AMAZING IQ, sharpness and gorgeous 3D subject separation. The files rival my favorite Zeiss glass and the new 300 II. Thanks to the new IS, I'm able to handhold and get stunning results. I use this lens for portraits, weddings and editorial work. It's an expensive one at $6k but a solid investment that's worth every penny.
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2011
|
|
dolina
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 4, 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 4827
|
|
Review Date: Nov 16, 2011
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Lead-free glass. Better MTF chart than 200/1.8L's. No antiquated focus-by-wire focusing. AI Servo works as great as the 800/5.6L IS. As hand-holdable as the 300/2.8L IS. Preferred tripod ring location. Shorter CFD by 600 cm than 200/1.8L. Has IS @ 4 full stops. Half a kilogram lighter than 200/1.8L. Cheaper than the two 200/1.8L copies my friend and I found on two local forums. Will be serviced by Canon for decades to come.
|
|
Cons:
|
I consider these pseudo-Cons: 1/3--stop smaller/slower aperture than the 200/1.8L but the 4-stop IS more than makes up for that. Not as well known as the "legendary" 200/1.8L.
|
|
I will benchmark the 200/2L IS to two other white primes namely the 800/5.6L IS and the 300/2.8L IS.
First off lead-free glass is a load worth of less worry.
The 200L IS delivers superb IQ like the 800L IS and 300/2.8L IS.
Modern focusing mechanism performs as well as the 800/5.6L IS.
My focus lock rate on AI Servo is as good as the 800/5.6L IS and 300/2.8L IS. This basically means fantastic!
Tripod ring is located in the logical place but I wish the feet had two mounting screws like the 800/5.6L IS.
A 1.9m vs 200/1.8L's 2.5m closest focusing distance is very helpful.
4 full stops IS more than makes up for the 1/3rd smaller/slower stop from the lens it replaces.
Warranty and support by Canon for the 200/2L IS is on going and expected to last at least a couple of decades. For those who do not know Canon USA & Canada has refused to service the 200/1.8L because Japan stopped making spare parts.
So if it breaks you either (a) need to look for a donor lens to cannibalize parts from, (b) manufacture the part yourself or (c) at worse have yourself a very expensive & very heavy manual focus lens.
If you want to see lens samples on full frame, APS-H and APS-C bodies go to http://www.flickr.com/photos/alabang/tags/canonef200mmf2lisusm/
|
|
|
Nov 16, 2011
|
|
danob
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 15, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 315
|
|
Review Date: Jul 29, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Superb speed and amazing IQ and bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
A tad on the heavy side
|
|
|
Simply superb one of the best lens I own It has 5 stops of IS or at least this is what Canon claim, to the 4 stops of the review?
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2011
|
|
NickD
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 7, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
|
|
Review Date: Jul 2, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Insanely accurate and fast focus, amazing bokeh,excellent build qaulity, 4 IS stops (5 effective), pin sharp wide open
|
|
Cons:
|
Bigger than the average L lens, somewhat heavier, expensive
|
|
|
I purchased this lens after a lot of research. I had high hopes and expectations of this lens and all I can say is that my expectations were not only met but they were far exceeded. This is THE best lens I have ever used. I cannot fault it in anyway whatsoever.
As has been stated before, its heavy but by no means is it unmanageable. The build quality is excellent, the focus speed and accuracy can only be described as insane. Once you have this lens on your camera everything just takes on a different feel, its is a pro lens in every sense of the word.
It is absolutely pin sharp wide open from edge to edge, even sharper that any of my other L lenses when they are stopped down. The color and contrast is fantastic but most of all, the bokeh that this lens produces is nothing short of amazing.
I was skeptical at spending so much money on a lens but after the first day of use I wondered why I didn't buy it sooner. Sure its a lot of money but you do get your money's worth.
