60 of 64 people found the following review helpful
An "L" Tele for a reasonable price,
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Telephoto Lens for Canon SLR Cameras (Electronics)
Canon L lenses are known for their great optics and priceyness. This fast tele is an excellent value. Some pictures I took at the Phoenix zoo with this lens are superb. Use your tripod and get tack-sharp images. The only thing that would improve this lens would be the addition of the image stabilizion feature found on a few Canon optics. Of course, the advantage of large aperature lenses is that you can set a fast shutter speed and still have enough light for a shot. This lens is surprisingly compact, (as long focal length teles go). The autofocus is very fast and quiet. Comes with a hood, too.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Apr 2, 2008 2:02:30 PM PDT
Posted on Jul 9, 2008 7:45:50 PM PDT
Wilcy Moore says:
I found the 200mm F2.0 IS - whoa!! $5,800? I think I'll stay with my 135mm if I need F2.0!!
Posted on Oct 10, 2008 10:37:47 PM PDT
P. Ryan says:
Most of these reviews acclaim the speed of this lens and the sharpness of the resulting photos, so would it really be a noticeable difference adding IS for several grand?
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 12, 2009 5:09:15 PM PDT
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 16, 2009 9:53:38 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 16, 2009 9:54:27 PM PDT
D. Alexander says:
Relative to the 200/2.8, the 200/2 is a stop faster, significantly sharper at all apertures, has slightly superior color and contrast, greater flare resistance, almost zero color fringing, weather sealing, is faster to focus, and vastly more usable as a result of IS. While I prefer to keep my shutter speed at 1/400 or better with the f/2.8 lens, at least one user reports consistently strong results as low as 1/5 seconds with the f/2.0 lens.
While post-processing after the fact can obscure which lens was used for a particular shot, the gulf between the two in actual use is enormous. Simply put, when you must get the shot to put food on the table, the top lens is worth the price of admission. For most everyone else, the 200/2.8 makes more sense.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›