Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L USM

[HKFEVER]

;) This will be a very short thread, as not too many have this lens.
But if you do, please post some picture and let us have a look.;)

[convergent]

Here you go. These are all with a 1DM2N, 200L f/1.8 w/TC1.4, f/2.5, 1/500, ISO1600. This is all far end court action, shot from the opposite end baseline. You can get a feel for how touchy the depth of field is, even at f/2.5.

The background is what you pay for.

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10391_web.jpg

Drawing a foul... in action.

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10328_web.jpg

I can hold my breath longer than you.

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10381_web.jpg

Ahh!!!

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10401_web.jpg

That's mine.

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10433_web.jpg

I can fly!

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10370_web.jpg

Can't forget the cheerleaders.

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10300_web.jpg

Not a great picture... wish I was on the other end of the court, but this is a FOUL, baby!

http://collins-home.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/TS_10436_web.jpg

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Aha...I hope that middle cheerleader in #4 was covering her ears. :lol:

Lovely shots!

[convergent]

Aha...I hope that middle cheerleader in #4 was covering her ears. :lol:

Lovely shots!

I don't even remember why they were screaming. I was following the player and in review I found that I kind of missed him and caught the cheerleaders being very moved by something going on.

Thanks for the comments. I haven't used the TC on this lens that much, but the lighting was a little better so I gave it a whirl. I was about a stop underexposed by doing that, but adjusted in PS. I shoot JPEG, and other than exposure adjust and crop/sharpen... nothing else was really done to these. I did adjust the color a little in two of them.... I don't like to spend a lot of time at the computer on the images.

Oh, and I almost forgot... double overtime game and I was shooting handheld with this lens, and swapping to another body with an 85 1.8 when they came to my end.

[Buttkicker]

Here are a few of mine
http://eventphotographer.smugmug.com/photos/41173658-L.jpg

http://eventphotographer.smugmug.com/photos/45459613-L.jpg

http://www.chrisprocter.plus.com/web%20horses/New%20Folder/IMG_22839.jpg

[busterboy]

The Canon 200mm f/1.8.

You like Bokeh.. This is Bokeh..;)

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/Candids/tim.jpg

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/Various/Grave%20stone%20Bokeh.jpg

[mspringfield]

With a 1.4x TC
http://www.pbase.com/mspringfield/image/56857857.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/mspringfield/image/56857860.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/mspringfield/image/56857866.jpg

And the token Goose pics:

http://www.pbase.com/mspringfield/image/56857873.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/mspringfield/image/56857875.jpg

[CyberDyneSystems]

How'd I miss this invitation :)

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=ya955e&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=ya955a&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=ya955s&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=ya9558&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=ya9559&outx=600&noresize=1

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=ya955f&outx=600&noresize=1

[malcolmp]

I don't own this lens but I had the chance to use it at the zoo one day. Awkward size, but an amazing lens.

This shot is taken through wire mesh, with wire mesh in the background, f/2.5. You can seen how clear the lion is and the wire mesh back and foreground melt away!

http://www.pbase.com/malcolmp/image/49406440/original.jpg

[Vertigo]

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/450011892/11.jpg


There is NO SUBSTITUTE!!!!


You guys are killing me!! Those shots are simply amazing!
BRC

[CyberDyneSystems]

Here's an odd one,. this was my first time shooting with it.

http://images.fotopic.net/?iid=yf6jfr&outx=600&noresize=1

[mspringfield]

Holy Macaroni! I've read in the FM reviews that this lens has been discontinued:( ...WHY? I know I'd want to buy it given that I have the money. Did another lens replace it that I don't know about?

Nope. No replacements. There have been rumors of a replacement for a few years but they seem to be just that. KEH has 4 of them used. Pick your price. Starting at around $3100 and going to just over $3900.

Michael

[schmoelzel]

CDS.......that shot with the beak coming down on the poor fish is amazing!! Awesome compostition and colour.........great stuff!

[arvin.07]

dang..... i just looked at a pic of that lens..... daaanngg...... its like a warhead...

i wonder, does the 200mm f/2.8L USM II compare?

[CyberDyneSystems]

i wonder, does the 200mm f/2.8L USM II compare?

Well,. yes and no..

The 200mm f/2.8L compares more with the 135mm f/2L for look and feel of the images,. ( not to mention look and feel and handling of the lenses them selves! :) )which is very high praise indeed!

But,. the f.18 with it's dinner plate sized front element has necesarily got that much more resolving power and the super insane shallow DOF due to the apeture,.
in short,. though the quality of the f/2.8 might be "just as good" it's quality is still "very different" .. if you know what I mean.

[convergent]

Holy Macaroni! I've read in the FM reviews that this lens has been discontinued:( ...WHY? I know I'd want to buy it given that I have the money. Did another lens replace it that I don't know about?

My understanding is that the lens was discontinued because there lead involved in the manufacturing and environmental concerns prevented continuing to make it.

I am guessing that they must be having a hard time coming up with a way to make a better version of the lens, and wouldn't want to release an inferior follow-on. Nikon has a 200mm f/2 VR that is supposed to be very comparable, so I'd hope that one day they figure it out. I'm becoming very dependent on this lens and knowing that it may one day be un-repairable is a bit worrisome.

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned is that the viewfinder really lights up with this lens. Rocket fast focus, and a bright viewfinder, help to deal with the very narrow DOF.

[busterboy]

Well the 200 costs more, and I believe that it can't be serviced by Canon... if that helps with the decision. 8)


Canon are indeed continuing to service this lens for the next 4 years..(FACT)

That came straight from the head of sales marketing in the UK.;)

[foxbat]

Here are a few of mine
http://eventphotographer.smugmug.com/photos/45459613-L.jpg
Amazing!