An absolutely amazing piece of glass and the best quality I have ever seen. It blows away the other 7 L's I own by a long-shot. I wont ever part with the 200 f2
|
|
|
Jul 2, 2011
|
|
slee915
Offline
Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 542
|
|
Review Date: Apr 5, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $4,850.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, unbelievable color, contrast and bokeh; excellent 280mm f/2.8 with 1.4x TC III
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Sharpest lens I ever owned. The background blur and bokeh is unreal. If you want the best, this is the best.
|
|
|
Apr 5, 2011
|
|
imranaz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 55
|
|
Review Date: Feb 27, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $5,400.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Optical and build quality, bokeh, f2.0, color rendition, slient and superb image stablization.
|
|
Cons:
|
Size and bulk, tripod ring should have been removable like the 70-200mm zoom.
|
|
One of the best hand holdable lenses that Canon produces by far. I primarily use it to shoot portraits, detailed landscapes and also wildlife photography with Canon 1.4x and 2.0x III extenders. Decided to get this lens over the Canon 70-200mm f2.8 II primary for the quality and character of images it renders at f2.0 and the fact it's better matched with the 2x extender.
Posted a more detailed review including photos here: http://imransblog.com/2011/02/27/canon-200mm-f2-0-l-lens-or-the-70-200mm-f2-8l-ii-zoom
|
|
|
Feb 27, 2011
|
|
gpchase
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 3, 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 808
|
|
Review Date: Feb 9, 2011
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Fantastic...fantastic...fantastic !
|
|
Cons:
|
Can't use it all the time :)
|
|
Yes this is my second post on this outstanding piece ..my favorite lens and it continues to please me greatly !
I wish I could use it for every application but alas, as we know this is not so practical.
Yes the latest few pieces I got are great like the 85L 1.2, 70-200L 2.8MKll and 100L macro 2.8 and 135L 2.0 but this baby just blows them away !
http://gpchase.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v20/p625679888-6.jpg
|
|
|
Feb 9, 2011
|
|
Dawei Ye
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 14, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 3763
|
|
Review Date: Jan 17, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Color, Contrast, Sharpness, Uniformity in Image Quality, "Pop"
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost, Unwanted Attention, Size, Mass
|
|
I purchased this lens for myself as a graduation from college present. Well, actually, a “will soon graduate from college” present. The good folks at BH Photo gave me a price match with Amazon and as usual the price was better than any Australia dealer by over $400.
Canon Super Telephoto lenses are the flagship lenses of their EF range. Needless to say, they have no inherent weaknesses designed into the lens. Their biggest weaknesses are more so from an economical and practicality perspective. That is, cost, mass and size.
Cost:
You get what you pay for. If you want a fast lens which is close to optical perfection, unfortunately this is what it costs.
Is it expensive? Yes.
Is it overpriced? Hard to say.
Is it good value? I believe so. Value is a function of cost and utility. This lens costs a lot, but I also use it a lot. A lens may be cheap, but it is poor value if you use it for the occasional snap, such as a 50mm f/1.8 which is used every once in a while. I use my 200L almost every time I take photos, consequently, it is excellent value for me.
Mass:
It is unavoidable that a f/2 aperture lens at 200mm will weigh a lot. However, Canon has impressively reduced the mass of this lens substantially from its 0.3 stop faster predecessor, the 200mm f/1.8L lens.
Having said that though, short of having a medical condition or injury, a typical adult photographer should not have difficulty carrying or using this lens. I never use a tripod or monopod with this lens and I can handhold it all day. To put it in perspective, the additional heft above a 70-200 f/2.8L IS is simply the sum of the mass of a battery grip and 580EX. Whilst not trivial, for me mass has definitely not affected my usage of this lens. The lens is so good I force myself to carry it with me.
f/2 Aperture:
How often does one use f/2? There are my usage statistics of this lens, sorted by aperture:
f/2: 99.999998%
f/2.8: 0.0000001%
f/8: 0.0000001%
Size:
The problem with this lens is that it attracts unwanted attention. This attention will affect your ability to take genuine candids, and will make you feel a bit odd especially at public locations. Telephoto lenses have obvious negative connotations, so the need to avoid such associations may convince you to leave this lens at home for certain locations (e.g. the beach)
Image Stabilization:
Effective, but not a miracle worker. You can't have sloppy handholding technique and expect good sharpness. You will get A LOT of motion blur, even with IS, and even with shutter speeds of 1/100 and faster, if you don't have good technique or steady hands. It's harder to handhold than you think as the lens tends to jerk in your hands sometimes due to its mass.
