EF 200mm f/2L IS discontinued. Updated list of (18) EF and EF-S going away soon.

I've just read that a number of people have been told that this lens is discontinued;

The 200mm f/2L Is is currently Canon's oldest big white, so it seems natural that it might be the first contender for an RF version.
Also with the emphasis already on ultrafast lenses like the 50mm and 85mm's this would be a natural fit (still need a 135mm)

On the other hand, the last time Canon discontinued it's fastest 200mm, it had no plan to launch a new one, and only did so after nearly a decade due to Nikon releasing an f/2 that competed with the old discontinued EF 200mm f/1.8L, and proving that in the heyday of digital, there was real demand for this lens.

Is this back to being such a niche lens that it doesn't make sense to make it?
How many more EF lenses might get the axe with no replacement in the era of sliding sales?

EDIT. The list continues to grow;

Discontinued EF Lenses:

Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "Pancake"
Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Macro
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM II
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L USM Macro
Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM II
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM II
Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM II

Discontinued EF-S
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 IS STM Macro
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

I honestly don't see a need for F2 RF lens at this point. It's not a light gathering problem, like it was when this lens was originally designed, with limited film and limited digital signal amplification still had pretty big limits compared to today. And the 2.8L IS III has most of what it would do covered, very well. The F2 version just doesn't offer a lot. I try to look at it from a mass market point of view, and video is a big ruling body as things move forward, not birding and not outdoor shallow DOF model portrait.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #19205462
I honestly don't see a need for F2 RF lens at this point. It's not a light gathering problem, like it was when this lens was originally designed, with limited film and limited digital signal amplification still had pretty big limits compared to today. And the 2.8L IS III has most of what it would do covered, very well. The F2 version just doesn't offer a lot. I try to look at it from a mass market point of view, and video is a big ruling body as things move forward, not birding and not outdoor shallow DOF model portrait.

Very best,

People dont buy the 200F2 for light gathering problems. Thats never been the case

People buy the 200F2 for the killer Bokeh that comes from this lens at F/2.0. It has only been recently that anything has come close to the look of a 200F2.......and that would be the Sigma 135 F1.8....its as on par as anything can come. I still think the colors and skins tones look a ton better on the Canon 200F2

I suspect it will be reintroduced in the RF line up as the RF200 F2/o......Its its probably going to come in as the other RF lens will...about $1000 more than the EF line up is my Guess

umphotography wrote in post #19205525
People dont buy the 200F2 for light gathering problems. Thats never been the case

People buy the 200F2 for the killer Bokeh that comes from this lens at F/2.0. It has only been recently that anything has come close to the look of a 200F2.......and that would be the Sigma 135 F1.8....its as on par as anything can come. I still think the colors and skins tones look a ton better on the Canon 200F2

I suspect it will be reintroduced in the RF line up as the RF200 F2/o......Its its probably going to come in as the other RF lens will...about $1000 more than the EF line up is my Guess

This may be true partially true of the 200mm f/2 now on internet forum discussions where enthusiasts collect these lenses, but that's not what it was made for. Malveaux has it right, this was a niche lens designed for specific low light sporting events. The original 200mm f/1.8 it was 100% made for, and pretty much only purchased new, for it's light gathering prowess. It was a film lens, and it was used for competitive gymnastics and figure skating in terrible indoor arena light. This was in an era where hobbiest and esoteric portrait shooters had yet to branch out into $4.5K lenses.

It certainly has become a more appreciated tool for the aspects you mention, but your statement that it "never has been" purchased for it's light gathering is simply not the case.

umphotography wrote in post #19205525
People dont buy the 200F2 for light gathering problems. Thats never been the case

People buy the 200F2 for the killer Bokeh that comes from this lens at F/2.0. It has only been recently that anything has come close to the look of a 200F2.......and that would be the Sigma 135 F1.8....its as on par as anything can come. I still think the colors and skins tones look a ton better on the Canon 200F2

I suspect it will be reintroduced in the RF line up as the RF200 F2/o......Its its probably going to come in as the other RF lens will...about $1000 more than the EF line up is my Guess

Got it backwards, Mike. In the days of ISO 400 film f/2 was to have achieved nirhvana!

