Why is there no option to support the channel directly from RUclips? It would be much more convenient, because then I can see all supported channels. Best regards for the best lens reviewer on RUclips. 💪🏻
Bought mine used about 8or9 years ago and just simply a stunning lens. What i like is put a 1.4x MK 2or3 extender and you have almost no real loss of quality a 280mm f.2.8 and a 2x extender some loss of quality but a 400mm f4. I have used this on all sensor sizes and 1.6 1.3 crop and Full frame always gives stunning images. Expensive but you get an amazing lens
I lusted after this lens, but with a 70-200 2.8, it was very hard to justify. I owned a 200mm f1.8 for about 6 months, and enjoyed it, but did my real sport work with a 70-200 2.8 and 400 2.8.
EN: After a long search, I finally managed to find a new one, it's a wonderful lens both for events (sports, theater, concerts, etc.), and for breathtaking portraits! I confirm its extreme sharpness combined with an unattainable blurry, what can I say is a real masterpiece! ITA: Dopo una lunga ricerca, finalmente sono riuscito a trovarlo uno nuovo, è una lente meravigliosa sia per gli eventi (sport, teatro, concerti, etc.), che per i ritratti mozzafiato! Confermo la sua estrema nitidezza combinata con uno sfocato inarrivabile, che dire è un vero e proprio capolavoro!
These are among the best reviews around. You are among my first “go-to” people when I have decided to spend money that I don’t need to spend. These are tremendously helpful in making these unnecessary purchases at least well informed wastes of money.
I brought this one a couple of years back, had to get it second hand as a brand new one was as difficult to get as an honest politician. I have used it on many portrait sessions. With its focal length and f2 aperture, it offers an unique look. Love it.
Ooooh. I remember having the Nikon version is this lens. One of the best lenses I’ve ever had the pleasure of leaving in my closet lol. Too tele for most situations, but not tele enough for most wildlife. Def a very specific purpose focal length.
Thanks for the review on one of the most coveted lenses and sharpest lenses from Canon. Unfortunately, this lens is now marked as discontinued in Canon's lineup. There's talk of a replacement coming in a RF mount that I'm sure will be impressive including an astronomical price point.
Since this lens is older design it doesn’t shine with tc , yes even with 1.4 there is hit on IQ , while bare lens is superb. V2 of 300/400 f2.8 and 500/600 f4 works better with tcs. Writing from experience.
TC are a waste of money. The only advantage is in a case where you need to otherwise crop a lot and then are forced to upsample the image again for a large print. Or in a case that you have a lens that out resolves the sensor, which is practically impossible unless you are using an old camera.
I have been using this lens on my Hasselblad X2D for some time now, and although this camera demands a lot from the lenses, this lens performs perfectly even on this camera. It fills the sensor without much more vignetting than you experienced. I believe it to resolve to the power of the 100mpx sensor in this camera, something I could also judge from your demanding APS-C test. The Hasselblad sensor is just about 4x larger than an APS-C sensor, multiplying that with your cameras resolution we would up with around 120mpx. So I was pretty confident, that it wouldn't disappoint, and boy have I been happy with this lens. It's on of the sharpest lens I have ever used, together with some of Hasselblads own lenses, and a few other lenses, but it's clearly worth all the money (not so many, I got I nice bargain of 2000€) I spent on it. Once again thanks for your review, that made me buy this lens. I forgot to mention, that the IS works perfectly also on the Hasselblad cameras with my electronic adapter from Techart. PS.: I also use it on a Canon 5DSR.
I hate to say this because I own a 200mm f1.8, but this lens is silly. A 70-200 f2.8 IS is so close to this lens at 200mm, and is just so much more practical and affordable.
I owned this lens and ended up actually selling it because it was very bad at keeping focus on people unless they were stationary. That being said though yeah the sharpness was about the same. My rf 70-200 2.8 at the time looked sharper. So the lens really did just end up coming down to if I needed the extra stop of light at f2 and wanted that cool affect, which I didn't. That being said.. I still miss this lens sometimes though haha.
