Talk Me Out Or Into It Please - 200mm F2L

[yorgasor]

Hmm, I think what I need to do is talk you into buying this lens for me

 

[Canon1]

Probably not what you want to hear but... If you have to ask, you don't need it. Take your family someplace nice for a vacation instead and photograph the trip with the gear you already have. My take.

 

[sanj]

You mainly shoot your kids?
Don't bother with the lens IMHO.

 

[anthonyd]

Excellent when you pair up with 24-70 on another body - close up shots are SUPER, prodcues very thin DOF. Otherwise, stay with 85L II and your current setup.

Dylan, you fit two kids in a picture shot with a 200mm? How far away were you? Amazing shot by the way (although I'd crop a little tighter to remove the bucket).

 

[Dylan777]

Excellent when you pair up with 24-70 on another body - close up shots are SUPER, prodcues very thin DOF. Otherwise, stay with 85L II and your current setup.


Dylan, you fit two kids in a picture shot with a 200mm? How far away were you? Amazing shot by the way (although I'd crop a little tighter to remove the bucket).

I was about 27ft away from the kids.

 

[Dylan777]

After seeing what Lensrentals did with the 200mm testing and comparison recently, it set me up for another internal struggle. lol

My main concern is whether or not I'll struggle with being fixed at 200 and how that will affect my frequency of usage/utility. I'm largely going to be shooting in the same scenarios as you, Dylan.

Maybe you could put a piece of gaffers tape on your 70-200 for a day and see how using just that FL affects your shooting. I know it won't show you what the images would look like out of the 2.0, but it would give you a feel for shooting at only 200.

A splendid idea indeed. Might just do that this evening.

That's good suggestion.

John, try to shoot 50mm fl with it. I find 50mm and 200mm combo works quite well, although, the 24-70 will give more flexibility. Having to own both 70-200 f2.8 IS II and 200f2, I still prefer 200f2 for close-up shots.

 

[Dylan777]

You mainly shoot your kids?
Don't bother with the lens IMHO.

Why not?

I'm building my gear to fit my kids activities. I prefer to own decent lenses and photograph my kids activities myself. Besides that, a dream to take a safari trip like you is still in my bucket list

 

[jdramirez]

I want to go halfsies on the lens. Heck, thirdsies works for me as well.

 

[Pookie]

I am a owner of a portrait studio. I own it and love it. Paid for by client work. BUT, there are other lenses that do the same. It's big and bulky... although it get's lots of oooh's and aww's in reality, I'd rather use the 85 II or the 135L.

Take a look at Dylan's photo, cute kids but do you need a 200 f/2 to capture that image. Nope. That money would be better used in a college savings account for those children. Or perhaps even basic photography classes so that you know how to compose an image properly... and then make money with client work.

If you're interested in bragging right on CR forums then by all means, get one and pet it while you call it precious. Mention it when anyone starts a thread on 200 FL. I love the forum comments, "yea, the 70-200 is great but the 200 f/2 is the way to go!!!".

If you're making loads of money with client work, then yes it's a great lens and might add something to your assets. Might, again I say, the 85L and 135L are just as kick ass and for a fraction of the cost will do practically the same thing. Even the 70-200 can produce a good thin DOF if you know how to use it.

If you're Jonesing for the 200mm f/2 just because it's the "200mm f/2"... save your cash and look elsewhere.

Pookie,
You have any kids? or maybe done any kid photograhy sessions? Your lighting works with models are wonderful. I would love to see some your light works with active kids - hopefully be able to pickup few tricks from it.

Two boys... I take more photos of them than I do models... Client work with children does not get posted and is only for the client (mainly youth league soccer/baseball and family portraits). My youngest child is just starting to walk, so there will be action shots of him in a few months

If you're thinking of a Safari in the future... unfort the 200 is going to fall far short of need. I rent a 300 and a 400 occasionally and often feel very FL limited. I'm sure there are a few members here that are far more knowledgable than I on Safari's than I but I def think you would encounter the same limitations.





[url=https://flic.kr/p/qty1kw]

 

[Pookie]

I am a owner of a portrait studio. I own it and love it. Paid for by client work. BUT, there are other lenses that do the same. It's big and bulky... although it get's lots of oooh's and aww's in reality, I'd rather use the 85 II or the 135L.

Take a look at Dylan's photo, cute kids but do you need a 200 f/2 to capture that image. Nope. That money would be better used in a college savings account for those children. Or perhaps even basic photography classes so that you know how to compose an image properly... and then make money with client work.

If you're interested in bragging right on CR forums then by all means, get one and pet it while you call it precious. Mention it when anyone starts a thread on 200 FL. I love the forum comments, "yea, the 70-200 is great but the 200 f/2 is the way to go!!!".

If you're making loads of money with client work, then yes it's a great lens and might add something to your assets. Might, again I say, the 85L and 135L are just as kick ass and for a fraction of the cost will do practically the same thing. Even the 70-200 can produce a good thin DOF if you know how to use it.

If you're Jonesing for the 200mm f/2 just because it's the "200mm f/2"... save your cash and look elsewhere.

All things I agree with you on. Definitely not trying to own it to brag about it on CR as I have plenty of other lenses that would allow me to oogle with others about. Petting it though on the other hand is something I think I would like to partake in.

My curiousity and hope primarily lies in the fact that I do do a lot of distant environmental portrait/action type stuff of my kids and thought I might get that extra umph and sharpness wide open that you don't get with the 85. While I get plenty of separation with the 85 and am very happy with it, I fantasize about the extra resolution, sharpness, focus speed, accuracy, and IS of the 200.

Based on what you're saying though, if I'm not getting much more than the 85 has to offer as far as "look" goes, then I will happily save my gouda for something else.

Well, I did pet mine for a few weeks. Just trying to be the voice of reason here. Not saying don't buy it but... also saying you'll get just about everything you want in smaller packages (easier with chasing kids) with lenses you already own. Hell, throw in a used 135L and go to Fiji with the fam with the money you'll save. I think you would be hard pressed to tell a good 135 shot from 200, you might but is it really worth 6K.

The other thing about carrying a 200, hell even the 70-200, as a dad (see above) chasing my 3 year old while my wife extracts my 14 month old from the car is a major PITA. Imagine dangling 6k plus as you move about... dinging the car door, your lenses, your camera. I've owned the 200 for about 4 years and after 2 trips out with it I soon realized it would be staying home the majority of the time (and that was even before kids).

 

[Dylan777]

I am a owner of a portrait studio. I own it and love it. Paid for by client work. BUT, there are other lenses that do the same. It's big and bulky... although it get's lots of oooh's and aww's in reality, I'd rather use the 85 II or the 135L.

Take a look at Dylan's photo, cute kids but do you need a 200 f/2 to capture that image. Nope. That money would be better used in a college savings account for those children. Or perhaps even basic photography classes so that you know how to compose an image properly... and then make money with client work.

If you're interested in bragging right on CR forums then by all means, get one and pet it while you call it precious. Mention it when anyone starts a thread on 200 FL. I love the forum comments, "yea, the 70-200 is great but the 200 f/2 is the way to go!!!".

If you're making loads of money with client work, then yes it's a great lens and might add something to your assets. Might, again I say, the 85L and 135L are just as kick ass and for a fraction of the cost will do practically the same thing. Even the 70-200 can produce a good thin DOF if you know how to use it.

If you're Jonesing for the 200mm f/2 just because it's the "200mm f/2"... save your cash and look elsewhere.

Pookie,
You have any kids? or maybe done any kid photograhy sessions? Your lighting works with models are wonderful. I would love to see some your light works with active kids - hopefully be able to pickup few tricks from it.

Two boys... I take more photos of them than I do models... Client work with children does not get posted and is only for the client (mainly youth league soccer/baseball and family portraits). My youngest child is just starting to walk, so there will be action shots of him in a few months

If you're thinking of a Safari in the future... unfort the 200 is going to fall far short of need. I rent a 300 and a 400 occasionally and often feel very FL limited. I'm sure there are a few members here that are far more knowledgable than I on Safari's than I but I def think you would encounter the same limitations.

Very cute.

Just too many memories for us to capture

85L II

or

200f2

 

[Viggo]

It's the one lens I will never ever sell. It gives a magic look and feel to every subject I point it too. Tried pretty much every ef lens from 300mm and down, and it's by far my favorite.

 

[hawaiisunsetphoto]

The 200L is my favorite lens. However, given what you have, and the type of shooting you do, it may be overkill. I don't see a 24-70 listed, and version 2 is awesome, I might add that one first. And like some have suggested, might want to rent it or get a CPS loaner to check out. If you buy a 200L used, it will likely keep it's value. Can always buy and resell later....

 

[Viggo]

If where you live is anything like here, the worst investment you can make with photogear is buying a new 200 f2 if you're not 110% you'll never sell. They absolutely won't sell used, I've seen only a few here sold used, and they were half off. Not seen that any other Canon lens.

That of course means it's the bargain like no other if you buy one used ;D

 

[JohnDizzo15]

Off the ledge for now. LOL.

Viggo - Wish I could get one of those used half off deals.

Hawaii - I had the 24-70II but traded it for the xt1, 56, and kit zoom last year. Ended up picking up the tamron VC a couple months later. Never use that one for stills though.