The BS about 'bokeh' did not arise until after the 1997 article discussing 'bokeh' for the FIRST time in the western press. Then, over the years, internet discussion devolved into the common man MISUSE of the term 'bokeh'
Before that, folks sometimes considered 'thin DOF' but pro portraitists NEVER wanted razor thin portraits...the clients would react, "Why is the photo of me so out of focus?!" if that is what the portraitist delivered!

The knowledgeable photographer knows

1. he can control DOF with f/stop
   
2. he can control far field backgroud blur amount with diameter of the aperture
   
3. there is little that can be done about 'bokeh'...the lens you have is what gives appealing or unappealing 'bokeh', and you might be able to alter it slightly with change in f/stop ...but you can only buy a different lens if you do not like the bokeh.
   

• 50mm f/2 at 10'
  
• 100mm f/2 at 20'
  
• 200mm f/2 lens at 40'
  
• 400mm f/2 lens (if you could buy one!) at 80'
  

Sorry my bad. I did not start using the 200F2 until 2007. I forgot about the 1.8 and even then on film I never used it. By the time i was able to get my hands on one....it was digital and all about Bokeh. The lens of choice for the elite portrait photographers was the 200 F/2 as well as the 85 1.2 and of course the lens that I could afford and still have to this day.....the 135 f/2.0

My bet is that it will still come on in the RF line up

umphotography wrote in post #19205572
Sorry my bad. I did not start using the 200F2 until 2007. I forgot about the 1.8 and even then on film I never used it. By the time i was able to get my hands on one....it was digital and all about Bokeh. The lens of choice for the elite portrait photographers was the 200 F/2 as well as the 85 1.2 and of course the lens that I could afford and still have to this day.....the 135 f/2.0

My bet is that it will still come on in the RF line up

Not about 'bokeh' at all!

I can see Sony coming out with a 200mm f2 but it will certainly be crazy expensive.

A Sigma 200mm f2 would likely come in at the best price/performance ratio though.

Thorrulz wrote in post #19205593
I can see Sony coming out with a 200mm f2 but it will certainly be crazy expensive.

A Sigma 200mm f2 would likely come in at the best price/performance ratio though.

Not necessarily (expensive). While Sony has a history of very expensive lenses, and still has some lenses that are more expensive than the competition, it is not a rule.
They are also starting to make some superb lenses. Their 400/2.8 and 600/4 were already superb but more expensive than competition.
The GM 24/1.4 is superb, but not more expensive than the competition. GM 135/1.8 does not yet have Canon competition, only the Sigma, which of course, is cheaper.
The G 20/1.8 seems oddball as 'only' a G, but a fantastic lens. The 200-600, release price was fair, but it has regularly been available for 25% less and even cheaper (at least here in Australia). The just released GM 35/1.4 is priced similar to competition. We will have to wait and see how they price the GM 50/1.2.
Now that Canon have RF Teleconverters, Sony's TC are cheaper when not long ago, they were more expensive.
The Sony 135/1.8 is regarded as optically better than the Sigma, but the Sigma is very close. The Sony though focuses much better which is the main reason along with the reduced weight it would be chosen over the Sigma. So price to performance ratio is definitely better with the Sigma if you remove AF and frame rate from the equation. For a lens that is commonly used for both portraits and sport, 20 fps with A9 or 30fps with A1 (compared to 15 fps with Sigma) much faster AF, lower weight arguably makes the Sony the better price to performance ratio for anyone who wants sports performance.

Sony lenses being more expensive compared to the competition is only still true for some choices. Now that they are Sony rather than Zony, they are also improving by most peoples assessment. The 15 fps limitation is Sony's doing and Sigma (or other manufacturers) have no control over that. The lower weight and better optical performance is all Sony. The faster AF - I don't know if Sony is giving themselves the advantage or not.

All these comparisons with the 135 1.8 are obviously very relevant to a possible 200/2.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19205453
I've just read that a number of people have been told that this lens is discontinued;

The 200mm f/2L Is is currently Canon's oldest big white, so it seems natural that it might be the first contender for an RF version.
Also with the emphasis already on ultrafast lenses like the 50mm and 85mm's this would be a natural fit (still need a 135mm)

On the other hand, the last time Canon discontinued it's fastest 200mm, it had no plan to launch a new one, and only did so after nearly a decade due to Nikon releasing an f/2 that competed with the old discontinued EF 200mm f/1.8L, and proving that in the heyday of digital, there was real demand for this lens.