These are beautiful photos and these tests as always are the best. They are inspiring me finally to try renting, which I have only researched. This one goes for $240/week here in the US. One nice thing about renting, besides being more affordable, is that I think it would put some pressure on to plan the shoot first and then follow through with some nice photos - in other words, inspire a person to do some real work. A way to learn otherwise unaffordable lenses and maybe help ramp up to more paid work as one would have one or two exceptional photos in the portfolio. - Dave
Interesting, I'm in the process of leaving Canon. Olympus replaced my Canon gear for 90% of my shooting. I'm still using Canon for that remainder 10% and considering giving that portion to Fuji. Canon in my perspective lost their way and I was extremely disappointed in the R-series camera bodies when I evaluated them over my aging Canon DSLRs.
@@drtod The R5 and R6 are state of the art. The R and RS were odd, but one way to deal with that was not buy them, but stick with a 1DX or 5D. Canon is the market leader in a shrinking market and is conservative, but vs Nikon and others who may be out of business soon, I'll take it.
@@DeputyNordburg I've been using Canon DSLR for 20 years, prior to that I was using Sony. I do own the 5D.M4 and it is showing its age in comparison to my Olympus OM-D EM1.m3. My Canon bag weighs 26 lbs, my Oly bag weighs 15 lbs using same focal length lenses. My knees and back thank me every time I leave Canon home. I borrowed a Canon R and my opinion was beyond poor. Example: completely unusable for sports due to massive EVF lag. As a result my aged 70D is a better tool than the Canon R. I looked at the R5 in the store (it was powered off), I also thought the case poorly built product in comparison to my Olympus gear and even to the 5D.m4. The knife to my heart was when Canon EOL the EF mount. This forced us legacy owners to buy all new lenses. I used that opportunity to explore other camera systems and I found Fuji & Olympus far ahead of Canon. I will continue to use my existing Canon products till they break, but Canon lost me as a future customer, the EOL of EF gave us that opportunity to explore other brands. When I explorered I learned just how far behind Canon are.
@@drtod A "knife to you heart" and making a decision on a "powered off" camera sounds very emotional. I have an R6 and use many of my EF lenses. Nobody told me I was forced to change them.
@@DeputyNordburg I use other Canon products as well (such as printers) over this 20 year span with the brand. The newer Canon printers are so temperamental compared to the older models that I do get frustrated. When I read the online reviews I'm not the only one experiencing frustration with their printer products. The Canon DSLRs are fantastic products, but this attention to quality for me did not translate to the R-series. The R that I actually used in a photography shoot, I had it in my hands for 2 hours and I took over 300 images. I could not wait to give it back. I never experienced such a poor experience like that before. When I looked at the R5 in the store, the body did not "feel right" in my hand. The perception of quality to me was lacking when I compare it to my Olympus and 5D.m4. I use some FD lenses adapted, the FD and EF (L) lenses are of excellent build quality. The RF to me feels 'cheap'. My entire modern Olympus system including lenses retains that true 'indestructible build quality feel'. When new photographers ask me today what camera to buy, I 1st have them look at Olympus (as long as they are not shooting low-light action). Those who purchased the system all love the product. The few who purchased the R, actually have told me they regretted it as well. If the EVF refresh rate on the R5 is the same EVF refresh rate speed on the R, the R5 is an inferior product. Since I don't have any experience with the R5, I will let others comment regarding that. Adapted lenses may work, but adapted lenses are never 100% compatible which is why I tend to shy away from adapted lenses unless I am shooting macro or landscapes, because then I have the time to manual focus.
Is there a new Nikon review in the pipe? I watched every Nikon review already 3 times :) I wish Nikon would send you the 14-30 and 24-200 ... (I know that they are reading your comments)
Lol, by total chance snatched one of this bad boys used last week. Now feel MUCH more reassured of my purchase after your review Chris :D I'm already in love with the lens of course, but I was (negatively) surprised by the amount of breathing in a prime lens of this class. Well, guess I can live with it somehow :P
You misunderstood how to use that lens in manny cases. This is not typical tele as 400/500/600mm, the 200f2 is special for portrait and best resoults when u make full body shots 👈📷 non lens gave u such backgrond separation 👌 Comparing to 70-200/2.8 is funny 😏
Probably a stupid guestion but..... Is it possible to download your test samples so I could pixelpeep them in Lr. (Im meaning those test images with the sharpness circle things :D )
I own the F2, I used to have the F1.8. The optics on the F2 are better. As is the CA. And the IS of the F2 made it a winner for me. The F1.8 does still look amazing. But I found myself always having a monopod with it where with the F2 I could hand hold for some pics. The F1.8 can be custom built better. A friend that's a optics engineer took his apart and aligned all the glass with the aid of some equipment he works with and used better sealants that don't thermal shift like the ones Canon had available then. It now is better then my F2. But doesn't have IS. I asked if he wanted to do my F2 and I'd pay him. He declined. Probably was worried the F2 would beat his F1.8. LOL I do think the new RF version will be back to a F1.8. Canon got a lot of heat when they released the new version at F2.
