Canon EF 50-200mm f/3.5-4.5 L - ???

Hi-

What do you guys think of this lens? If it's become available for me to purchase used, should I go for it? I was looking at the 70-200, f/2.8 L -- are they even comparable in quality (f/2.8 is good, but I probably wouldn't need it enough to justify that as my only reason to choose one over the other).

Ok - I wanted you to think about it and give me your honest opinions before I tell you the price is $104.99.

Would I be getting a good price and/or good lens? Is it a worthy lens to add to my collection (I'm just switching over to Canon EF mount lenses, so I only have a 28-70 f/2.8 L at this moment) or will it just "hold me over until I buy another"?

I'm thinking "too good to be true" -- but crossing my fingers hoping that I've stumbled upon a good deal. BTW- I'm told that the quality is "excellent +".

Thank you for your responses,
Jasper

How old(or new) is this lens? I've used Canon cameras for 12 years (switched to EOS from Nikon) and I honestly have never seen or heard of an L series EF 50-200mm lens. Canon doesn't list this lens as a current model, they have a 35-350L and an 80-200 non-L but I could not locate a 50-200L.

Just curious.

Cal

I'm certain that it's an older lens. I found it on one of the "lens review" sites that Pekka lists in many of his messages, and I found several refernces to it in a Google search. Beyond that, I know nothing about it.

Well, I just threw it on my Amex and it's on its way. It should be here in a few days and we'll see what we've got.

Jasper

See http://www.photo.net …g_id=000bBE&msg​_id=000bBE

Also found this from http://www.photozone.d​e/

groups/elements: 16/14 1 CaF2 + 1 UD (?)
aperture blades: 8
AF motor: AFD (very slow)
fulltime manual: no
filter size: 58mm
weight: 695g
close focus: 1.2m
unsealed, cylindrical hood, cannot use original Canon EF converters.

"The old dinosour 50-200/3.5-4.5L is a quite different species compared to the others: it is a push-pull design made with an outer plastic barrel and it has a rotating front element - naturally no USM here as well. Nonetheless even this one qualifies as an L class lens with superior optical quality. "

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Thanks Pekka! You're the best!

It looks like it might just end up working for me. Then I can use the money I've saved to get another... hehe

Either way, it's only $105 -- can't hurt to try it and see what it's like.

I have a friend who goes on long buying trips for antiques -- she's in and out of secondhand stores, flea markets, etc. in every part of the country. She found this for me someplace in Arizona and wanted to know if I was interested.

Jasper

Thanks for the info. Pekka. It looks as if you will be getting a nice old "L" lens at a bargain Jasper!

Cal.......

Any true L lens for $100 is a huge bargain, unless of course the glass is scratched, etc. Even if you can only really use it on manual focus, I'd be very happy to get it for $100.

Ok... you're going to laugh....

It doesn't have USM -- so the focus is SLOOOOOOOOOOW.

I passed it along to a friend who doesn't have ANY good lenses -- so this is a major improvement for him.

And, I have a 70-200 f/4 L USM coming for $550 not including the $40 rebate (seems like a great price to me!).

Jasper

Oh go ahead and get it, if you don't like it you can sell it to me for a profit I've been looking for a lens with about that focal length, I've heard very good things about it although it is old and slow.

Rich

Hi Jasper ,

I used that lens on my EOS620 , years ago and did like it a lot . Yes , it is slow but it's really good .
I had 50x60cmm prints and they were outstanding .
I sold it along with the camera and it's still in use today .

Best regards ,

Danny


http://www.canonians.c​om

Great price, and an even better lens! Excellent choice!

Haha--

This is an old thread. Those 70-200 f/4's are hard to come buy. I couldn't get one in quick enough, so I settled on a 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS for $750 (used, but great condition).

Jasper

Hey Jasper,

I can't throw any stones here - that is the lens I have (70-200 f/2.8 L). I have seen some of your other replies (in other threads), and wondered whether the f/2.8 was a "loaner"...

Funnily enough, I started off with the f/4 version, too... but mine must have been made on a Monday and had some problems, and the only way I could replace it quickly... well, you guessed it!

The 70-200 f/2.8 L is a great lens to "settle" for...