Gear of Yesteryear: DPReviewTV reviews the Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L USM

Jan 24, 2021
2
2
I have a 200 1.8 and a 200 2.0 and love them both. The 1.8 works fantastic on the R5.
I bought the 2.0 because the 1.8 stopped focusing . After a few years I tried it on the R and it’s back.
Could someone please give the name of the repair place in Michigan?
I wa told they are not repairable.
Thanks,
Tim
www.tjphoto.net
 

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
8,813
1,546
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
I have a 200 1.8 and a 200 2.0 and love them both. The 1.8 works fantastic on the R5.
I bought the 2.0 because the 1.8 stopped focusing . After a few years I tried it on the R and it’s back.
Could someone please give the name of the repair place in Michigan?
I wa told they are not repairable.
Thanks,
Tim
www.tjphoto.net

 

Fischer

EOS 90D
Mar 17, 2020
146
82
Heavy like hell and unwieldy. But beautiful - even unique - rendering. Pretty much sums it up for me. Never got to use it on the 5DSR, but it performed very well on the previous Canon DSLRs. The newer 200mm f2.0 is a much better build and is not nearly as cumbersome in use. The big advantage of the f1.8 was its lead elements. It took Canon years to come up with coatings to compensate effectively for removing the lead. That is why several older Canon lenses were optically better than their predecessors. The - less than stellar - original 70-200mm f2.8 IS L being the most notorious case. The 200mm f1.8 btw got a bad rap, because Canon officially stopped servicing it only a couple of years after they stopped production. Ouch...
 
Last edited:

risto0

I'm New Here
She said in the video that RF lenses enable R5 to focus on eye iris. But EF lenses focus on eye lashes (probably because they try to focus on eye iris but if an eye lash gets between the iris and camera then camera focuses on the item closer to the camera). I've never heard that before. So is this true that only RF lenses manage to focus on eye iris even if the eye lash gets into the way?
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
1,010
1,043
This blog confirms what I always have been convinced of.
It's not the wide-open MTFs which matter, but a lens' rendering, or should I name it character?
A clinically sharp lens, like some Sigmas, sometimes lack the "magic" wide-open rendering of some vintage lenses (Canon EF 1,2/85, Summilux 1,4/75 etc...).
Sharpness certainly matters, contrast too, but imperfections have advantages as well.
To repeat myself: a lens isn't designed for shooting charts...
 

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,209
285
31
34109
www.facebook.com
Thanks for the post, Dolina. It was a good video to see. I guess the LensLibrary in Malaysia is a special place for cameras in that part of the world?
Haven't been back to Malaysia since the 2000 Malaysian GP. ;) I just did a youtube search on the lens.

Before COVID I was planning to go there for a food trip. I think round trip tickets are ~$250.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
823
913
Kentucky, USA
Haven't been back to Malaysia since the 2000 Malaysian GP. ;) I just did a youtube search on the lens.

Before COVID I was planning to go there for a food trip. I think round trip tickets are ~$250.
What do you mean by a "food trip"? Enjoying eating at their food places, or buying special cooking supplies? (I'm just curious)
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,279
3,547
Irving, Texas
She said in the video that RF lenses enable R5 to focus on eye iris. But EF lenses focus on eye lashes (probably because they try to focus on eye iris but if an eye lash gets between the iris and camera then camera focuses on the item closer to the camera). I've never heard that before. So is this true that only RF lenses manage to focus on eye iris even if the eye lash gets into the way?
I have two EF mount lenses. One is from Canon, and one from Tamron. I have had no issues as a portrait shooter at all. Maybe the problem is specific to certain lenses? I wouldn't know. Admittedly, I use an R, not the R5.
 

Exploreshootshare

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 31, 2020
67
60
Ohhhhh woooow! Totally amazing images! This lense really sparked my interest since my EF 100-400mm sometimes isn't bright enough to take pictures of forest wildlife at dawn. The only downsides:
- weight
- even tough 20 years old, I so far only found one offer on eBay Germany and it is still at 4.500 $... I'll keep looking

If Canon were to make an RF Version of this lense: Is there any chance it would be a lot lighter?
Although, I don´ think I could ever afford an RF 200 F1.8 (F2.0) with the RF markup prices. But I least I've got a new dream
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

bluezurich

5D3 Curmudgeon
Dec 17, 2013
4,351
2,457
This blog confirms what I always have been convinced of.
It's not the wide-open MTFs which matter, but a lens' rendering, or should I name it character?
A clinically sharp lens, like some Sigmas, sometimes lack the "magic" wide-open rendering of some vintage lenses (Canon EF 1,2/85, Summilux 1,4/75 etc...).
Sharpness certainly matters, contrast too, but imperfections have advantages as well.
To repeat myself: a lens isn't designed for shooting charts...
the 135L
 
  • Love
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Fischer

EOS 90D
Mar 17, 2020
146
82
She said in the video that RF lenses enable R5 to focus on eye iris. But EF lenses focus on eye lashes (probably because they try to focus on eye iris but if an eye lash gets between the iris and camera then camera focuses on the item closer to the camera). I've never heard that before. So is this true that only RF lenses manage to focus on eye iris even if the eye lash gets into the way?
I heard this from others. Have not seen it myself. But then again - there's hardly any people to shoot these days... :cry:.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

Fischer

EOS 90D
Mar 17, 2020
146
82
Ohhhhh woooow! Totally amazing images! This lense really sparked my interest since my EF 100-400mm sometimes isn't bright enough to take pictures of forest wildlife at dawn. The only downsides:
- weight
- even tough 20 years old, I so far only found one offer on eBay Germany and it is still at 4.500 $... I'll keep looking

If Canon were to make an RF Version of this lense: Is there any chance it would be a lot lighter?
Although, I don´ think I could ever afford an RF 200 F1.8 (F2.0) with the RF markup prices. But I least I've got a new dream
The new 200mm f/2.0 is so much better to use. Even if only a little lighter. Expect a new super-fast 200mm would be still lighter to use. Count on a half pound less for the lens and another half for your wallet.
 

briangus

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Apr 6, 2017
102
165
Bangkok
A few of the 200mm F1.8's popped up in the 2nd hand camera shops in Singapore a while back.
I was thinking who in their right minds would lug one of these about, just looked so big.

Piqued my interest though and reading a few reviews decided to buy one.
Unfortunately for me they were all gone when I went to buy.
After a couple of months I gave up and bought the 200mm F2
My favourite Canon lens, works well on the adaptor with the R, not had a chance to try out on the R5 but hopefully soon
 

Exploreshootshare

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 31, 2020
67
60
The new 200mm f/2.0 is so much better to use. Even if only a little lighter. Expect a new super-fast 200mm would be still lighter to use. Count on a half pound less for the lens and another half for your wallet.

Thx for the reply. I didn't have in mind that the F1.8 doesn't have IS.
I'll look for a used F2.0 but I doubt there'll be a "cheap" one available. I'll probably just stick to my 100-400mm or may upgrade to the RF 100-500mm one day.
 

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
8,813
1,546
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
A few of the 200mm F1.8's popped up in the 2nd hand camera shops in Singapore a while back.
I was thinking who in their right minds would lug one of these about, just looked so big.

Piqued my interest though and reading a few reviews decided to buy one.
Unfortunately for me they were all gone when I went to buy.
After a couple of months I gave up and bought the 200mm F2
My favourite Canon lens, works well on the adaptor with the R, not had a chance to try out on the R5 but hopefully soon

I own the f/2 as well as the 1.8. It's a brilliant lens and definitely has a more modern rendering and better ergonomics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: briangus
<-- start Taboola -->