 |
|
|
selinberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 30, 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Dec 17, 2020
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Wonderful build quality and optics. It's not white.
|
|
Cons:
|
None for me.
|
|
|
I like taking casual headshots of the grandkids and found that 200mm is a great length. I am far enough away that they don't see me focusing on them and so there is no posing. I think of a typical portrait lens as being in the 85mm range but with kids it's a different world, in my opinion. The backgrounds just melt away with this lens and I get some really great shots.
|
|
 Dec 17, 2020
|
|
tcphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1536
|
|
Review Date: Apr 4, 2018
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $475.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
I will admit that I've bought and sold a couple of these lenses. I have purchased one then get seduced by a 70-200/2.8 which is big and heavy. Then I'll sell it and end up buying another. This one is in my bag to stay.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This is a perfect lens for watching a friends ballgame, attending an outdoor event or shooting a different perspective on landscapes. The speed, color and contrast is great and is not too large to carry around. The used market is good and a deal can be found with a little patience.
|
|
|
Apr 4, 2018
|
|
next390
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 23, 2016
Location: Germany
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2016
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
I liked this lens. I bought it recently. While happy with everything.
But overall I'm satisfied.
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2016
|
|
vivianchen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 30, 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 30, 2015
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Unparalleled image quality, 4 stops rated/5 stops effective IS, lightning fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
Need to find your own perfect lens cap!
|
|
It produces an image with a DOF+compression effect that is a bit more than the 85L does @ f/1.2 but the image quality is better than the 85 @ 5.6!
Add to that lightning fast and accurate AF and unbelievable IS and this is the most handholdable lens that Canon has at the moment (ignoring shutter speed)!
This thing outresolves the 40D's 10MP APS-C sensor wide open! I can't see any improvement in sharpness all the way up to f/5.6! It's also sharper than the 70-200 f4 IS, both wide open.
I gave a 9 for construction because I honestly think that Canon could've used a better material for focusing rings of their top lenses. Apart from that, it's every bit as good as pro lenses get.
I have the 85LII which I use for pretty much everything and I'd use this 200 f2 IS as a replacement whenever I'm allowed the increased distance to the subject.
http://www.hitsticker.com | http://www.printradiant.com | http://www.adstateagent.com
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2015
|
|
CarteB
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 24, 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 24, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $670.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, lovely background blur, size
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing serious.
|
|
|
I shoot with a Canon 6D and this is a very nice lens indeed. Sharper than the 24-105 at any of its focal lengths or apertures, not quite as sharp as the 24-70 f2.8 mkii in the centre. Certainly sharper than the 15-85 if you are using a crop sensor. Very good at f2.8 and excellent at f4-f8, but keep the shutter speed up. I try to keep it at 1/500+, the higher the better. This might mean raising the ISO or staying at f2.8. Immediately after buying the lens, I didn't really understand the great reviews but I saw the light when I started shooting at 1/640. Made all the difference. I get some sharp shots at 1/250, but inconsistently. Still get the occasional unfocused image from camera shake at even very high speeds, like 1/2000, so take a few extra shots; don't rely on that one quickie. Interestingly, the 135mm f2 is easier (more consistent) for me to hand hold at lower shutter speeds,and it's only a little shorter. That 200mm length seems to be the threshold for me, at which either my technique or general steadiness begin to have a significant impact on hand-held shots. I tried a monopod but no better. Keep your elbows tucked in and always be aware of the shutter speed. During the day it is not at all difficult to keep that shutter speed up, especially with a full frame that handles, say, ISO 400 very well. And then this is a really good lens. And much less intrusive than the 70-200s. But stabilisation is wonderful.
|
|
|
Dec 24, 2014
|
|
ScottUmstattd
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 16, 2014
Location: Mexico
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 28, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $750.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent color and image. 200mm without being too big. Excellent color and image! Not white.
|
|
Cons:
|
It doesn't make coffee.
|
|
After my Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 broke, I was in the market for a replacement. While considering options, I thought to myself that most of the time I was pushing my 70-200 all the way to 200 (and wishing I had more). I wanted to see what all the fuss was about Canon L glass but there was no way I was going to pay for and carry around the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L. The Canon 200mm f/2.8L was my first L series lens.
I miss being able to zoom, but this is the case with every prime I have. But it's easy to make the adjustment by foot most of the time.
I primarily use this lens for landscape, portrait and event pictures. It is definitely not a walk-around lens because of it's focal length. But, when you know how to use it, it can make for an interesting lens to tackle street photography.
It's a great lens and the price I paid was fair.
You can read my full review (with pictures) http://www.picture-power.com/canon-lens-reviews-canon-ef-200mm-f-2-8L.html
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014
|
|
Soulphoto2014
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 3, 2014
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 3, 2014
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $750.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Razorsharp, superbokeh, fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS and unhandy focal length (too long, you have to backup too much, 135L is better and also long)
|
|
|
Perfect optics, pictures can be published in a magazine without PP direct out of the lens. But it's too long, you have too back up too much, I recommend the 135L or 70-200 2.8L II instead. Ended op selling it.
|
|
|
Sep 3, 2014
|
|
Stephen Cooper
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 14, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 22, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, sharp, fast
|
|
Cons:
|
Pricey tripod adaptor as an option, hood is a bit awkward
|
|
|
This was one of two lenses that I had wanted for a while (the other being the EF135 f/2 L). Whilst I have the focal length covered with my 70-200 I still was interested.
