which 200mm lens to get

Sort by date Sort by votes
Patak

Patak

Take that shot for god sake !
Nov 17, 2014
33
0
345
Canada
#1
Hello everyone,

i am planing to obtain a 200mm lens and looking into various options. i would use the lens mostly for outdoors, portraits, sport, kids playing etc. i was looking into 200mm F2.8 L which is very similar to 135 f2 L. The only problem for me would be lack of IS with this focal length. Second choice would be one of 70-200mm, preferably f2.8 IS II. however my issue with this lens would be size/weight and not really being as "special" as my 135L. My ultimate choice would be 200mm F2 L. For the quality of shots i would forgive the size/weight factor, but price would be an issue and would need a bit more time to gather $$$. I already have 70-300 L and do not use it much since it does not produce the same "feel" as 135L

What is your experience with lenses mentioned above and how would you compare them?

thankfully,
 
#2
I would love the 200 f/2 but it might be a hassle/burdon to bust out all the time and a tripod/monopod is definitely needed as well. All your other lenses are hand holdable and so is the 70-200. But if you have the means to own such a special lens, id get it. You get a look you simply can't get with any other lens. Same can be said of the 85L and 135L but they are far more affordable
 
Upvote 0
#3
bmwzimmer said:
I would love the 200 f/2 but it might be a hassle/burdon to bust out all the time and a tripod/monopod is definitely needed as well. All your other lenses are hand holdable and so is the 70-200. But if you have the means to own such a special lens, id get it. You get a look you simply can't get with any other lens. Same can be said of the 85L and 135L but they are far more affordable
Click to expand...

200mm f2 is hand holdable depending on the person, I use it for street photography sometimes.

Nice to crack it out at weddings too :D

10484154_10154440125155227_8371851168448966587_o.jpg



I generally use 35mm, 85mm 1.2, and 200mm f2 - I have a 135mm f2 and the only reason I dont sell it, is just in case I need that FL.. which isn't often.
 
Upvote 0
#4
Patak said:
Hello everyone,

however my issue with this lens would be size/weight and not really being as "special" as my 135L. My ultimate choice would be 200mm F2 L.

thankfully,
Click to expand...
Looking at your list, actually, to me you miss the most special (85 1.2) so I assume that "special" thing is more a personal taste.
Both 200mm f2.0 and 2.8 are "special" in my taste, but different "special". I rent the 2.0 occasionally because I cannot afford it, and the 2.8 became my second best after the 85 1.2, because of the "special" thing. I don't use my 135 that much.
If you are shooting something moving, unless you pan, you won't really need an IS and you have already the 135 so the main difference is just the focal length and at 200mm 2.8 is special (at least to me).
My suggestion is rent each one of them and then decide, because to me you are the only who can take the decision.
I use prime, mainly, and I went for the 100-400 II for my zoom. Big, but worth it. I got it two weeks ago and haven't stop playing with it yet.
 
Upvote 0
#5
bmwzimmer said:
I would love the 200 f/2 but it might be a hassle/burdon to bust out all the time and a tripod/monopod is definitely needed as well. All your other lenses are hand holdable and so is the 70-200. But if you have the means to own such a special lens, id get it. You get a look you simply can't get with any other lens. Same can be said of the 85L and 135L but they are far more affordable
Click to expand...

I hand hold the 200mm f2 all the time but for long periods of time I use a monopod. I got hired to shoot hockey pics (I'm not a pro but they thought I was good enough).

These are a bunch of head shots/close ups for human interest:

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/daryn

These are of the games:

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/2015-winter-classic/

I *love* that lens. It's the one expensive lens that I think is worth every penny. Next favorite is 400mm DO I (I've got a good copy but want to upgrade to the II). The expensive lens I like the least is the 600mm f4 II. Nice glass, so heavy that you have to dedicate time to shooting, it is not a grab and run lens. The 400mm w/ 1.4x on it sees far more use, you can hand hold that one.
 
Upvote 0
#7
Pick up 70-200 2.8ii. I have 200 2.0 and even though it's a fantastic lens, 70-200 2.8ii is more practical and versatile.

Also, if you're planning to shoot playing kids or sport, IS may not be that practical.
 
Upvote 0
#8
The EF 200/2.8 USM II is a bargain. It is small, light, pretty sharp, AF is fast, bokeh is fine. You should rent it and use it for some days to decide wether you like it or not. With the 70D it gives me an acceptable reach for many situations. Hand holding 200mm without IS can be critical, if you are not used to it. I have a Mini-Stativ wich serves as an "Shoulder Camera Support". This is ok.

The other lenses (180 Macro; 70-200/2.8 II; 200/2) are better, but they are much more expensive. So the little 200/2.8 is the choice for the "poor people", wich means for nearly everbody.

