Anyone own the 200mm 2.8L prime?

[Adam Hicks]

I'm really curious how it compares to the 70-200f4 at the long end for the same price. I've really fallen in love with some of Canon's prime lens' bokeh wide open, and have found that to get that bokeh and a razor sharp image, you're better off with a prime. The 200mm is not too bad price-wise, but I'm giving up the flexibility of the 70-200 zoom. I currently have 18-100 covered at 2.8. I'm intrigued by the 200mm L but haven't seen anything on here from anyone using it.

Any impressions are appreciated!

Adam

[drisley]

Sorry for sounding like a broken record but....
I had the 70-200F4L, and it was AWESOME. However, I wanted something less noticable, and better for low light.
I ended up buying the 135F2L and the 1.4 extender. First off, the 135F2L is the sharpest, most beautiful lens I've ever used! With the 1.4x extender, I get a 190mm F2.8 lens that is even sharper than the 70-200F4L. I simply can't say enough about this combo.
This would give you almost the same reach, and the option to go shorter (and faster) if you ever wanted.
I guess the price may be the only drawback.
Anyway, remember seeing someone post that they just bought a 200F2.8 prime recently. I will look around for that.

[neo_xeno]

adam, i do have this lens. even though the primes aren't as practical as the zooms, i just love the primes. u can find pretty good deals for used ones here and there. i bought mine on ebay for around 500. the lens is a pleasure to use, tack sharp and beautiful colors. here are some photos i took with it.

http://img12.exs.cx/img12/5095/CRW_2820_RJ.jpg
http://img12.exs.cx/img12/2136/CRW_2277_RJ1.jpg
http://img12.exs.cx/img12/1994/CRW_2829_RJ.jpg

[Adam Hicks]

Very nice indeed. Is that an e36 5 series or an e38 7?

What I'm looking for is something to give the same bokeh I've enjoyed with my 100mm 2.8 macro prime, for example...

http://www.golilm.com/DSLR/moth.jpg

and

http://www.golilm.com/DSLR/birds_100mmMacro.jpg

I love the blur, while at the same time it's an amazingly sharp lens in my opinion... I took this by accident last night as my daughter walked towards the camera... check out the bottom eyelashes at 100%! I thought it was a good way to represent the sharpness of the lens even though it wasn't the intention...

http://www.golilm.com/DSLR/eyelashes.jpg

Anyways, thanks for posting the 200mm information.. and DRISLEY if you're reading this... stop mentioning that lens. I'm absolutely drooling for it, but the 135f2 + a 1.4tc will put me over-budget, especially with the 20D on the way!

Thanks guys,
Adam

[neo_xeno]

it's not my car but i think it's a 5 series

[drisley]

Get the 135F2L and 1.4x extender. You know you want it! Buy it, BUY IT!!!! :lol:
Resistance is FUTILE! And mac&cheese is pretty darn tasty with ketchup!

BTW, Neo, those shots are awesome!
I also love that first moth shot Adam. :shock:

For bokeh, how these were shot with that combo wide open at 190mm, F2.8
http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/zoo/CRW_2534
http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/zoo/CRW_2539
http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/zoo/CRW_2548

[CyberDyneSystems]

This prime is one of Canon's most overlooked lenses.. particularly in the primes.

The reason is simple.. it offers no more aperture over the f/2.8 70-200mm zooms... and the 70-200mm zooms (all three of them) happen to be considered Canon's sharpest telephoto zooms.

With so many HIGH quality options in the zooms.. the prime often goes overlooked.

However,. it really should not be,.. as it still offers the unbeleivable "prime" quality that no zoom.. no matter how good, seems to be able to match. (though some come close)

The "prime thing" may be too subjective a criteria for many.. but to those that are gripped with "prime fever" (similar to "L" fever.. but it hurts your back more) ...do see the difference.

What I don't recall from my brief time trying this prime out is if it's AF performance is the equal of the 70-200mm f/2.8IS ?

Anyway.. I needed the flexibility of the zoom despite being impressed with the prime overall, so I too got the zoom.

[drisley]

I agree with CDS.
Also, one "advantage" to the prime is that it's more stealthy than the big white L zooms.
It's also smaller and lighter than the 70-200F2.8L zoom.
I used to own the 70-200F4L, a remarkable lens which is much smaller and lighter than the F2.8 zooms. However, even this lens attracted lots of attention, and that irritated me.
One time i was walking down the street with the 70-200F4L on my rebel, and people were staring at me like I was an animal (I Am Not An Animal!).
Then, I hear a voice of some unidentified person in an apartment yelling out of his window... "HOW MANY MILLIMETERS IS THAT THING?!".
That's pretty much when I decided I needed a stealthier lens.

Now with the 135F2 and extender, people will still look, but more with a look of admiration, not shock and awe as before.

[LittleG.]

Sounds like we're on the same planet. I own the 100mm macro and also took a shot of my son's eyelashes - fabulous detail. Like under a microscope!!

Anyway, to the point, I only use primes myself and have recently purchased the 200mm. I agree it has been overlooked as a brilliant piece of glass on a reasonable budget. The bokeh is superb and you won't be disappointed. I have had probs with my focus on moving subjects but that is handheld and my rubbish technique :oops: With tripod and cable release, or inanimate subjects the pics are sharp as a pin.