Sharpness and Contrast:
This lens is uniformly sharp across all apertures until diffraction starts rearing its head. Please note Depth of Field is quite thin at 200mm f/2, and accurate focus is required to get top sharpness wide open. There is a very, very small improvement in sharpness stopping down to f/5.6. The improvement is virtually imperceptible if your focus at f/2 is correct.
In conjunction with a Canon Extender 1.4X II, there is a small but noticeable drop in performance. Performance is excellent stopping down one stop.
This lens is widely touted as being one of, if not the, sharpest Canon EF lens. I think it is difficult to assess this claim, as so many Canon EF lenses outresolve current sensors that it isn’t likely going to be any sharper than say, a $80 USD 50mm f/1.8 II. However, unlike other lenses, the 200L is sharp across the whole frame, and furthermore, the “apparent sharpness” of the photo is enhanced by the incredible contrast and colours.
In my opinion, what makes this lens stand out from a sharpness perspective is the contrast wide open. Many Zeiss/Leica/whatever fanatics will wax on about how their lenses show incredible micro contrast and all that. To be honest, I don’t really know what that discussion is about. But one thing is for certain: the “pop” and contrast hit you get from a well exposed 200L photo in great lighting conditions with this lens is unmatched compared to any other lens I have used.
The background blur attained at 200mm, f/2, as well as the natural vignetting of this lens, all contribute towards this jaw dropping effect.
However, it is important to note that the lens does not reward sloppy photography. Do not expect to point this lens and get a jaw dropping photo. It will require a lot of work from you as a photographer to choose the right scene, the right light, the right composition etc.
When I do my job right, I find this lens requires no post processing. What does one need to do when the colours, contrast and composition are all excellent? Well, I guess you need to convert from RAW, but sometimes I feel like I haven’t done my job properly as I hardly need to PP (post produce) any of the images.
Chromatic Aberration:
The usage of a low dispersion fluorite element is generally associated with very well controlled lateral chromatic aberration (purple fringing at high contrast transitions). The 200L is no exception to this rule. The only scenario where I have ever noted chromatic aberration with this lens was when I took a test shot of a shiny/highly reflective metal object in harsh, direct sunlight. Even then, it was very well controlled. If you have used any Canon telephoto with a fluorite element (or two), you will be aware of the clean, chromatic aberration free look, which is typically the norm.
Vignetting:
This lens noticeably vignettes wide open, like all other large (for their class) aperture lenses. However, I LOVE this feature of this lens. Often I find that stopped down images do not “pop” as much as images wide open. Upon closer inspection, it is because of the lack of vignetting stopping down. For me, vignetting helps accentuate the subject, and adds a classical look to the image. I often associate the lack of a vignette with the photo being too “clinical” or lacking “feel”. I love vignetting. I have never corrected vignetting in the thousands of photos I have taken with this lens. I actually wish the vignetting was stronger at times. Some people say that it is desirable to have zero vignetting in a lens, and then add it in photoshop if required. I disagree. I think it is very easy to remove vignetting by using Peripheral Illumination Correction, or stopping down past f/2.8, or using any post production software. But adding vignetting is time consuming, and I don’t feel it looks as natural as lens induced vignetting. Notwithstanding this subjective debate, most photographers will agree vignetting is the least serious optical defect, and far from a blight on the 200L’s optical performance.
Distortion:
None noted for my typical usage, however critical users may need to consult more objective lens tests.