@@mverick160 i also testet both. The 2.0 is the better lens, the 1.8 has contrast problems its lower overall and extreme bad if you shoot backlite. It also has more CAs and its less sharp but still very good. AF is also worse. And the Bokeh? its not that much diffrent between these 2 lenses. And btw. you cannot repair the 1.8 version there are no spare parts left. If you brake it its over. If someone wants to buy one, get the 2.0.
Nice an old lens but at least the hood is long enough unlike the Nikkor I have which I need to use the 300/2.8 hood Think I prefer the Nikon bokeh and rendition but if I shot C I would be into it
What about the IS, does it turn off automatically when (in combination with a Canon camera) mounted on a tripod? --> does it detect being on a tripod (set of camera + lens)?
chris- one thing this lens does that i haven't seen in many is this one does that full body bokeh. My buddy coined that term and i've got to try it out. take about 14 steps away from the subject and it does this effect that makes the subject look like it is jumping off the page. you can see others demo this on youtube.....
I think this the really distinctive trait of this lens and the reason there are people ready to pay a premium for that. There is nothing else that give such look in such a pronounced way, while buying this lens to do face or even just half torso portraits is a waste of money IMHO, as a 200 F2.8 in those circumstances will give a very similar look anyway. The only catch is that I've seen many comparison that even stopped down to F2.8, this lens retains a softer bokeh than, say the EF 200 F2.8 wide open, so some "magic" remains anyway.
@@admiralvontirpitz7115 I agree. Back to back with my 200/2.8 u can see the difference. The 200/2.0 is a 10 at doing this especially at wide composition. The next closest is the 135/2.0. It’s funny though that if the subject is more than 15 steps away you lost that razor sharp. I was 30 steps away and the effect wasn’t there.
The EF 200mm is much sharper than the RF 85mm 1.2. I would say that the only lenses in the RF system that can come close to the EF 200mm f/2 are the RF 85mm 1.2 and the 135mm 1.8. However, due to field compression, the EF 200mm f/2 is even more impressive.
The Canon EF 135mm 2.0 L and the 1.4x Extender combo that I had was maybe not quite as sharp, but it was much lighter and much more versatile and with a close focus of 0.9 meter it was very good for Dragonflies and Butterflies. I would never chose the 2.5 Kg 200mm 2.0.
Hit the gym bro... 💪🤪 but for real though - this lens is, in 2021, just for fun and personal gratification. New 70-200's are just as sharp, more versatile and offers close to same bokeh. This lens is even more huge in real life than what it looks like in videos.
The similar full frame F mount Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200mm F/2.0 is equally good and very expensive. The Canon 200mm f/2 is discontinued long ago despite being not a very old lens and Nikon 200mm f/2.0 is rarely available new by major shops. I doubt that such a lens will appear for e-mount or Z mount and RF mount any soon. They are the dream of every portrait photographer. Much better than any 200mm f/2.8 or the classic 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.
I think both Canon and Nikon did produce a very limited number of them a long time ago - the last I heard they were used for snapping photo finishes at race courses years ago. The Canon one was f/1.8
Chris, just a test review suggestion : The Kamlan 21mm 1.8 looks very interesting but the reviews are so few. Judging from those few reports, it seems to have similar performance to the 28mm 1.4 you've tested. Stay safe mate!
What equipment, a piece of paper with pictures and patterns on it? :p I'm sure manufacturers knows how to measure sharpness :p we weren't in the stone ages in 2008.
@@hiawrj A 35mm sensor to capture the detail on that paper. 45 megapixels is more resolution than any sensor available at the time could provide, and more resolution than any fine grain film can render.
What you are saying is very true, however manufacturers doesn't just throw lenses together and then check out their sharpness in a RUclipsr test. :) They engineer them and create manufacturing processes, so they know how sharp lenses are and what they sacrifice in return etc. Also, high megapixel sensors have been available for a long time, they just aren't sold comercially to consumers.