Andy
 
Upvote 0
#9
For me size is a big deal as I travel a lot.
My travel kit is 5D II plus 35/2 IS and 200/2.8 plus 270EX flash. All this fits nicely in a Crumpler "4 Million Dollar Home" bag, which is a small bag. I used to travel with the 85/1.8, but like the extra reach of the 200. I have a metal screw in lens hood for the 200 that fits nicely over the mount end of the lens when not in use. The original lens hood is huge. I previously had a 70-200/4 and there's no way that would fit in my current bag. It does fit in my "5 Million Dollar Home" but that bag is significantly bigger.
The 200 is sharp and flare resistant. It takes the 1.4x nicely to give a 280/4.
The 70-200/2.8 is too big for my needs and the 200/2 is also way too expensive.
 
Upvote 0
#10
I've had them all and really liked all of them, but as special goes, the f2 is just on another level. I bring it everywhere, never used any legs for it except my own. And I have inflamed joints and haven't worked out in 20 years, lol.

80% of my favorite shots are from the 200. The one lens I will never ever sell.
 
Upvote 0
#11
thank you all for your replies. My idea is to mosly hand-hold this lens. this is why the IS is essential to me with this focal lenght. i tried my 135L on my 7D (becomes 216mm) and the view was shaking quite a bit, which i am not use to. I appriciate 200mm f2.8L with respect to size, apature and optical quality, but i just cannot see using it if i cannot frame things properly.
 
Upvote 0
#12
Upvote 0
#13
Patak said:
thank you all for your replies. My idea is to mosly hand-hold this lens. this is why the IS is essential to me with this focal lenght. i tried my 135L on my 7D (becomes 216mm) and the view was shaking quite a bit, which i am not use to. I appriciate 200mm f2.8L with respect to size, apature and optical quality, but i just cannot see using it if i cannot frame things properly.
Click to expand...


It seems like you have all the good reasons (portraits, sports, "look") to buy the 200/2L. Given that situation, I don't see anyone regretting after having bought the lens. Especially since you are willing to save up for it.
 
Upvote 0
#15
Patak said:
thank you all for your replies. My idea is to mosly hand-hold this lens. this is why the IS is essential to me with this focal lenght. i tried my 135L on my 7D (becomes 216mm) and the view was shaking quite a bit, which i am not use to. I appriciate 200mm f2.8L with respect to size, apature and optical quality, but i just cannot see using it if i cannot frame things properly.
Click to expand...

I have had all three: 200/2L IS 200/2,8 II and 70-200/2,8L IS II and my advice is: buy the 70-200 II. It has IS and it has better contrast than the 200/2,8. The zoom is very sharp and it is actually very difficult to see any difference from the 200/2 IS in terms of sharpness. The zoom is very easy to hand hold, especially with a camera with battery grip, and much lighter than the 200/2 IS.

You said in your post that you don't feel the zoom is as special as the 200/2,8.... That´s nonsence! The reality is the opposite: The zoom is sharper and better in every way, especially since you are going to hand hold the lens.
 
Upvote 0
#16
If budget is not an issue, 200mm f2 IS will blow you away. I used to shoot with 70-200mm f2.8 IS II a lot, until my 200mm f2 IS arrived. I'm Asian, I have problem shooting with 1Dx + 200mm f2 IS II. The background blur/bokeh @ f2 will melt the f2.8 ;)
 

Attachments

  • _X7U8356 (2).jpg
    _X7U8356 (2).jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 302
Upvote 0
#18
OH... and to answer the question... I vote on the 70-200mm f/2.8L Is mkii... it is very sharp wide open and when shooting moving targets, i.e. kids and sports... having the ability to zoom is quite helpful. I was playing around with shooting hockey with the 135L and f/2 is nice... but being able to frame a player is nicer. Especially when they come in close... I can handle if they are a bit far and I have to crop into the image... but if they come in close... I can't zoom out... and I wind up chopping off good action.

So there's that. Also... I like my 135L... but I find it hard to love... I love my 85L mkii... and I love my 70-200 as a 2nd wife that doesn't know about the first... but I'm still getting to learn to love the 135L.
 
Upvote 0
#20
a few people here seem to be steering you towards a 85L ii

I had 70-200 2,8IS which i never really loved - it just served a focal length purpose.
ended up using 85L ii where possible

however,when i upgraded to 70-200 2.8IS mk2 it was like a light came on - superb
so much so that the 85L started to gather dust...after almost 2yrs of non use i sold the 85
main reason was,although it's fantastic when nailed correctly,I found it useless with kids and events due to autofocus issues. i was losing waaaay too many shots

i then ended up buying a 135L for easy carry and that sweet f2 bokeh
I miss the 85 at times, but it's very frustrating lens depending on your use

you wouldnt regret the 70-200mk2 and it's resale value holds exceptionally well

200F2 holds value too, but could take you a while to sell if the time came
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fbimages
Svalbard and Arctic pack ice, summer 2025
Replies
16
Views
1K
ArdoSmith
A
N
Which CPL to use with RF 24-105mm Z
Replies
4
Views
1K
nhandumuc
N
M
Power Zoom screw openings on lens
Replies
0
Views
1K
mpphoto
M
E
[COMMUNITY PROJECT] Deriving comprehensive guidelines for shooting the sun without sensor damage
Replies
14
Views
707
EOSR7MkII
E
L
RF 20mm f/1.4L VCM
Replies
9
Views
6K
Click
Click
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu