Trying to justify purchasing a 200mm f2.0

[SJTstudios]

Hey guy, I'm Thinking about buying the 200mm f2, I love the 200mm on my 70-200 2.8 is ii, but I don't know if the 200 f2 will make things all that better.
My 70-200 is my dedicated sports lens, but I want to use the 200 for low ligh sports, and a medium telephoto for some portraits as well as some other things, 200 is my decided range.
I just want to hear your opinions on wether or not the purchase would be worth it over the 70-200, an also, has anybody used it with TCs, because I know they make nice 400mm f4's and okay ~300mm 2.8's

 

[PackLight]

I will qualify my thoughts in that I do not own the 200 mm, but I do own the 300mm f/2.8 and the 500mm f/4 so understand what owning a supertele is like.
I also have a great copy of the 70-200mm II and know what it will do.
All the supertele's are in another category than the 70-200. Both in IQ and performance.
If 200mm is your length go for it. You will not be disappointed. It will be a nice step up.

 

[RLPhoto]

If you do a lot of portraits the 200 f/2 is unbeatable and you get roughly a 300mm 2.8 and a 400mm f/4 with TC's.

I've been seriously considering the 200 f/2 for a long while because of the magic in my 135L. The 200L would just be even more awesome.

 

[Drizzt321]

Not having used the 200 f/2 (but lusting after it), and don't own the 70-200 (yet, rented it), i'd say is this for work, how you make a living? I'd be the 70-200 2.8 is perfectly fine for you then, and it's extremely good quality throughout it's range.

Is this because you have a bunch of extra money and you want a really fancy new toy? Heck ya! Go for it. Everything I've heard makes me want this lens.

 

[wickidwombat]

lens rentals had a grat priced one a month or so ago but refused to send it over here to me in Australia

so its their fault I don't own one

 

[dolina]

I have the Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM and Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM.

You have the proper understanding and intention for the prime. You must determine if it is worth your while to buy it. The prime is peerless but hefty in mass and price.

I had no regrets in buying it and have only high praise for it.

My sole complaint is the lens foot was small to use as a handle so I replaced it with one from Kirk.

This lens draws attention and people will expect you to be able to magnify the moon to touch the top and bottom of image frame. Removing the lens hood lessens the attention to a degree.

 

[M.ST]

Buy the EF 200 f/2 L IS (5 stop IS) lens if you want to shoot indoor sports or indoor action.

There is no better lens for canon cameras on the market with this focal lenght.

I like it and can recommend it. It is worth the price you pay for it.

I like my EF 300 2.8 II IS and EF 400 2.8 II IS lens too, but for indoor action the EF 200 f/2 L IS will be the one and only.

 

[AdamJ]

I'd advise you to prioritise on filling some of the more basic gaps in your equipment list, such as a standard or wide zoom. I'd also recommend upgrading from your Rebel before contemplating a $6,000 prime.

 

[PackLight]

I'd advise you to prioritise on filling some of the more basic gaps in your equipment list, such as a standard or wide zoom. I'd also recommend upgrading from your Rebel before contemplating a $6,000 prime.

I do not know what the OP's equipment list is, I wouldn't necessarly go with a FF over a super tele though.

However if the OP is using a crop body and is thinking about going FF, the 300mm f/2.8L is the lens to be looking at if the 200mm is the right length for his crop body.

 

[Loswr]

I'd also recommend upgrading from your Rebel before contemplating a $6,000 prime.

+1 on this. I would not even consider buying a fast prime, much less a supertele, on a body without AFMA.

You like 200mm on APS-C but mentioned elsewhere you'll likely be getting a new body (APS-H or FF) "soon". That will change the FoV of all your lenses, so if you love the 200/2 on APS-C, you will need a 300/2.8 on FF for an approximate equivalent.

Also, for low light use, a FF body will give you over a stop (closer to 2 stops with the 5DIII) better ISO noise performance than your Rebel. A $6K lens will only get you one stop. Likewise, the FF camera will give you 1.3-stops thinner DoF for portraits with your existing lenses (f/2.8 is on APS-C is equivalent to f/4.5 on FF for DoF at the same framing).

 

[dolina]

I'd stick with the current body if you are happy with it.

Bodies are made obsolete in mere years.

Lenses are made obsolete in decades.

The 1-Series bodies generally have a 3 year or longer product cycle. My 1D4 was just a crummy 2 years.

The predecessor to the Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM enjoyed a product cycle starting from 1988 through 2003. The lens you are contemplating was marketed in 2008. Chances are it wont get replaced anytime soon even if there are rumors to this effect.

Two decades for a lens that sold barely 8,000 copies worldwide. Not bad, not bad at all.