5D3 or 200mm f/2?

[RLPhoto]

I've been considering both of these options for a couple months now. I've already got the cash for either but been waiting a bit on both.

5D3 would be nice upgrade from my classic. Its ready to die soon and don't really want to fix it when it does.

But

I've always liked the stunning shots from the 200mm f/2. Heavy, impractical but amazing. Specialist item.

I'd Like to hear opinions over both.

 

[bdunbar79]

I always recommend glass over bodies, but in this case I can't. Upgrade to the 5D Mk III first, then start saving again and get the 200 f/2L. Get that lens, because I can tell you, as good as the 135L is, the 200L is even better. Whether you make money off these purchases or not, I think your photography means enough to you, that I can guarantee you that it will be worth it to you. 5D Mark III about $3500, 200 f/2L about $5999, total purchase value $9500. That's not that big of a deal if you spread it out and your photography will go where it hasn't yet. The 200L loses very little resale value anyways, for financial security.

 

[candyman]

The 200 f2 should be checked on purchase with the 5D MKIII. There is an issue and can be fixed by sending the lens to Canon. I am not sure if it is already fixed when buying the lens new.

 

[ChrisAnderson]

I just happen to have this combo sitting on my desk. I've had the 5D3 for over a month, and the 200 f/2 arrived today.
I'm renting the 200, and i can't ever see myself spending this kind of money on a single lens at this point. With that said, once you have the 5D3, so much is possible with so many different combinations of glass.

 

[briansquibb]

I've been considering both of these options for a couple months now. I've already got the cash for either but been waiting a bit on both.

5D3 would be nice upgrade from my classic. Its ready to die soon and don't really want to fix it when it does.

But

I've always liked the stunning shots from the 200mm f/2. Heavy, impractical but amazing. Specialist item.

I'd Like to hear opinions over both.

Wow that is a very hard decision

I can only comment on the 200 f/2

- it is big, but actually slightly shorter than the 70-200 f/2.8. The hood makes it longer
- doesn't feel much heavier
- the IQ is quite stunning as is the bokeh. shooting at f/2 is great for portraits
- AF just clicks in - there is a button on the lens that turns off AF - great for recompose

I use the 200 f/2 in preference to the 70-200 whenever possible

I rate this as my best lens

See the gallery for examples - OK the link is to mine ;D but go through the others and you will see every one is stunning

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=2607.msg135017#msg135017

 

[Razor2012]

I just happen to have this combo sitting on my desk. I've had the 5D3 for over a month, and the 200 f/2 arrived today.
I'm renting the 200, and i can't ever see myself spending this kind of money on a single lens at this point. With that said, once you have the 5D3, so much is possible with so many different combinations of glass.

That is one nice lens. *sigh*

 

[Razor2012]

I've been considering both of these options for a couple months now. I've already got the cash for either but been waiting a bit on both.

5D3 would be nice upgrade from my classic. Its ready to die soon and don't really want to fix it when it does.

But

I've always liked the stunning shots from the 200mm f/2. Heavy, impractical but amazing. Specialist item.

I'd Like to hear opinions over both.

Wow that is a very hard decision

I can only comment on the 200 f/2

- it is big, but actually slightly shorter than the 70-200 f/2.8. The hood makes it longer
- doesn't feel much heavier
- the IQ is quite stunning as is the bokeh. shooting at f/2 is great for portraits
- AF just clicks in - there is a button on the lens that turns off AF - great for recompose

I use the 200 f/2 in preference to the 70-200 whenever possible

I rate this as my best lens

See the gallery for examples - OK the link is to mine ;D but go through the others and you will see every one is stunning

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=2607.msg135017#msg135017

Brian the bokeh is unreal in those shots, very nice.

 

[MarkWebbPhoto]

I have been using the 200mm f/2 for about two years now and I love everything I get with that lens at f/2.0. You will notice a huge difference between this lens and the 70-200 2.8. This lens is better for portraits because there is practically no distortion which you will have with a zoom. This will add more pop than you will get going from a 5D2 to a 5D3, however shooting action with the 5D2 is nearly impossible. Right now I'm using this lens with the 1D4 for basketball and weddings but it really shines with a full frame camera. For me, once I get the 1DX it will be extremely difficult to separate the two

Here's one of my favorites from a recent shoot. With the 5DMKII I had to prefocus because you need a pro level autofocus to properly track movement with this lens.
http://markwebbphoto.com/sizemore/h3d2fd6b4#h3d2fd6b4

And one more that I posted earlier today with the lens wide open on the 5D2 with some lighting from the 600EX-RT.
http://markwebbphoto.com/p506385157/h28ab94e#h28ab94e

I also posted a couple other shots in the lens samples.

 

[Drizzt321]

If you don't need the improvements the 5d3 has over the 5Dc, go for the lens. If you find yourself limited a significant amount of the time, consider the 5d2 unless you want something with a significantly better AF system.