Autofocus Performance:
Overall, very accurate and very fast. It is difficult to assess the autofocus performance of this lens as the camera, subject, lighting conditions and the photographer play a large part in determining autofocus performance. But here are some estimated statistics to give you an idea. These are ESTIMATES and do not exclude photos caused by my poor technique, which is a big factor:
- With a 1D Mark III photographing tennis on AI Servo, in focus rate is > 75%
- With a 1D Mark IIN photographing a person running towards you, in focus rate is > 90% on AI Servo
- With a 5D Mark II photographing a person for a portraiture photo, in focus rate is >80% on one shot
Accuracy is definitely better than my Canon calibrated 70-200 f/4L IS on AI Servo
Notwithstanding my results above, given that Canon utilises its latest and best USM motors in its flagship Super Telephotos, needless to say, no other current lenses are likely to be significantly superior in autofocus performance.
Please note, this lens is VERY hard to manually focus handheld using Liveview. You need VERY strong arms. Manual focus is excellent with liveview, but difficult.
Bokeh:
This will be controversial, but I believe the bokeh from this lens is nothing special. Don’t get me wrong, you will be hard pressed to find another non Super telephoto lens that blurs the background as comprehensively and creamy as this one does. So what do I mean?
The issue is, you are relying on the long focal length, and the f/2 aperture, to get a blurry background. When you stop down the lens, or put your subject behind a busy background, you are really asking for the impossible from this lens. Whilst bokeh is about the quality of the out of focus areas, there is no doubt that our perception of it is affected by the depth of field of the image.
The lens is no bokeh miracle worker. As it is with any other lens, your selection of your background, your aperture and the distance between the subject and background play a pivotal part of the look of the out of focus areas. If you can get the above right, then yes, the 200L will obliterate the background for you. But don’t go expecting to use some ugly shrubs for background and expecting creamy perfection, particularly when stopped down.
All that said though, the 200L is a bokeh machine. Put a clean background behind a subject, find some nice lighting, and you will get a jaw dropping, creamy background photo.
Best Uses for this Lens:
Any. Many lens reviewers will recommend lenses for particular purposes, e.g. wide angles for landscapes, telephotos for wildlife and sports. This lens is so good that I try and find any and all uses for this lens. I like to use this lens as my primary walkabout lens, so don’t let anyone
Do not get seduced by the background blur of this lens however. If you go onto any forum and have a look at “example photos” taken by users of this lens, a large portion tend to be of random objects in a boring rule of thirds composition, with a blurred background. Boring…
In my gallery listed below, I have included some photographs from a wide range of settings to show the versatility of this lens.
Portraits:
Amazing Portraiture results. Ever since I have gotten this lens, I no longer use my 85mm f/1.2L II where space is not an issue. The 85mm just feels too wide in comparison, almost like one is using a wide angle prime. I know this will be sacrilege to many, but it is my perception of the 85L for outdoor portraiture.
That said, the 85L is still king of the hill for me for indoor portraiture and indoor events.
Note that in my opinion, the 200L at f/2 blows out the background better than the 85L does at f/1.2 for equal framing. The 85 at f/1.2 has shallower DOF, but the 200L has the blurrier background. (Please research on focal length and background blur and DOF if this seems counter intuitive to you)
Group Photos:
Group Photos from this lens are amazing. You would not think to take group photographs at 200mm f/2, however if you are willing to put in the effort, you will get very nice group photos with naturally blurred backgrounds. Naturally, I use f/2 for all my group photos too. Too shallow DOF? Only if you aren’t imaginative in how you can combat the problem (Focus Bracketing, Photoshop, row manipulation, angle manipulation, the possibilities are endless)
Many photographers use wide angle lenses for group photos. I think this is boring. Sometimes it is unavoidable due to space constraints, but where possible I always use longer lenses to get great telephoto perspective and a diffuse background.
Landscape:
Why not? The colours coming from this lens are special. However, note that if you are photographing distant scenes, atmospheric effects will induce loss of contrast, so use this lens with care. This lens probably isn’t worth the load for most during a long hiking trip, but I love it so much I still carry it. Like other applications, I take landscapes at f/2. Generally the DOF is more than sufficient for distant scenes.