[mspringfield]

My understanding is that the lens was discontinued because there lead involved in the manufacturing and environmental concerns prevented continuing to make it.

I am guessing that they must be having a hard time coming up with a way to make a better version of the lens, and wouldn't want to release an inferior follow-on. Nikon has a 200mm f/2 VR that is supposed to be very comparable, so I'd hope that one day they figure it out. I'm becoming very dependent on this lens and knowing that it may one day be un-repairable is a bit worrisome.

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned is that the viewfinder really lights up with this lens. Rocket fast focus, and a bright viewfinder, help to deal with the very narrow DOF.

Another thing to remember about this lens is that it is a "specialty lens". Part of the reason that it was discontinued and not replaced was because sales were just not that high. There were less than 8K manufactured during the entire run as evidenced by the serial numbers. Starting serial numbers were 10xxx and the highest serial number I have heard of is 17xxx. I would think it was as much a financial desision as anything else.

Also this lens has only become a commodity in recent years. A friend of mine bought his before they were discontinued and paid $2500.00 for it. Others at that time in less than mint condition were going in the $2K range. By contrast I saw them on eBay last fall going for over $5K.

[convergent]

Another thing to remember about this lens is that it is a "specialty lens". Part of the reason that it was discontinued and not replaced was because sales were just not that high. There were less than 8K manufactured during the entire run as evidenced by the serial numbers. Starting serial numbers were 10xxx and the highest serial number I have heard of is 17xxx. I would think it was as much a financial desision as anything else.

Not sure I agree with this. Canon goes to GREAT expense to pretty much own the professional sports photography market. They are evident in every major venue and pay a price for that presence. The 200 f/1.8 (or f/2) is a very popular lens for indoor sports. If you were watching closely at the recent olympics, there were a lot of them in action. I would think that having a lens in this space is critical to this market, and the cost of it is kind of a drop in the big bucket of what they spend to capture this market. Also, do they sell any more of the 400 2.8 or 600 4?

[CyberDyneSystems]

They sell a LOT more 400 2.8 and 600mm f/4s...

And more to the point .. at the time the 200mm was discontinued,. they were selling very few of them.

Folks,. you have to realize that the landscape and demand for this sort of "niche" lens is easily on the magnitude of dozens of times what it was just a few years back when they were discontinued... this is no exaggeration.

The Lead argument as Springfield mentions is just a small part of the reason for the lens being discontinued. When it was safe for manufacturers in Japan to work with leaded glass,. they did so,. it was not just the 200mm that used leaded glass.

When the atmosphere regarding work health and safety standards changed and modernized,. and working with super fine ground leaded glass dust became huge legal liability all the optics manufacturers dropped it to prevent lawsuits and to lower insurance rates,. shaving millions off there overhead and giving them all the opportunity ti pat themselves on the back and let marketing say "we are ecologically sound and lead free" Win win in a big way.

But,. switching to a different glass process did not prevent anyone from re-designing lenses that were still making money.

Anyway,. the landscape we said,. has changed dramatically,. the demand for these esoteric optics has increased at least ten fold in just over five years,. $k and $5k lenses can readily be found in hobbiest hands all over the world where just ten years go was virtually unheard of.. and Nikon saw the hol;e that Canon left behind and filled it with there VR 200mm f/2.

I certainly would assume that Canon will soon re-introduce a modernized version of the lens.

So maybe Canon is working on a revolutionary design..
For those who've never worked with one,. the 200mm f/1.8 is an absolute beast of a lens.. it's HUGE.
It weighs in the same as many 500mm super tele primes,. it's front element is virtually the same diameter as a super tele 500mm.. and it's stubby size makes it in fact more unwieldy than a longer 500mm...

Would it be surprising that Canon may be trying to design a replacement that would totally dominate the market and that may be half the weight? Perhaps they are perfecting DO optics for it?
Who knows really.

My point is that YES,. it does make sens that Canon should re-introduce a modern version of the lens. The market for it exists now.

However,. it also made sense that Canon discontinued it back when it did (early 21st century ;) )
It was a lens ahead of it's time by a brief four or five years.

[Lord_Malone]

Well,. yes and no..

The 200mm f/2.8L compares more with the 135mm f/2L for look and feel of the images,. ( not to mention look and feel and handling of the lenses them selves! :) )which is very high praise indeed!

But,. the f.18 with it's dinner plate sized front element has necesarily got that much more resolving power and the super insane shallow DOF due to the apeture,.
in short,. though the quality of the f/2.8 might be "just as good" it's quality is still "very different" .. if you know what I mean.

Hmmm... Yes, I see. I'd love to see side by side comparisons of both these lenses. The f/1.8 version is a pipe dream for me. :(

[convergent]

I agree with your comments here on the market differences, and such. One point I disagree with is the handling of the lens. I find the 200 1.8 very handholdable and use it that way a lot. The short size, to me, is very well balanced and easy to work with. I've shot with the 500 and have a 400, and in comparison, the 200 is much easier to handle. The pictures I posted in this thread were all handheld with the 200. On a monopod it is super well balanced, assuming its on a good Arca Swiss mount so that you can slide it back and forth to find the sweet spot. Now, in comparison to a 135L, for example, of course its a beast. Shooting it along side the Sigma 120-300, though... the Sigma is a nightmare in comparison to the 200 1.8.
Good discussion... I'm sure the OP never imagined this thead would still be driving along.

They sell a LOT more 400 2.8 and 600mm f/4s...

And more to the point .. at the time the 200mm was discontinued,. they were selling very few of them.

Folks,. you have to realize that the landscape and demand for this sort of "niche" lens is easily on the magnitude of dozens of times what it was just a few years back when they were discontinued... this is no exaggeration.