Is this back to being such a niche lens that it doesn't make sense to make it?
How many more EF lenses might get the axe with no replacement in the era of sliding sales?

I wonder if Fuji 'counts' as competition. I assume Canon would be aware of how many 200/2s Fuji sells and would therefore be able to have a good idea how many RF 200/2s they could expect to sell. Sony is not slowing yet so while maybe not 200/2, a long ultra fast is rumoured and likely IMHO.

if it's a popular lens they'll make it in RF mount. really aren't you amazed how quickly Canon is fleshing out its RF line of lenses?

ed rader wrote in post #19205806
.
really aren't you amazed how quickly Canon is fleshing out its RF line of lenses?
.

.
No, I am not amazed.

Their timetable is about what I would have expected. . In order for me to be "amazed", they would have to have had equivalents for at least 75% of the EF lenses out within the first two years, and that would have to include several specialty lenses like tilt-shift lenses, true macro lenses, and true supertelephotos like a 600 f4, 400mm f2.8, 800mm f5.6, etc. . Doing that in under two years would be amazing to me. . Taking 4 to 5 years to do that is just average timetable; neither slow, nor fast.

"Amazed" is a really strong word. . Takes a hell of a lot to actually amaze me. . I am slightly impressed with what they have done, but not amazed.


.

ed rader wrote in post #19205806
really aren't you amazed how quickly Canon is fleshing out its RF line of lenses?

Not at all.

They're late to the party and didn't re-invent the wheel. If anything, they're catching up to what other mirrorless options already had for quite a while that are all pretty good. And instead, they got to see what everyone else's mirrorless sales were mostly comprised of, for a long time, before marketing their own. So they were given market information on a silver platter.

Fleshing out the RF line would be more impressive if they actually used the gained regstration distances to design more interesting lenses. The RF 28-70 F2 is an example of that, but unfortunately it's their only example. They could be putting out very interesting faster primes without the expensive of monster apertures thanks to the mount change, just like everyone else in the mirrorless world has pretty much done. More interesting pancake primes. More interesting zoom ranges with faster optical speeds. More interesting telephoto options with faster optical speeds. Even just medium range primes with faster optical speeds. But no, nothing. Just the same old stuff. They're not taking advantage of what can be done with all that extra space between lens and sensor plane that mirrorless offers up, that others have, and that's underwhelming, not amazing. There's nothing exciting about the same lens configuration with a new mount.

The 200mm F2L IS is a good example too, on topic. They could drop an even more interesting 200mm focal length option with a faster optical train. The R&D would need to find a way to eliminate coma, flat field it and tame the spherical aberration and keep it apochromatic and that's where the real challenge comes in. Dropping the same old F2 after how many decades? Underwhelming.

It's been underwhelming watching Canon slowly get with the mirrorless direction. But I honestly don't care either, because I'm not a brand loyalist. These are just tools.

Very best,

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19205828
.
No, I am not amazed.

Their timetable is about what I would have expected. . In order for me to be "amazed", they would have to have had equivalents for at least 75% of the EF lenses out within the first two years, and that would have to include several specialty lenses like tilt-shift lenses, true macro lenses, and true supertelephotos like a 600 f4, 400mm f2.8, 800mm f5.6, etc. . Doing that in under two years would be amazing to me. . Taking 4 to 5 years to do that is just average timetable; neither slow, nor fast.

"Amazed" is a really strong word. . Takes a hell of a lot to actually amaze me. . I am slightly impressed with what they have done, but not amazed.

.

I will be Amazed if Canon continues to allow the EF adapter to be used on future camera models. I think that at some point they will not allow EF lens to be programmed into future cameras for use.....why...because its going to hurt RF lens sales

I think thats coming and would be really amazed if it does not

umphotography wrote in post #19205952
I will be Amazed if Canon continues to allow the EF adapter to be used on future camera models. I think that at some point they will not allow EF lens to be programmed into future cameras for use.....why...because its going to hurt RF lens sales

I think thats coming and would be really amazed if it does not

That would be a major mistake as canon isn't offering anything so special to prevent a new wave of adapted sonys. Canon just caught (or passed) Sony with mirrorless bodies. Many who switched away from Sony using their Canon glass would switch right back if Canon blocked them from using their legacy glass.