Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L USM Holy Grail

I'm going to have to look at this lens!

Terrific images collectively!

airbutchie wrote in post #19230621
^ So you would like to know if a CPL would work for portraiture work? Just want to make sure that's what you're asking, Tirpitz...

Sort of, I'm trying to understand if they could be of any added value for that kind of photography or not, probably for most of the cases not so much, since most likely any blue sky or water in the background will be out of focus

So,. it seems I at some point while owning this lens twice, I managed to double up on the CPL, and also still have the rare bird, the drop in gelatin filter holder.

So if I recall that means there were three drop in options.
- The rotatable CPL, "PL-C".

- The older gelatin holder, which also has a clear piece of glass. This came with the earliest version before the screw in version. "48mm Drop-in Holder III for Gelatin"
Strangely, Canon USA has a page for this, it's never been in stock, and the image is incorrect showing an IS gen 52mm holder of some sorthttps://shop.usa.canon​.com …-gelatin-filter-holder-ii
BH has the correct image;
https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …n_Filter_Holder​_48mm.html

- The newer versions of the lens came with the more common screw in type also with a clear screw-in filter. (don't knwo the part number)

Canon told us that the clear glass was "part of the optical formula" and necessary, but I do recall extensive testing with an without and don't recall discerning a difference.

Anyway, to anyone interested, I do have a CPL and this clear filter. If anyone is shooting without ANY drop in, you probably want the gelatin holder to use empty with just the glass.

Yeah, that wording about the clear glass "being part of the optical formula" I've always find quite amusing to tell the truth, especially when you are supposed to be able to exchange it for a different piece of other glass, being it a CPL or a gelatin

Guess is more to prevent any dirt to enter the lens from the rear or something, anyway, I'm keeping it in place

I took mine out long ago

Azaleas in the local arboretum

Image hosted by forum (1102561) © SeattleSpeedster THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.

Finally gave in and snatched one myself

I'm already in love, now have to decide if to keep it or its more modern F2 sibling.. Decisions decisions..

At the end decided to keep the Holy Grail, even though the rendering is really neck and neck with the newer version, the bokeh is just that tad softer that the main subject stands out that bit more to render the overall image preferable to my eyes. On short to medium distance probably the F2 is just a bit sharper, especially towards midframe and corners, but to my surprise at infinity the Holy Grail is quite a bit sharper, even wide open. Guess it is possible that the newer version was more optimized for the shorter distances, if I recall correctly I've read a comparison review that was hinting at something like that. I know my F2 is in good order as it was checked for focus accuracy by Canon some months ago.

Anyway, the F1.8 it's really an amazing and unique proposition still today, really a testament of what Canon put into it at the time..

Family holiday portraiture session... Lighting done by Profoto B10 mounted on a 36" Wescott Deep Octo (above left of family)...

Redux this capture in portrait and tighter crop... 48mm Drop-in CPL on the 200 1.8L working hard to reduce as much of the atmospheric haze has possible...

Photo from airbutchie's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1136085)