Wanted to buy: 200m 2.0 prime (out of produciton)

[iND]

I'd really like to have one of these.

[Daniel Browning]

I'm not sure what you mean by "200m 2.0 prime (out of produciton)". As far as I know, the Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM is still in stock at many major retailers like B&H. Did you mean the older 200mm f/1.8?

[Fast Glass]

It's still on Canon's web site.


Here is the link http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=153&modeli d=16357 ("http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=153&modeli d=16357).


John.

[HiFiGuy1]

Guys, I think you're missing something important. He said "200m 2.0 prime", which is 1000 times longer than a 200mm prime. I bet there is only one like it in the world. Tough to handhold, that. I'd really like one, too, but honestly, I don't think it'd fit in my house. Actually, not even my driveway, come to think of it.

[Jon Ruyle]

He said "200m 2.0 prime", which is 1000 times longer than a 200mm prime.


Sorry for rambling, but this got me wondering, and google led me to this discussion ("http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/674447) of the longest focal length lenses ever made.


According tho these guys, the longest lens ever made for a camera is a 5200mm f/14. If you count telescopes, the longest is under 20 meters.


So much for the 200m f/2 prime. :)

[Daniel Browning]

If you count telescopes, the longest is under 20 meters.


If you cheat by stacking a bunch of barlows, the twin Keck telescopes will get you to 200 meters at f/20 (i.e. 200000mm f/20). Normally it's a paltry 17500mm f/1.75. [:D]

[iND]

Sorry group
What I meant was a 200mm f 1.8

[Jon Ruyle]

Well, if it's a 200mm f/1.8 you want, Bryan says where he got his in his review:






My Canon EF 200mm f/1.8 L USM Lens was sourced from "chamcamera" in South Korea through EBay.
Lee at chamcamera proved reliable and seems to at this time have a deep source for these discontinued lenses.





You might check there. But I still think you should look into a 200 meter f/2. [:)]

[peety3]

Sorry group
What I meant was a 200mm f 1.8
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





For the sake of asking, why would you want one? They're front-heavy, not so sharp in the corners, and non-repairable. Oh, and on the rare/common occasion that you could benefit from IS, it's not there.

[Daniel Browning]

For the sake of asking, why would you want one?





I can't speak for iND, but one reason that I want it is bokeh. The 200mm f/1.8 is soft because it has intentionally undercorrected spherical aberration, which greatly enhances bokeh at the cost of some sharpness, similar to the 50mm f/1.2.

[Chuck Lee]

iND,


KEH has two in stock....... http://www.keh.com/Product-Details/1/CE06999049055R/CE06/FE.aspx ("http://www.keh.com/Product-Details/1/CE06999049055R/CE06/FE.aspx)


Show us some shots....[Y]

[peety3]

I can't speak for iND, but one reason that I want it is bokeh. The 200mm f/1.8 is soft because it has intentionally undercorrected spherical aberration, which greatly enhances bokeh at the cost of some sharpness, similar to the 50mm f/1.2.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>





How on earth do you find all of this out? I've heard of "connections", but wow.

[Daniel Browning]

How on earth do you find all of this out?





Easy. I read it on the internet, so it must be true. [;)] I saw a star test of the 200mm f/1.8 (I can't find it now), and the Point Spread looked like negative spherical aberration ("http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Spherical-aberration-disk.jpg). I learned that such aberrations enhance bokeh when I was researching the 50mm f/1.2.

[Chuck Lee]

How on earth do you find all of this out?





Easy. I read it on the internet, so it must be true. /emoticons/emotion-5.gif I saw a star test of the 200mm f/1.8 (I can't find it now), and the Point Spread looked like negative spherical aberration ("http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Spherical-aberration-disk.jpg). I learned that such aberrations enhance bokeh when I was researching the 50mm f/1.2.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



Very Cool...[H]