There's the design, then there's the process and the final product. It's nearly impossible to do quality assurance when you lack the equipment to verify that the design and the process ended up as you intended them to. I'm just saying they did a darn fine job.
I had the Fuji 200mm f2 for a weekend and it is *spectacular*! Exceptional sharpness, contrast, colour and bokeh. But that focal length is a bit awkward on an APS-C camera.
I don't believe this new fast 200 has better image quality than the original 200/1.8, in fact the original has beautiful rendering many consider superior to the new lens because of the now banned leaded glass used. Where the new lens is superior is, IS, better AF, weather sealing and the newer coatings. The old lens had 3 large magnificent UD elements which contained lead so a new optical formula was derived to cater for a 1/3 stop slower lens and unleaded glass. The original lens is faster, razor sharp however a bit harder to use as it's heavier, a bit larger and front heavy. (I know I have a beautiful copy).
While the "original" F1.8 is still an amazing lens per se with some unique traits, every review/comparison that I've read pointed to the fact the the newer lens is a tad sharper, at least in the center. Some things that get often overlooked is that the newer model weighs 500gr less and is much less front-heavy, making much easier to hand hold it (I do it all the time) and it focuses 60cm closer as well, which is a nice bonus. Both are anyway pretty unique lenses and you can't go wrong either way :)
@@admiralvontirpitz7115 Roger Cicala from Lens Rentals has tested multiple copies over the years and reckons sharpness is indistinguishable between the two models. So it comes down to the rendering, for me I think the 1.8 just looks different, is it better who knows (better for me). However, I would never buy one today as the AF motor can fail and the part is not available, so it can become a table leg or an oversized paperweight whereas the 2.0 can be repaired for a long while yet. I mentioned all the weight stuff. If I could get a 2.0 at a reasonable price I would snap it up. I showed some recent swimwear photos to a client and he commented about my great photoshop skills. I said the photos were basically straight out of camera with minor processing. He was so used to looking at the 200mm/f2.8 images and these looked so different, he loved them.
@@ayfj4572 The 1.8 has contrast problems. Its worse then the 2.0 and very bad in backlite situations. bokeh and rendering is not much diffrent. CAs are also better on the new one. i cannot find any. And btw. you cannot repair the 1.8 version there are no spare parts left. If you brake it its over. If someone wants to buy one, get the 2.0.
I think it is hard to find any used 200mm 2.0, but you can find the Canon EF 200mm 1.8 used if you are fast enough on ebay, some say that the 1.8 are better than the 2.0
A much cheaper, fantastic option is the Canon 200mm f/2.8L USM II prime lens. Small, light, sharp, affordable and gives such a stunning image even wide open, better than the 70-200 2.8. (I use mine adapted on the A7iii and it works well with the MC-11)
@@666Tomato666 They also made a 50-100mm f/1.8, arguably a more impressive lens. That said, they're both aps-c lenses. In theory, it should be easier to make faster lenses for aps-c. Similar to how 2.8 tends to be the standard for full frame, but medium format is closer to 3.5
Hehe same. They are for fun and games. x) new 70-200 are better in every way except light transmission/background blur. But it's so minor that you need pictures side by side to tell the difference.
Thank you so much to the new people supporting the channel on Patreon! Check it out for some exclusive content. www.patreon.com/christopherfrost
Plese try Sony 16 35 GM
I would, but gave up on Patreon. It's just such a pain to use. They insist on such complicated and annoying security.
@@colinedwards7250 Huh, sorry to hear that. One of my friends just signed up and it barely took him a minute or two.
Why is there no option to support the channel directly from RUclips? It would be much more convenient, because then I can see all supported channels. Best regards for the best lens reviewer on RUclips. 💪🏻
@@WieHurra There's no option for me to do that from the UK (I believe it would be possible if I were based in the US)
YEEES! Bring on the crazy lenses that I could never justify buying but find fascinating and want to see reviewed by my favorite lens reviewer.
I used the f1.8 version for years, doing stage photography. To sell, the thing was always to make your images stand out and that lens did that.
Bought mine used about 8or9 years ago and just simply a stunning lens. What i like is put a 1.4x MK 2or3 extender and you have almost no real loss of quality a 280mm f.2.8 and a 2x extender some loss of quality but a 400mm f4. I have used this on all sensor sizes and 1.6 1.3 crop and Full frame always gives stunning images. Expensive but you get an amazing lens
I lusted after this lens, but with a 70-200 2.8, it was very hard to justify. I owned a 200mm f1.8 for about 6 months, and enjoyed it, but did my real sport work with a 70-200 2.8 and 400 2.8.