The Lead argument as Springfield mentions is just a small part of the reason for the lens being discontinued. When it was safe for manufacturers in Japan to work with leaded glass,. they did so,. it was not just the 200mm that used leaded glass.

When the atmosphere regarding work health and safety standards changed and modernized,. and working with super fine ground leaded glass dust became huge legal liability all the optics manufacturers dropped it to prevent lawsuits and to lower insurance rates,. shaving millions off there overhead and giving them all the opportunity ti pat themselves on the back and let marketing say "we are ecologically sound and lead free" Win win in a big way.

But,. switching to a different glass process did not prevent anyone from re-designing lenses that were still making money.

Anyway,. the landscape we said,. has changed dramatically,. the demand for these esoteric optics has increased at least ten fold in just over five years,. $k and $5k lenses can readily be found in hobbiest hands all over the world where just ten years go was virtually unheard of.. and Nikon saw the hol;e that Canon left behind and filled it with there VR 200mm f/2.

I certainly would assume that Canon will soon re-introduce a modernized version of the lens.

So maybe Canon is working on a revolutionary design..
For those who've never worked with one,. the 200mm f/1.8 is an absolute beast of a lens.. it's HUGE.
It weighs in the same as many 500mm super tele primes,. it's front element is virtually the same diameter as a super tele 500mm.. and it's stubby size makes it in fact more unwieldy than a longer 500mm...

Would it be surprising that Canon may be trying to design a replacement that would totally dominate the market and that may be half the weight? Perhaps they are perfecting DO optics for it?
Who knows really.

My point is that YES,. it does make sens that Canon should re-introduce a modern version of the lens. The market for it exists now.

However,. it also made sense that Canon discontinued it back when it did (early 21st century ;) )
It was a lens ahead of it's time by a brief four or five years.

[Lord_Malone]

I agree with your comments here on the market differences, and such. One point I disagree with is the handling of the lens. I find the 200 1.8 very handholdable and use it that way a lot. The short size, to me, is very well balanced and easy to work with. I've shot with the 500 and have a 400, and in comparison, the 200 is much easier to handle. The pictures I posted in this thread were all handheld with the 200. On a monopod it is super well balanced, assuming its on a good Arca Swiss mount so that you can slide it back and forth to find the sweet spot. Now, in comparison to a 135L, for example, of course its a beast. Shooting it along side the Sigma 120-300, though... the Sigma is a nightmare in comparison to the 200 1.8.
Good discussion... I'm sure the OP never imagined this thead would still be driving along.

Have you ever compared yours to the 2.8 version?

[TGrits10]

a few from last weekend, I posted more in the sports section.

http://static.flickr.com/38/115567994_4882eca4cd_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/54/117507111_e08c6a0e32_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/46/115567660_05f64fc490_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/47/115567589_cf8e1909e8_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/48/115567561_a52a2788b4_o.jpg

[convergent]

Have you ever compared yours to the 2.8 version? I have compared it to the 70-200L 2.8 IS, but not the 200 2.8 prime. The 70-200 is a great lens, but no anywhere close to the 200 1.8. The brightness in the viewfinder and the AF speed blow it away. I did recently shoot hockey with these two lenses on separate identical bodies, side by side. I was able to get to f/2.8, and I still didn't want to use the 70-200 (lighter, and giving me a zoom for up close). It was that much better.
a few from last weekend, I posted more in the sports section.
Those are awesome shots. Are those rings the glowing rotors on the front brakes?

[Double Negative]

Are those rings the glowing rotors on the front brakes?
Yes... :D

[CyberDyneSystems]

It is handholdable,. I agree and have of course used it hand held. But for me I find it too heavy to want to support it hand held for long.. it's a monopod lens for my uses (or tripod when possible)

The Heron shots on page one were all hand held. I found walking with it on a monopod is easier (as I do with larger lenses as well) ,. and use an Arca QR to "dump the pod" when hand holding is preferrred.

Obviously people have different ideas about what is and isn't big/ hand hold-able.. I hear people say they feel the 100-400mm is HUGE and to me that is a featherweight! :lol:

What I was trying to say was to give an actual indication of it's size based on fact,. and made the mistake of injecting my own conclusions and reactions to this size. The fact is,. It is as heavy as a Sigma or Canon 500mm f/4.5 and has an equally 500mm-ish girth.

I mention this for those that have used the f/2.8 or 135mm f/2 and may not realize that "next step up" is a very very large step indeed :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yes... :D

That's.. well,. just SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Cooooooooooool!!!! :shock:

Awesome shots!

[Lord_Malone]

My buddies dad does drag racing. I would love this lens to take shots of him at the strip. That is an awesome shot of the rotors. Hope they're Brembos. ;) I'd love to get into GT racing myself.

[TGrits10]

It is handholdable,. I agree and have of course used it hand held. But for me I find it too heavy to want to support it hand held for long.. it's a monopod lens for my uses (or tripod when possible)


I would comment on this by saying I partially agree with you. The shooting part is no big deal, just raise it up when you want to shoot, and let it hang from your neck or shoulder the rest of the time. Though, my neck does get kinda sore after a couple hours, so....yeah it's heavy, but I don't find the weight being detrimental to my photography, just my comfort.

[convergent]

It is handholdable,. I agree and have of course used it hand held. But for me I find it too heavy to want to support it hand held for long.. it's a monopod lens for my uses (or tripod when possible)

The Heron shots on page one were all hand held. I found walking with it on a monopod is easier (as I do with larger lenses as well) ,. and use an Arca QR to "dump the pod" when hand holding is preferrred.

