Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

any low light samples, like indoor concerts, highly considering this lens

Lester Wareham wrote in post #8401585
A search does not show one up.

I think the only difference is the Mk I had a built in pull forward hood rather like the 300 f4L IS. So optically it should be the same, the Mk II is just better shaded.

Are you absolutely sure that's the only difference? I have googled about this but can't find anything. I think i have read that the mk2 had an improvement in coating? (rear coating)

I've researched this lens extensively and yep, they are optically the same. The hood on the MKI is supposedly not as good as the MKII though (as far as providing shade).

I've read that the mk I's hood was more fragile but more convienient

blue9 wrote in post #8581423
Are you absolutely sure that's the only difference? I have googled about this but can't find anything. I think i have read that the mk2 had an improvement in coating? (rear coating)

BlueTsunami wrote in post #8581471
I've researched this lens extensively and yep, they are optically the same. The hood on the MKI is supposedly not as good as the MKII though (as far as providing shade).

this is my understanding, there does not seem to be a technical report to help. Other than finding two versions of eyes of EOS or the links below you could ask Canon.


Try http://www.canon.com …photo/ef_200_28​l_usm.html

http://www.canon.com …oto/ef_200_28li​i_usm.html

Hello, is anyone using this lens for street photography? Because i am wandering if i should get this or the 100mm macro...

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #8582570
I've read that the mk I's hood was more fragile but more convienient

I don't see anything fragile about it. It doesn't seem big enough to shade the lens but I certainly wouldn't call it fragile.

Everything I have been able to find comparing the two says that they are identical except for the lens hood. And the mkI comes with the tripod ring rather than being an optional accessory. I have the mkI and love it.

palaima wrote in post #8582818
Hello, is anyone using this lens for street photography? Because i am wandering if i should get this or the 100mm macro...

My street/city kit is 24-105 as primary with the 200 2.8 as a telephoto and the 50 1.4 in case I need something fast for low light shooting. A really great kit that doesn't attract too much attention.

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #8582570
I've read that the mk I's hood was more fragile but more convienient

Not fragile, much more compact

echo wrote in post #8585291
Not fragile, much more compact

I don't see why it should be fragile, the 300/f4 IS hood is Ok, also I have my old FD 135mm which has an integral metal hood, that was never a problem.

However, this smaller diamiter hoods will be a lot less effective as a hood.

kandyredcoi wrote in post #8560629
any low light samples, like indoor concerts, highly considering this lens

wow anyone?

kandyredcoi wrote in post #8587590
wow anyone?

Just 2 from my first concert (and my first day with this lens!). Tried to keep ISO low on my 40D. Great colors, fast AF.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

^moar, thanx!

versedmb wrote in post #6147717
Maybe I should consider shooting some motocross - love this one Nick.

+1 me

How is this lens' sharpness compared to the 135L? I know they're both sharp...but there's a $300 difference between the two, so I don't know which one to get :/