Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

[dbdb]

hello everyone!


at the moment, i am seriously considering
getting this lens, as i have heard about it's amazing image quality. it is also black, and relatively small/light.
essentially, i am looking for a telephoto lens for use for outdoor
sports, and probably wedding candids (indoors/outdoors).


i have
thought about getting one of the 70-200mm canons, but they are either
too slow (f/4), or too expensive and big (f/2.8). i know that the Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens
is not as flexible one of the zooms, but i am more interested in using
the 200mm, rather than the 70mm end, because i already have the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens to cover that "lower" focal range


so, if anyone out there has used this lens, then i would like to know what you think of it. how easy is it take handheld shots? at what kind of shutter speeds can you still get sharp images at - especially when using an APS-C crop camera? do you find it has limited use because of the fixed 200mm focal length? i'd really appreciate any feedback you have!


thanks =)

[hotsecretary]

If you're complaining about the 70-200 being too slow or too expensive and big. What about the 70-200 Non-IS? Or the 400 IS which also gets great reviews. Also if you're planning on using a tripod since the 200 2.8 is non-IS.. then big/heavy shouldn't be a worry.

And it's strange you complain about the speed, when you already own a f4


Just my 2 cents.. I just picked up the 2.8 IS and yes it's expensive and heavy, but it's a tank And I really wanted the IS and something I new was reviewed as being an amazing lens and also would last me years to come.


So I personally would look at the 70-200 f4 IS or not, which will give you more range and weigh about the same and the IS is what you'll pay for and if you're going hand-held and sports, I personally think you'd be better with the 4 IS or 2.8 IS.

[Daniel Browning]

i am more interested in using
the 200mm, rather than the 70mm end

Sounds like the 200mm f/2.8 prime is a good choice for you. It's an excellent lens. It's easy to take handheld shots. It has much better balance on a crop body than the 70-200 f/2.8, for example. But without IS, of course, camera shake can be a big problem.

at what kind of shutter speeds can you still get sharp images at - especially when using an APS-C crop camera?

At 12x18 print sizes, I need at least 1/500 to take care of motion blur. but if I'm just doing web-size images, I can get away with 1/125. (It helps that the lens is smaller and lighter than the 70-200.)

do you find it has limited use because of the fixed 200mm focal length

Yes, that's why I don't have it now.


It is amazingly sharp for the price.

[Sean Setters]

You might want to consider the 135mm f/2. It's another excellent lens (although not quite as long as the 200), but at f/2 it's easier to get the shutter speeds you need to stop motion without pushing the ISO too high.

[dbdb]

hello again,

If you're complaining about the
70-200 being too slow or too expensive and big. What about the 70-200
Non-IS? Or the 400 IS which also gets great reviews. Also if you're
planning on using a tripod since the 200 2.8 is non-IS.. then big/heavy
shouldn't be a worry.

And it's strange you complain about the speed, when you already own a f4

the 70-200 f/4 non-IS is still too slow, and the f/2.8 is still too
big + expensive. and no, i am not planning on using a tripod, because
i know that even if i bought a tripod, i'd never bring it with me, as i
don't like to carry much. and also, i know i'll need at least f/2.8
for sports.

Sounds like the 200mm f/2.8 prime is a good choice for you. It's an
excellent lens. It's easy to take handheld shots. It has much better
balance on a crop body than the 70-200 f/2.8, for example. But without
IS, of course, camera shake can be a big problem.


At 12x18 print sizes, I need at least 1/500 to take care of motion
blur. but if I'm just doing web-size images, I can get away with 1/125.
(It helps that the lens is smaller and lighter than the 70-200.)

daniel, thanks for the detailed info - that's very useful to me!
although it's sad to hear that you no longer own this lens. does
anyone out there still own the 200mm f/2.8 and is STILL using it??

You might want to consider the
135mm f/2. It's another excellent lens (although not quite as long as
the 200), but at f/2 it's easier to get the shutter speeds you need to
stop motion without pushing the ISO too high.

and sean, the 135mm f/2 is a very nice lens, but it will cost more
than the 200mm f/2.8, and maybe a little bit too short for my planned
usage. it's a tough choice,because i know that fast telephotos will
inevitably = big + expensive!! unless canon can come up with some new
technology like the DO lenses that can solve these problems... without
compromising image quality of course! =)

[hotsecretary]

Best of luck then But that's what happened when I bought my 70-200.. I was on the edge between all 4 of them. But after knowing I prefer low-light and 2.8 is just the thing for that, heck I'd take a 1.8! [H]


As for the 135, do you have a 1.4x extender[] Then you'd get a lot of use out of the 135, not just for sports. And if you already have the extender then it wouldn't be too much difference in price over the 200.

[jeffersonposter]

This is a shot from Road Atlanta using the 200 f/2.8 and a 1.4x II on a 5D. A crop body would be similar (1.4 extender to 1.6 APS ). Shot is at f/5, ISO 500 so it is a fast shutter speed (1/4000th). Shot is hand held.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.27.05/Mitty.jpg[/img]


The 200 f/2.8 has exellent IQ and doesn't cost that much, about $700 I think. The shot is not croped.


JeffersonPorter


One more


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.27.05/WERA.jpg[/img]


Shutter Priority, ISO 250, f/10, 1/320, again hand held. 200 f/2.8 and 1.4x II.

[dbdb]

WOWSAAA!!!


nice one jefferson, i'm very impressed with what you've managed with that second image... AF speed must be pretty good then! were you panning as you shot it?

[jeffersonposter]

AF is fairly fast even with the 1.4x II. Yes, this was a pan. I shot with AI Servo Center Weighted metering. Pre focused at a spot on the track, then followed till I got the frame I wanted.


JeffersonPoster

[hotsecretary]

Great shots!