Obviously people have different ideas about what is and isn't big/ hand hold-able.. I hear people say they feel the 100-400mm is HUGE and to me that is a featherweight! :lol:

What I was trying to say was to give an actual indication of it's size based on fact,. and made the mistake of injecting my own conclusions and reactions to this size. The fact is,. It is as heavy as a Sigma or Canon 500mm f/4.5 and has an equally 500mm-ish girth.

I mention this for those that have used the f/2.8 or 135mm f/2 and may not realize that "next step up" is a very very large step indeed :)

Agreed... I do use it a lot on a monopod too... and when possible it is loads easier.

I would comment on this by saying I partially agree with you. The shooting part is no big deal, just raise it up when you want to shoot, and let it hang from your neck or shoulder the rest of the time. Though, my neck does get kinda sore after a couple hours, so....yeah it's heavy, but I don't find the weight being detrimental to my photography, just my comfort.

You have a stronger neck than me... :)

[Exit]

Thread revival :)

Here is 1/1600s f/1.8 at 200.0mm iso400 on a Mark2n
http://k41.pbase.com/o4/56/525456/1/65810726.JwKxgPWG.63613926.JzzP2fYG.METL2134.jpg

And with a 1.4X Canon TC
1/1000s f/2.5 at 280.0mm iso640
http://k41.pbase.com/o4/56/525456/1/62503146.iKeIwjnI.METL1878.jpg
Sorry for the watermark

[Stavhp]

here is what is underneath a F 22 canopy
http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006/f22.40.jpg
http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006/f22.42.jpg
http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006/f22.43.jpg

[Frank Jr.]

Here is one at f 1.8

[psurrette]

Here is the second shot I took with my 200@ 1.8 just trying it out. The background was a backyard with a fence that I did not want to show.
I love this lens.....
http://www.petesurrette.com/FMPics/Flower%20200%201.8

[RgB]

here is what is underneath a F 22 canopy
http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006/f22.40.jpg
http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006/f22.42.jpg
http://images.spaceref.com/news/2006/f22.43.jpg

WTF happened there, look expensive ouch anyway uncle Sam can afford it;).

[tkjaer]

Here's a couple at f/1.8. First two (and crop) on 1D Mark I, second two on 1D Mark II.

http://thomaskjaer.com/potn/lenses/200_1.8_1.jpg

http://thomaskjaer.com/potn/lenses/200_1.8_2.jpg

http://thomaskjaer.com/potn/lenses/200_1.8_3.jpg

http://thomaskjaer.com/potn/lenses/200_1.8_4.jpg

http://thomaskjaer.com/potn/lenses/200_1.8_1-crop.jpg

[Pete-eos]

Amazing lens!

Also Small world, I'm sure sure I had a brief chat with this guy in Castle Camera's Winton, over heard him talking about POTN a few weeks ago!

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/Candids/tim.jpg



And met the guy at the front and know the guy at the back, called Gary :eek:
http://www.chrisprocter.plus.com/Surfer.jpg

[Zilly]

My buddies dad does drag racing. I would love this lens to take shots of him at the strip. That is an awesome shot of the rotors. Hope they're Brembos. ;) I'd love to get into GT racing myself.

why youll never need it uk racing i oftern shoot at 70 mm and then also 20mm shot at 20mm http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h152/zilly_photos/jet.jpg

how ever i would still love to have the 200mm f1.8 as its a stunning piece of glass I WANT

looking around there are 3 on ebay mmmm to have the money

[Buttkicker]

Another one from this great Lens
http://eventphotographer.smugmug.com/photos/130453973-L.jpg

[Liam:]

Another one from this great Lens
http://eventphotographer.smugmug.com/photos/130453973-L.jpg

I now see why this lens cost £4000

:eek:
liam.

[BotSO]

I picked this beast of a lens up on eBay last week and am pleased. For grins and giggles, I stood underneath a basketball net in a dimly lit field house and took the attached. I think the image is fairly clear given I was without monopod or tripod.

Canon 5D, ISO 200, 1/125th, AWB. Image #2 is, obviously, a crop of Image #1.

A novice like myself really shouldn't have a lens like this!!!

I'll post more if there is interest...

[Borderfox]

post more post more Please!! :)

[Buttkicker]

http://eventphotographer.smugmug.com/photos/205501815-L.jpgpost more post more Please!! :)

[Borderfox]

Great shot Buttkicker, must have been plenty dark...

[vondark]

How do you think the newly announced 200mm F/2.0 L will compare?

[Buttkicker]

Well obviously I am 'biased' but F2 is not F1.8 and the current version is the sharpest Lens I have ever had on any camera I have ever owned

no doubt the New 200mm F2 will be a fabulous lens and will sell in great numbers, but I wont be swapping mine for the F2 version

some people will probably panic sell there 200mm F1.8 thinking the price will drop through the floor, I dont see that happening
regards Chris

[Nikolas]

Wonder how the 200 f1.8 goes with stacked teleconverters?
ie 1.4 and 2x
would work out to 560 f5
Wonder what the iq would be like?

[michael_]

saw this lens at the tennis a few weeks back, damn cant wait for the f/2 version to come out, its a stocky lens looked funny on the monopod

[cwphoto]

How do you think the newly announced 200mm F/2.0 L will compare?

Feels like an improvement - tried it last week.

[cwphoto]

Wonder how the 200 f1.8 goes with stacked teleconverters?
ie 1.4 and 2x
would work out to 560 f5
Wonder what the iq would be like?

EOS-1D Mark II N, EF 200mm f/1.8 L USM, EF 2x II, EF 1.4x II, 1/1,000s @ f/8, ISO 400:

[michael_]

hmm i didnt know you had the 1.8

where did you try the f2 christian? any idea when it will come out?