Wedding Photos:
Beautiful lens for wedding couple shots, and photojournalism. That said, it is a very restrictive focal length at a wedding, so you need to use with care. In my opinion, the ideal situation would be a 2nd shooter using this lens. I once photographed a wedding entirely with this lens as a second photographer, and the couple loved the output far more than main’s output from a 24-70L and 16-35L. That said, I do not recommend this lens as a primary wedding lens for obvious reasons. Otherwise, you will miss shots.
How to carry gear:
For gigs, I use a Thinktank Airport Security v2. When I’m out and about, I use a Crumpler Whickey and Cox backpack which can hold the lens with hood and camera mounted. The lens will also fit (without hood) into a Lowepro AW75 toploader, backwards. There are many other cases available.
Lens Cap:
Many people buy expensive lens caps for this lens, but in my opinion, you don’t really need this lens cap if you intend to store the camera with the hood on. I always have the hood on and I never use a lens cap. Actually, I never use lens caps for any of my lenses, but anyway…
Other Accessories:
I recommend a lens coat (overpriced, but effective) and Permacel Professional Grade gaffer tape to protect your gear. Permacel professional grade is the only brand of gaffer I have used which is removable from cameras/lenses after 2 years +. (standard disclaimer applies)
Here are some sample galleries: http://dawei.zenfolio.com/p757773147
If enough people request it I can do some objective tests and allow original download, but I think sites like TDP are better for these. I will also add more images over time.
Please note the majority of photographs have had no post processing correction with respect to imaging parameters such as saturation and contrast and colours and things like that. My standard workflow is RAW capture using Canon DPP and Landscape Picture Style, White balance change (if required), Exposure change (if required), crop and vignette (if required). I do not apply any colour altering actions or procedures.
EXIF is accessible by holding mouse over photo and clicking relevant button.
Cheers,
Dawei Ye
Ex President, Fotoholics – Melbourne University Photography Club
Long time FM member
Gear Collector and Lens Test Chart Photographer
|
|
|
Jan 17, 2011
|
|
gpchase
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 3, 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 808
|
|
Review Date: Jan 12, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $5,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This is as good as it gets ! Outstanding fit and finish. Very sharp files and fantastic bokeh. Fast with beautiful color and contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
All this glass is going to be heavy but worth it. Expensive but a worthy investment in the long run.
|
|
Only took the one file so far but I'd say it speaks for itself. I hope to see years of good snappin 
http://gpchase.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v20/p1010517826-6.jpg
|
|
|
Jan 12, 2011
|
|
PJ Fish
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 24, 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 18
|
|
Review Date: Oct 14, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Ooh boy,what a lens,Canon 200f2, is absolutely stunning and heartbreaking ,it is simply awesome ,its a true winner..its a PRO lens for pros !
|
|
Cons:
|
Far tooo expensive in my country,canon should be ashamed...
a little too beefy to handle..but that goes with all the good glass inside...
|
|
|
where shall i start and begin with this master of a lens? i tried this lens for fast handball sports indoor with a Canon 5D2,i thought i was missing something with the relative slow AF on the 5d2 ,i was wrong ! this lens nail the shot every time,and when i went home for PP work i found , they were almost all sharp and contrasty ,not needing so much work in PP.
I also tried the lens with Canon 7D for soccer,where it really shines,due to the very fast AF speed on this cam.
In general the files you get, is fantastic sharp,with good contrast,perfect colourand superbokeh and its very acceptable indeed,even better than my Canon 135 mm f2.
As a working PJ i will recomand this lens anytime.
You can put on the Canon extenders 1,4 and 2,0 ,with perfectly good results ,getting 280mm f2,8 and 400mm f4 !not lacking of AF speed,with good results ,in short ;its a workhorse and an absolutely pro.-lens.
I also tried the Nikon 200mm and i simply love them both and found them equal in terms of speed and quality and alike..
The only thing i cant understand is , why the H..is the Canon version so damn expensive compared to the Nikon Version? why??
If you have the Canon system you cant go wrong with this lens.
|
|
|
Oct 14, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
50
|
156475
|
May 1, 2014
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
96% of reviewers
|
$5,180.92
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.96
|
8.78
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