In terms of speed and focusing it's great also being lightweight and portable it's not that noticeable carrying as a 2nd or 3rd lens.
Price paid was £629 (website only seems to work with $) but it was worth it - I'm still looking to build up my prime collection with the 135, but that can wait a while.
|
|
|
May 22, 2013
|
|
maddog76
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast and accurate focusing. Sharp wide open, not white.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Have been using this lens from the start of the summer til now.
Have used it indoors taking sports pics, and outdoor / indoor for long wedding shots.
This lens completey blows away my canon 'L' zooms. Cannot find one single fault.
This will be the start of my conversion to primes from zooms.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2012
|
|
oldshutterhand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2012
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 28, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact size, fantastic picture quality, very precise, and fast autofocus
|
|
Cons:
|
manual focus can be little bit more easy to turn
|
|
Since my first review I got an 1.4 Kenko dgx converter. I use the lens now without converter, with an 1.4X, with a 2X, and with two converters stacked. Whopping 560mm focal length with still acceptable, and sometimes surprisingly good results. With an 1.4 Kenko dgx the results are very good even wide open at f4, with a 2x good at f8, with the two converters stacked I use at f9 sometimes, or shutter priority from 1/1000 sec. I have the MK I version I prefer the built in hood.See my review and sample pictures with all combination in my website:
http://oldshutterhand.com/equipment-reviews/canon-2002-8-usm-l/
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2012
|
|
James Markus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 6880
|
|
Review Date: Sep 21, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $630.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, and well built. This is probably the best value in Canon lenses.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
I found this is a surprisingly good theater lens. I know some clamor for IS versions of many lenses, but this one doesn't need anything.
Sample:
http://www.photomatter.com/2021/TheaterSample.jpg
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2012
|
|
fishyfinger
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 3, 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 14, 2012
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Better link for the review below..
Thanks for looking.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 14, 2012
|
|
fishyfinger
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 3, 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 13, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, very fast focus, light, well made, it is mine..
|
|
Cons:
|
Having to pay for it!
Nothing wrong with it, read the product's box and you know what you are getting..
|
|
|
Hello.
Well, what fun there is to be had with this lens. It is very sharp, VERY. I was going to get the 135 mm, went for the 200 mm instead. I live in Shetland and we are blessed with plenty of wildlife, more or less on our door-step, so that bit of extra reach is great for me. Works very well with my 50d, great set-up for wildlife.
The lens did surprise me at the speed that it can focus, faster than my other L lenses. I really am going off zoom lenses, primes is the way to go for me, zoom with my legs!
More fun..
Why people want IS on every lens is beyond me, none of my lenses have IS, and I cope. And I have arthritis in my fingers, hands and wrists, and still manage to sell on Getty, and exhibit work in my local art gallery.
May be it is down to technique..
Still, we are all different.
The lens is great, really.
If you are thinking about it, just buy it if you can, this lens really is THE bargain within the Canon range.
Buy it and go take great shots.
Have a look here if you have the time;http://www.flickr.com/photos/fishyfinger/
Just a few shots at the moment, more to follow.
If we ever get a summer here in Shetland..
Thanks for taking the time to read,
Tim x
|
|
|
Jul 13, 2012
|
|
oldshutterhand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2012
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 24, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Outstanding picture quality (sharpness, colours, contrast)
Ultrafast focus
creamy bokeh
'wow' pictures
small, black
moderate price compare to other longer Canon primes
|
|
Cons:
|
Manual focus little hard to use (feels scratchy)
|
|
I got the lens about half a year ago used. Picture quality simply fantastic ! Great colours, contrast fantastic, sharpness on could wish for. The bare lens without the converter simply faultless in practical terms.
I mainly use the lens for birding with a Soligor 2x teleconverter, I usually use the lens with the teleconverter at f3.5-4.5. With the teleconverter wide open(f2.8) the pictures are soft, resolution not bad, but contrast is reduced a lot, at f4 quite good. My 30D sensor I can tell not up to this lens resolution capabilities.
You can chech some pictures at
www.oldshutterhand.com/?page_id=1897
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2012
|
|
MrBrilliant
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2011
Location: Norway
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 13, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $880.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, solid, cheap (It's a great L-lens) and black
|
|
Cons:
|
Nope, not really
|
|
|
I have used this lens extensively for candid downtown shots and I'm amazed at the quality of the images. Itę's black and rather average-looking, so nobody cares where I pioint it.
Have taken pictures at 50+ metres that I've kept! Took some of my nephew from 40 metres out. Great candids that my sister framed and put on the wall in the living room.
This lens takes a 1,4 extender with little problem.
Highly recommended!
|
|
|
Dec 13, 2011
|
|
didierv
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 436
|
|
Review Date: Oct 17, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, great build, small and inconspicuous
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I really like this lens.
It is very sharp from 2.8 on...
Because of the focal lens I do not used it all that much, but every time I take it out I love the results.
I like it better than my 70-200 because it is smaller, lighter and inconspicuous.
I have the Mark I version, bought used on FM almost 5 years ago, it is a pretty old lens but works perfectly after all these years.
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
171
|
392784
|
Dec 17, 2020
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$614.58
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.76
|
9.69
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