[cwphoto]

hmm i didnt know you had the 1.8

where did you try the f2 christian? any idea when it will come out?

Canon has one, looks like local shipping will be April.

It's so much more versatile than the 200/1.8.

[jakes]

1/8000 f/1.8 640iso .. as i had just stepped out of shade and run around in front of where they were headed to catch this
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2287/1788817738_fd79a86d38_b.jpg

1/250 f/1.8 3200iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2368/2122765022_49cdd08c72_b.jpg

1/3200 f/2.2 200iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2055/2140916716_0feef4518b_b.jpg

1/250 f/5 100iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2168/2205838920_e4f8728e7e_b.jpg

1/5000 f/2.5 100iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2361/1855919115_19fe4a393f_b.jpg

[michael_]

more please

[michael_]

Canon has one, looks like local shipping will be April.

It's so much more versatile than the 200/1.8.
excellent, did they give you an indicator on price?

[cwphoto]

excellent, did they give you an indicator on price?

Around the same as the 300/2.8 IS, give or take.

[metalman1010]

Canon has one, looks like local shipping will be April.

It's so much more versatile than the 200/1.8.

Yes I too would like to know how much more versatile and in what way.

Ross

[michael_]

Around the same as the 300/2.8 IS, give or take.
excellent

[cwphoto]

Yes I too would like to know how much more versatile and in what way.

Ross

1) IS means it can be used hand-held in more situations than the 200/1.8. Furthermore, IS has two modes to allow panning etc.
2) Lighter weight means it can be hand-held for longer periods than the 200/1.8, also makes it easier to transport/carry.
3) Smaller in size makes it a more attractive option when space is at a premium.
4) Better balanced makes it easier to use.
5) AF-stop buttons make the lens more customisable and integrated with 1-series cameras' feature-set.
6) Weather sealing means it can shoot in harsher environments.
7) No question mark over parts availability.
8 ) Same size drop-in filter as the current range of super-teles. No need to carry two different sized filters.
9) A shorter minimum focusing distance.
10) Full-time manual focus over-ride in AF mode.
11) Faster AF response.

The only advantage I can see with the 200/1.8 is the 1/3rd stop in lens-speed and the variable focusing speed in MF.

IQ-wise is obviously too early to tell. I would expect the new lens to be at least the equal to the old.

[jakes]

1/800 f/3.5 125iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2098/1967078710_7162b8118d_b.jpg

1/800 f/2.2 100iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2289/2133568665_f677179d9e_b.jpg

1/2500 f/1.8 100iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2124/1752878806_bc5425a559_b.jpg

1/1250 f/1.8 100iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2303/1752134509_14be53ded7_b.jpg

1/3200 f/2.8 100iso
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2393/2137154661_2fa1aa9683_b.jpg

btw these are all resized only no pp

[michael_]

what body jakes?

[jakes]

1d3

[dfindr]

I WANT ONE!

[silvex]

Stunning lens period!

[jakes]

let me know if im overdoing it ..

5d 1/125 f/1.8 1600iso
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1054/1458021345_9d95b22677_b.jpg

5d 1/160 f/1.8 1600iso
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1197/1462671418_f04ce20566_b.jpg

5d 1/250 f/1.8 1600iso
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1187/1458022343_f55b410be7_b.jpg

[michael_]

you are not, i want to grab the f2 when it comes out so seeing these on the same body as i have is great. Any chance you could leave or show EXIF for the images?

[jakes]

i can edit my posts later tonight to add the exif info

flickr takes it out when it resizes, only the originals you upload retain the exif

[michael_]

ahh just link me to your flickr account jakes ill check it out saves you time

[PM01]

Canon are indeed continuing to service this lens for the next 4 years..(FACT)

That came straight from the head of sales marketing in the UK.;)

Canon HQ in New Jersey no longer has some of the main parts for this lens. From what I remember, if the AF motor (or certain parts of it) go bad, it's pretty much a goner. The little screws on the lens hood are known to back out and get lost - they don't carry these anymore either. SO, if you're shooting with one of these wonderful lenses, be sure to use some threadlocking compound before you lose the little screws forever!

It's the 4th sharpest lens that I own. Very respectable for a commercially made production lens.

[Buttkicker]

I WANT ONE!

Ha ha
I have got one
think Sharp Sharp Sharp:D

Sadly I might have to sell mine in the coming months to Finance another Lens that I am considering
regards Chris

[Zilly]

Ha ha
I have got one
think Sharp Sharp Sharp:D

Sadly I might have to sell mine in the coming months to Finance another Lens that I am considering
regards Chris

thats some tantalizing information ;)

[PM01]

Probably the 200/2L IS or the 800/5.6L IS. :)

[Bubble]

a great lens. Anyone want to sell it? :)

[jakes]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2325/2520248251_b86e8900ec_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2231/2521066690_2041a02e01_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2218/2521060844_b1ee3d9f95_o.jpg

[ANGUS]

Awwww I WANT ONE :lol: Anyone got a pic of it attached to a gripped body? Want to see its scale etc.

[Gabe63]

Awwww I WANT ONE :lol: Anyone got a pic of it attached to a gripped body? Want to see its scale etc.

There is a picture of a guy using one in the lens archive thread.

[jakes]

the lens archive thread..?

[Gabe63]

the lens archive thread..?

Sorry, this one

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=96262

the 200 1.8 is in there a few times

[dfindr]

Here is one from the front yard with 100% crop on the center flower, no sharpening added. 1DsMarkII, f/1.8. 100 ISO

[dfindr]

Awwww I WANT ONE :lol: Anyone got a pic of it attached to a gripped body? Want to see its scale etc..

Well close, here is one on a 1DsMarkII which is close.

