80-200 2.8 L ?

Anyone have or have used this lens?How old is this model?I am looking at purchasing one but would like more info.

Thanks

the "magic drainpipe" everyone who has owned one loves it. they only disadvantage is it lacks the USM focusing of the 70-200 2.8 series that replaced it.

Other disadvantage other then in post #2 is the you can not focus as close as the white versions. Other wise its a pretty good lens if you have a sharp one and the black of it IMO makes it a bit better then the white newer lenses because it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.

That micromotor ain't bad either.
The main reason the lens can be gotten relatively cheap these days is that you may not be able to get parts/service for it should that be required.

Other than that, I think it's a great lens, plus its not painted in that dorky white sand color.

One of the best lenses ever.

how long has it been out of production?I can get one for $770 in like new condition,does this sound like a good deal?The cheapest I have found a 70-200 2.8 is $1099 which is more than I can spare.Would this be better than getting the 70-200 f4?

Thanks again

well, i dont know, for that price i would look at the sigma 2.8. generally you can find a decent drainpipe for mid 500s to mid 600s, unless im off my rocker.

*edit*
then again if it is really"like new" then mabye. but that still seems just a bit high.

Sounds like a KEH price...they have a reputation for rating the condition of their used gear conservatively.
There are risks associated with obsolete equipment purchase. If you have the guts, go for it, assuming it's KEH. However, do check their (i.e., KEH) warranty carefully beforehand....I think it is 3 months.

If you need f/2.8 then "like new"drainpipe is better for you than getting a new 70-200 f/4. If f/4 will do for you, get the 70-200 f/4.

Thanks,yeah its at KEH.I may end up going for the 70-200 f4,and when I have the extra cash selling it and upgrading.At least they hold their value well.This is my first "L" so i'm being very anal about it.

Yup, it's good to be cautious.....these damn lenses cost lot of money.

I owned the 80-200 for awhile and compared it to my 70-200 f4. Basically ALL was the same except the 70-200 f4 could focus closer which gave me more background blur. Other then that its about equal to the current 70-200mm lenses. The black is an added bonus that I really like. I really wish the 70-200mm lenses came in black.

The ease of use with this lens is pretty similar also to the newer ones but it weighs just a tad bit more then the 70-200mm f2.8 version. Other then that if you can get a really good copy from a seller that will refund your money if you dont like it then go for it. Most likely you will like it. I liked mine.

Also you might want to check out its companion if you can find a good copy like I did. the 28-80 f2.8-4 L is a superb lens that although not as good as the 24-70 f2.8 lens it is far better then the sigma IMO.

Great lens. Get it. (For a max of around $650 I'd say)

yeah i love mine. as has been pointed out, you can't get parts for it. my af-mf switch died and it took me forever to find a replacement. but it's fast, sharp and it's served me very well.

I've just replaced my magic drainpipe with a 70-200 IS - I can't see any difference in image quality, focusing seems a tad quicker on the new one but other than that, not a lot of difference.

I had both the 80-200 and 70-200. I did some side by side comparisons and it looked to me like the 80-200 was a bit sharper. The 70-200 was definitely faster focusing tho which is why I ended up keeping the 70-200. It was a tough decision tho