[mkfotos]

This lens has become my favorite over the last few months. I initially bought it to see what the hype was about, and because the deal didn't seem too bad, but short of a financial crisis, I don't see myself getting rid of it, not even for the new version.

Somewhat recent samples:

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/6742/1d38305sia9.th.jpg (http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1d38305sia9.jpg) http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1233/1d38315she8.th.jpg (http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1d38315she8.jpg) http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1932/1d39934lxh7.th.jpg (http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1d39934lxh7.jpg)

[Clony3k]

Well, got mine now, and all i can say is that its the best and most fun lens i have used!

Some pictures i took the day i got it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/083111.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/05211.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/0011.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/0931111.jpg

Finn W....

[jakes]

http://www.modu.li/post/5Y1O1812.JPG

http://www.modu.li/post/5Y1O0418.JPG

[PM01]

I *might* get rid of mine for the newer 200 2.0 as the corners and color correction as well as sharpness are better. I've done side by side testing of them so I know. :)

[Clony3k]

Love this lens!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/Dag_4_76.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/Dag_4_67.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/Dag_4_50.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/Dag_4_22.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/Dag_4_20.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/Dag_4_18.jpg

[mkfotos]

Mine's now sold... but the f/2 is on the way :D

[Clony3k]

Some pictures of some street performers from Tall Ships' Races in Norway (Bergen city)

All shoot wide open @ iso50

1.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/02211hdd-2.jpg

2.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/02411hdd-1.jpg

3.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/03911hdd.jpg

4.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/04711hdd-1.jpg

5.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/04911hdd-1.jpg

6.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/09211hdd-1.jpg

7.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/clonebaby/12511hdd-1.jpg

[Shuko]

Went to a shop to check out one of these (2nd hand). It was every bit nice as I thought it would be. I know it weighted a lot, but man...

One shot inside the shop:

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4782.jpg

[brianch]

how much do these go for on the used market?

[silverwolf]

I seen one on ebay once it was below $4000. Good luck in your hunt.:rolleyes:

[brianch]

i was browsing around ebay and i found a wealthy amount of these for sale. now its just a matter of who to buy from.

[Shuko]

The one Im going to check out next is 2700e (3870usd), which is about half of a new f2 price here in Finland.

[HKFEVER]

I sold my to a used equirement shop for USD4500.00 in 3 months ago.

Hope can get th enew 2.0 soon. I sure miss the 1.8 :cry: I shouldn't sell the 1.8. But there is not support at all in HK for the old 1.8.

[Shuko]

Had to buy it. ;)

First test pic, my dad checking out the front lens cover/bag.

1Ds2, f1.8, 1/45s (hand held)

http://derfel.org/kuvia/canon/200f18/UZ3J5053.jpg

[Chris(PA)]

I'm looking to sell mine if anyone is interested

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=577632

[Shuko]

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/loka/UZ3J5558.jpg
@ f2

[TheGaffer]

Last weekend I rented the 200mm f1.8 from LensesForHire.co.uk

It is like the 85mm f1.2 on steroids. Bokeh to die for.

I must have been 10 to 15m behind the groom when I shot him driving into the dawn here, yet the fairway ahead of him is in lovely soft focus.

http://www.tug.com/stuff/200mm-f1.8-Greg-drive.jpg

Bringing the subject into sharp focus:

http://www.tug.com/stuff/200mm-f1.8-136I9040.jpg

It isn't exactly light-weight but it is such a pleasure to use that I was quite happy to lug it around all weekend.

Andrew

[SeattleSpeedster]

got these today at the local touch football game


http://www.vispoint.com/album/200L/slides/playaction.jpg

http://www.vispoint.com/album/200L/slides/hesoff.jpg

and the next Mia Hamm:

http://www.vispoint.com/album/200L/slides/girl2.jpg

its funny other photogs ask how much reach youve got and i think they expect 600, 800 or more....200mm. They seem disappointed.

[PM01]

It's the lenshood that does it. I was shooting a gymnastics event and the guy thought I had a 400 2.8L EF IS.

And I had a Nikon photographer come up to me and ask..."Is that a 200 1.8?!?!" He was drooling and wanted to buy it from me right then and there. I told him no less than 10 grand, cash.

This was when there was no 200 2.0L IS available. He thought about it for a moment and then walked away. I was too busy trying to get an assignment done.

[PM01]

Here's one from the 200 1.8L EF. Shot wide open, iso 3200. 1dm3.

[nazdravanul]

Here's one from the 200 1.8L EF. Shot wide open, iso 3200. 1dm3.

PM01 if I remember correctly you also own a 200 2 IS. Do you own both lenses ? And if so, why, if you don't mind me asking ?

[PM01]

nazdravanul -

It's mostly due to the fact that the 1.8 setting has saved my pictures. It's only 1/3rd of a stop, but that 1/3rd of a stop makes a huge difference in some of the extreme low level lighting that I shoot in. Yes, the others will say "push the ISO level to the max", and on the 1d3, it's already at the H setting on the low lighting levels dance pics. When the lighting level is THAT low, the camera is already on a nice Gitzo carbon fiber tripod, so I'm not worried about the shake.

Others might suggest the 5Dm2, but the low level light makes it a challenge for the camera to focus with any authority. The additional sensitivity of the 1D series focusing (mark 3) makes it a "go or no go". Mostly "no go" for the 5dm2, mostly "go" for the 1Dm3. A simple test target (dark rug with texture) meters out at 1/30th, f/2.0, ISO3200 on the 5dm2. The 5dm2 doesn't want to focus and it's confused. With the 1D, it snaps right on.

Now if the new 1D series camera comes out with a usable 6400 or 12800 iso, and fairly clean, then you will more than likely see me trading in the 1.8 for a 2.0 - the 2.0 is much easier for me to lug around on the multi hour shoots. I usually don't carry a tripod with me, nor a monopod as I want the maneuverability. If it's one of the dance shoots then I will take the tripod.

For gymnastics, no tripod. You have to be able to go from aparatus to aparatus at a moments notice to fight for photo angles.

The 200/2 right now is from a friend. I tag him occasionally to use the 200/2. I have access to at least 3 of them from other people. Makes for a nice network.

As for the dance pictures, I shoot anywhere from 1/30th to 1/125th, H settings, f/1.8 - if that isn't low, I don't know what is! About the only thing lower in light level would be astrophotography...which I also do. :)

[nazdravanul]

PM01, you've been perfectly explicit :), thank you for the reply.

[Palladium]

Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS-1D Mark III
Image Date: 2009:01:04 16:25:25
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 200.0mm
CCD Width: 4.19mm
Exposure Time: 0.0005 s (1/2000)
Aperture: f/1.8
ISO equiv: 3200
Exposure Bias: 0.67
White Balance: Auto
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)

From the Gymnastics image above - I might have set up the shot differently but it's a good capture.

Generally for low light stuff IN POST I'll dupe the image layer and run a noise reduction program on the image background (bottom layer) and then add a very light GB. Then working on the top layer (this doesn't have any NR - it's the original capture) I'll quick mask out the subject and then apply some sharpening to the main subject.

IMHO the Gymnastics imagse above could have benefited from this type of Post processing.

[Go Go]

http://gioniro.smugmug.com/photos/300571274_J53cP-L.jpg

Less than 1/3 of the frame shot at F2.5 on a 1DIII,

[elysium]

JUST picked this up as a rental. Its stunning!

#1
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9061/932f0224zz9.jpg

#2
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/3540/932f0227pl7.jpg

#3
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/8012/932f0221lu2.jpg

More tomorrow.

[dfindr]

Elysium:

Just wait until you start taking pictures of people!

[elysium]

Elysium:

Just wait until you start taking pictures of people!
Tomorrow will be the day. I have a feeling it will knock the lens hood off my 300 f4L. :lol:

More to come over this whole weekend.

[silvex]

got these today at the local touch football game

[/IMG]

its funny other photogs ask how much reach youve got and i think they expect 600, 800 or more....200mm. They seem disappointed.

Amazing IQ...you can almost see them float...!! I would crop tight....REALLY tight!!!

[SBPhoto]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3542/3402980614_b23bbcb2a1_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3462/3402980620_11caacd8b9_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3453/3402980606_0579f1e722_o.jpg
Some Schools Gaelic Hurling action with the 200/1.8L at f4.5 Sharpness and AF Speed of this lens is superb.

[SeattleSpeedster]

Amazing IQ...you can almost see them float...!! I would crop tight....REALLY tight!!!

Its like I'm looking at those thinking wow these are familiar...hey those are my photos!

yeah its an amazing lens....everyone in the crowd thought I was from CNN or something

[SeattleSpeedster]

here are a few more from my trip to the local Japanese Garden at around f/3.5

http://www.vispoint.com/album/Japanese%20Garden%20Fall%202008/slides/IMG_9261.jpg

http://www.vispoint.com/album/Japanese%20Garden%20Fall%202008/slides/IMG_9262.jpg

http://www.vispoint.com/album/Japanese%20Garden%20Fall%202008/slides/IMG_9264.jpg

[SeattleSpeedster]

some more...

http://www.vispoint.com/album/Beach%20and%20Around%20the%20House/slides/beach.jpg

http://www.vispoint.com/album/Beach%20and%20Around%20the%20House/slides/dogwalkers.jpg

http://www.vispoint.com/album/Beach%20and%20Around%20the%20House/slides/purple.jpg

[SBPhoto]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3439/3388393444_0b90b084dd_o.jpg

[SBPhoto]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3311/3438285864_1c569ed6ff_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3330/3438285862_f919b6edb3_o.jpg

[idd]

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/DetSad/slides/IMG_1509.jpg

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/DetSad/slides/IMG_1295.jpg

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/BotSad/slides/IMG_1204.JPG

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/LegendLetSad/slides/IMG_1796.jpg

www.site-photo.ru

[SBPhoto]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2461/3552228561_e81e73ea67_o.jpg

[nazdravanul]

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/DetSad/slides/IMG_1509.jpg

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/DetSad/slides/IMG_1295.jpg

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/BotSad/slides/IMG_1204.JPG

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/LegendLetSad/slides/IMG_1796.jpg

www.site-photo.ru

Cool first post :) .

[silvex]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3439/3388393444_0b90b084dd_o.jpg

WOW!

[idd]

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/misc/slides/IMG_1949.jpg

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/fauna/slides/IMG_1908.jpg

[silvex]

http://site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/Misc/fauna/slides/IMG_1908.jpg

I think it is impossible to take a bad frame with this glass...:)

[idd]

I think it is impossible to take a bad frame with this glass...:)
It's true. Thanks...:)

[Gissan]

Wooow this lens is awesome!

[idd]

http://www.site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/Pavlovsk/Konnosport_klub/slides/IMG_2305.JPG


http://www.site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/Pavlovsk/Pavlovsk_prazdnik/slides/IMG_2149.JPG

[Whippeticious]

http://www.site-photo.ru/PhotoAlbums/St_Petersburg/Pavlovsk/Konnosport_klub/slides/IMG_2305.JPG




Ouch! Poor pony.

[SBPhoto]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3410/3609247744_c240f712e0_o.jpg

[S.Horton]

Does anyone feel that this version is more desirable than the new f/2?

[silvex]

Does anyone feel that this version is more desirable than the new f/2?

Both ARE desirable...the F2 ofters IS and maintenance work...:)

[airfrogusmc]

With IS the f/2 is about 4 stops faster and has less CA (fluorite element) but both are great!

[SBPhoto]

Does anyone experience ghosting with this this lens wide open, If you look at my wedding shot above the edges of the dress has the whites bleeding into the surroundings, If i shoot the groom the white of the shirt bleeds into his dark jacket. is this normal for this lens ?

[dolina]

At the right price the 1.8L is a better value lens but if you're going to charge me the equivalent of a 200/2L IS and a 135/2L then you're nuts. I rather have these two currently sold lens.

[elysium]

Does anyone feel that this version is more desirable than the new f/2?
I still say so yes. It tends to make way into crowds without a word. :lol:
Does anyone experience ghosting with this this lens wide open, If you look at my wedding shot above the edges of the dress has the whites bleeding into the surroundings, If i shoot the groom the white of the shirt bleeds into his dark jacket. is this normal for this lens ?
No ghosting but I suppose it depends on what you have shot with it.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9061/932f0224zz9.jpg

Wide open and no issues here but then again, no bright whites on dark to cause this. Could just be a one off?
At the right price the 1.8L is a better value lens but if you're going to charge me the equivalent of a 200/2L IS and a 135/2L then you're nuts. I rather have these two currently sold lens.
That is the same issue im having, price vs performance, what would I rather have. From what I am renting this for again, the IS wouldnt come in much use since its going to be skaters in an indoor hall so keeping my shutter speed up is vital. IS would help on the panning but not necessary.

Am REALLY tempted by the 200 1.8L.

[airfrogusmc]

I still say so yes. It tends to make way into crowds without a word. :lol:

No ghosting but I suppose it depends on what you have shot with it.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9061/932f0224zz9.jpg

Wide open and no issues here but then again, no bright whites on dark to cause this. Could just be a one off?

That is the same issue im having, price vs performance, what would I rather have. From what I am renting this for again, the IS wouldnt come in much use since its going to be skaters in an indoor hall so keeping my shutter speed up is vital. IS would help on the panning but not necessary.

Am REALLY tempted by the 200 1.8L.

You'd be surprised at how useful IS really is...

[elysium]

You'd be surprised at how useful IS really is...
Heh, I know. Its not something I will have access to for some time so its going to be hard to compare the two. A good fast 200mm is on my wishlist but once again, comes down to pricing.

If only the rental company has the f2L IS. Never mind. I can survive.

[airfrogusmc]

Heh, I know. Its not something I will have access to for some time so its going to be hard to compare the two. A good fast 200mm is on my wishlist but once again, comes down to pricing.

If only the rental company has the f2L IS. Never mind. I can survive.


I think Calumet in Chicago has both...

[elysium]

Over in the UK, Calumet charge you the Earth on deposit. They tend to target themselves at Pro's and studio photographers who NEED the gear. Not many semi pro's or hobbist's use them sadly.

Ill have to see if they have one I can try out in store.

[airfrogusmc]

I think all you have to do is show your business insurance policy so they can make sure the stuff is covered in case of any theft or damage and yes they've always been slanted to the pro market but less so lately...

[Gnarlyographer]

WOW! I've just made the switch from nikon to Canon and only have general knowlage of the newer Canon lenses so this is new to me. And at a fair few stops faster than my (non IS) 200mm f4 this would be great for me! (Im a brid and sports man) Where can I find one? (Im from northern nsw Aus)
Even if I have to import one I want it!

[elysium]

WOW! I've just made the switch from nikon to Canon and only have general knowlage of the newer Canon lenses so this is new to me. And at a fair few stops faster than my (non IS) 200mm f4 this would be great for me! (Im a brid and sports man) Where can I find one? (Im from northern nsw Aus)
Even if I have to import one I want it!
Good luck. Jacobs Photographic, Aperture UK have them. Not sure if they would ship abroad. They are going for about £2,500 here even in average condition. Hate to think about shipping costs and insurance on one.

[SBPhoto]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3599/3687065560_27104bf19d_o.jpg

[SBPhoto]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2521/3698844471_7a30e82d03_o.jpg

[elysium]

Booya, my rental arrives in a weeks time. I cant wait! Should get more use out of it this time.

[elysium]

Yummy yummy bokeh. Got here today

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/8430/img5901g.jpg

[elysium]

Some more from me from the weekend. High ISO shots with no NR. 5D+200 1.8L

http://www.clarity-rebirth.co.uk/RB%20High/RB-7.jpg

http://www.clarity-rebirth.co.uk/RB%20High/RB-11.jpg

http://www.clarity-rebirth.co.uk/RB%20High/RB-24.jpg

http://www.clarity-rebirth.co.uk/RB%20High/RB-18.jpg

Last set of pics before I catch some sleep.

http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/930/img9167.jpg

http://img126.imageshack.us/img126/820/img1119.jpg

[SBPhoto]

These are really good Elysium Love number 2

[elysium]

Thanks, I really enjoyed my time with the 200 1.8L and will defo be renting it again for another tournament like this.

[JhnRX7]

I had a chance to play with one of these today :-)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2522/3914511004_c03756034a_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnrenna/3914511004/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2473/3914060543_256ee690c4_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnrenna/3914060543/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3448/3914612444_547c23eda2_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnrenna/3914612444/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3496/3913722823_3a15d3f2b8_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnrenna/3913722823/)

[wernersl]

rented this bad boy a couple weeks back. holy crap.

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k188/wernersl/IMG_4787_web.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k188/wernersl/IMG_4836_web.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k188/wernersl/sunset-web.jpg