EN: After a long search, I finally managed to find a new one, it's a wonderful lens both for events (sports, theater, concerts, etc.), and for breathtaking portraits!
I confirm its extreme sharpness combined with an unattainable blurry, what can I say is a real masterpiece!
ITA: Dopo una lunga ricerca, finalmente sono riuscito a trovarlo uno nuovo, è una lente meravigliosa sia per gli eventi (sport, teatro, concerti, etc.), che per i ritratti mozzafiato!
Confermo la sua estrema nitidezza combinata con uno sfocato inarrivabile, che dire è un vero e proprio capolavoro!
These are among the best reviews around. You are among my first “go-to” people when I have decided to spend money that I don’t need to spend. These are tremendously helpful in making these unnecessary purchases at least well informed wastes of money.
I brought this one a couple of years back, had to get it second hand as a brand new one was as difficult to get as an honest politician.
I have used it on many portrait sessions. With its focal length and f2 aperture, it offers an unique look. Love it.
"tough enough to hammer roofing tiles with"... that is a verdict if i ever heard one :D
Wow. What an amazing piece of glass
Ooooh. I remember having the Nikon version is this lens. One of the best lenses I’ve ever had the pleasure of leaving in my closet lol. Too tele for most situations, but not tele enough for most wildlife. Def a very specific purpose focal length.
Awesome! I just got a copy of the 200 mm 1.8.... it's impressive.
Thanks for the review on one of the most coveted lenses and sharpest lenses from Canon. Unfortunately, this lens is now marked as discontinued in Canon's lineup. There's talk of a replacement coming in a RF mount that I'm sure will be impressive including an astronomical price point.
When testing lenses like this, could we see the performance with a 2x teleconverter as well?
With 2x extender much of the contrast and sharpnes disapears, the 1.4x extender are a much better option which I can recommend.
@@Anarki2U That's why you want a 2x extender test, if the 1.4 extenders are so good you don't really need a test right?
Since this lens is older design it doesn’t shine with tc , yes even with 1.4 there is hit on IQ , while bare lens is superb. V2 of 300/400 f2.8 and 500/600 f4 works better with tcs.
Writing from experience.
Yes true nice idea
TC are a waste of money. The only advantage is in a case where you need to otherwise crop a lot and then are forced to upsample the image again for a large print. Or in a case that you have a lens that out resolves the sensor, which is practically impossible unless you are using an old camera.
Thanks for the review, I decided to buy it on the basis of your review. Used but nice and without issues 🙂
I have been using this lens on my Hasselblad X2D for some time now, and although this camera demands a lot from the lenses, this lens performs perfectly even on this camera. It fills the sensor without much more vignetting than you experienced. I believe it to resolve to the power of the 100mpx sensor in this camera, something I could also judge from your demanding APS-C test. The Hasselblad sensor is just about 4x larger than an APS-C sensor, multiplying that with your cameras resolution we would up with around 120mpx. So I was pretty confident, that it wouldn't disappoint, and boy have I been happy with this lens. It's on of the sharpest lens I have ever used, together with some of Hasselblads own lenses, and a few other lenses, but it's clearly worth all the money (not so many, I got I nice bargain of 2000€) I spent on it. Once again thanks for your review, that made me buy this lens. I forgot to mention, that the IS works perfectly also on the Hasselblad cameras with my electronic adapter from Techart. PS.: I also use it on a Canon 5DSR.
Aquired one of these not long ago; great images and worth the hassle. Periodically, it does lock up my R5 though and requires power cycle.
Great review Chris, as always.
Nice little portrait lens !
I've been dreaming that u will review this
I will use my stimulus check for this and let my family starve.
How will the support for this lens be? Since it is one of the EF lenses that were discontinued by Canon, if it has a problem, will it become unusable?
I hate to say this because I own a 200mm f1.8, but this lens is silly. A 70-200 f2.8 IS is so close to this lens at 200mm, and is just so much more practical and affordable.
Not so close. If you cannot discern the difference, don’t purchase this lens.
Uh OK. Close is not the same as cannot discern the difference btw.
I owned this lens and ended up actually selling it because it was very bad at keeping focus on people unless they were stationary. That being said though yeah the sharpness was about the same. My rf 70-200 2.8 at the time looked sharper. So the lens really did just end up coming down to if I needed the extra stop of light at f2 and wanted that cool affect, which I didn't. That being said.. I still miss this lens sometimes though haha.
this is my dream lens in ten years ago. I cannot afford this Len.
I bought it in 2020 and enjoy this lens.
These are beautiful photos and these tests as always are the best. They are inspiring me finally to try renting, which I have only researched. This one goes for $240/week here in the US. One nice thing about renting, besides being more affordable, is that I think it would put some pressure on to plan the shoot first and then follow through with some nice photos - in other words, inspire a person to do some real work. A way to learn otherwise unaffordable lenses and maybe help ramp up to more paid work as one would have one or two exceptional photos in the portfolio. - Dave
Ahhh, the famous beloved big boi portrait lens :D lovely stuff!
Unfortunately I gotta live on the 200 2.8... which is not bad.
I’m dying for that Lens and I don’t even shoot Canon anymore!!!
Interesting, I'm in the process of leaving Canon. Olympus replaced my Canon gear for 90% of my shooting. I'm still using Canon for that remainder 10% and considering giving that portion to Fuji. Canon in my perspective lost their way and I was extremely disappointed in the R-series camera bodies when I evaluated them over my aging Canon DSLRs.
@@drtod The R5 and R6 are state of the art. The R and RS were odd, but one way to deal with that was not buy them, but stick with a 1DX or 5D. Canon is the market leader in a shrinking market and is conservative, but vs Nikon and others who may be out of business soon, I'll take it.
@@DeputyNordburg I've been using Canon DSLR for 20 years, prior to that I was using Sony. I do own the 5D.M4 and it is showing its age in comparison to my Olympus OM-D EM1.m3. My Canon bag weighs 26 lbs, my Oly bag weighs 15 lbs using same focal length lenses. My knees and back thank me every time I leave Canon home. I borrowed a Canon R and my opinion was beyond poor. Example: completely unusable for sports due to massive EVF lag. As a result my aged 70D is a better tool than the Canon R. I looked at the R5 in the store (it was powered off), I also thought the case poorly built product in comparison to my Olympus gear and even to the 5D.m4. The knife to my heart was when Canon EOL the EF mount. This forced us legacy owners to buy all new lenses. I used that opportunity to explore other camera systems and I found Fuji & Olympus far ahead of Canon. I will continue to use my existing Canon products till they break, but Canon lost me as a future customer, the EOL of EF gave us that opportunity to explore other brands. When I explorered I learned just how far behind Canon are.
@@drtod A "knife to you heart" and making a decision on a "powered off" camera sounds very emotional.
I have an R6 and use many of my EF lenses. Nobody told me I was forced to change them.
@@DeputyNordburg I use other Canon products as well (such as printers) over this 20 year span with the brand. The newer Canon printers are so temperamental compared to the older models that I do get frustrated. When I read the online reviews I'm not the only one experiencing frustration with their printer products. The Canon DSLRs are fantastic products, but this attention to quality for me did not translate to the R-series. The R that I actually used in a photography shoot, I had it in my hands for 2 hours and I took over 300 images. I could not wait to give it back. I never experienced such a poor experience like that before. When I looked at the R5 in the store, the body did not "feel right" in my hand. The perception of quality to me was lacking when I compare it to my Olympus and 5D.m4. I use some FD lenses adapted, the FD and EF (L) lenses are of excellent build quality. The RF to me feels 'cheap'. My entire modern Olympus system including lenses retains that true 'indestructible build quality feel'. When new photographers ask me today what camera to buy, I 1st have them look at Olympus (as long as they are not shooting low-light action). Those who purchased the system all love the product. The few who purchased the R, actually have told me they regretted it as well. If the EVF refresh rate on the R5 is the same EVF refresh rate speed on the R, the R5 is an inferior product. Since I don't have any experience with the R5, I will let others comment regarding that. Adapted lenses may work, but adapted lenses are never 100% compatible which is why I tend to shy away from adapted lenses unless I am shooting macro or landscapes, because then I have the time to manual focus.
Would like to see a comparison between this and the fujifilm 200mm
Is there a new Nikon review in the pipe? I watched every Nikon review already 3 times :)
I wish Nikon would send you the 14-30 and 24-200 ...
(I know that they are reading your comments)
Lol, by total chance snatched one of this bad boys used last week. Now feel MUCH more reassured of my purchase after your review Chris :D I'm already in love with the lens of course, but I was (negatively) surprised by the amount of breathing in a prime lens of this class. Well, guess I can live with it somehow :P
The legend of portraits
You misunderstood how to use that lens in manny cases. This is not typical tele as 400/500/600mm, the 200f2 is special for portrait and best resoults when u make full body shots 👈📷 non lens gave u such backgrond separation 👌
Comparing to 70-200/2.8 is funny 😏
Yep such a shame. Wasted opportunity :/
I use it for sports.
It's been discontinued, unfortunately, but I did see a patent for an RF 200 f/2.
200mm Tony 1.8. I think I just came. Think of the toneh!
200mm would be perfect for vlogging!
It’s so cute. It looks like the rear of the 400/2.8.
Oh you lucky guy!!! Nice Video!
Probably a stupid guestion but..... Is it possible to download your test samples so I could pixelpeep them in Lr. (Im meaning those test images with the sharpness circle things :D )
It would be great if you would compare 200 mm F2 and 200 mm F1.8 in portraits
As well as a 70-200 f/2.8.
Cant see how any avg enthusiast justify this lens when the 70-200 is so much more versatile, lighter, smaller, and cheaper.
I own the F2, I used to have the F1.8. The optics on the F2 are better. As is the CA. And the IS of the F2 made it a winner for me. The F1.8 does still look amazing. But I found myself always having a monopod with it where with the F2 I could hand hold for some pics. The F1.8 can be custom built better. A friend that's a optics engineer took his apart and aligned all the glass with the aid of some equipment he works with and used better sealants that don't thermal shift like the ones Canon had available then. It now is better then my F2. But doesn't have IS. I asked if he wanted to do my F2 and I'd pay him. He declined. Probably was worried the F2 would beat his F1.8. LOL
I do think the new RF version will be back to a F1.8. Canon got a lot of heat when they released the new version at F2.
@@mverick160 i also testet both. The 2.0 is the better lens, the 1.8 has contrast problems its lower overall and extreme bad if you shoot backlite. It also has more CAs and its less sharp but still very good. AF is also worse. And the Bokeh? its not that much diffrent between these 2 lenses. And btw. you cannot repair the 1.8 version there are no spare parts left. If you brake it its over. If someone wants to buy one, get the 2.0.
Nice an old lens but at least the hood is long enough unlike the Nikkor I have which I need to use the 300/2.8 hood
Think I prefer the Nikon bokeh and rendition but if I shot C I would be into it
how can a lens this old be so perfect? its just like the new lenses from canon, Sony or sigma in the last 2 years? wow!
Since there is no new 200/2.0 then it’s the best Canon 200/2.0 they make. The best Canon lens made is the 400/2.8. The 300/2.8 is a very close second.
What about the IS, does it turn off automatically when (in combination with a Canon camera) mounted on a tripod? --> does it detect being on a tripod (set of camera + lens)?
No, it doesn't. You will need to turn off the IS yourself.
chris- one thing this lens does that i haven't seen in many is this one does that full body bokeh. My buddy coined that term and i've got to try it out. take about 14 steps away from the subject and it does this effect that makes the subject look like it is jumping off the page. you can see others demo this on youtube.....
I think this the really distinctive trait of this lens and the reason there are people ready to pay a premium for that. There is nothing else that give such look in such a pronounced way, while buying this lens to do face or even just half torso portraits is a waste of money IMHO, as a 200 F2.8 in those circumstances will give a very similar look anyway. The only catch is that I've seen many comparison that even stopped down to F2.8, this lens retains a softer bokeh than, say the EF 200 F2.8 wide open, so some "magic" remains anyway.
@@admiralvontirpitz7115 I agree. Back to back with my 200/2.8 u can see the difference. The 200/2.0 is a 10 at doing this especially at wide composition. The next closest is the 135/2.0. It’s funny though that if the subject is more than 15 steps away you lost that razor sharp. I was 30 steps away and the effect wasn’t there.
Usually people choose between 200f2 or 300f2.8
Great review do you think this 200 MM lens is sharper than the RF85MM 1.2
The EF 200mm is much sharper than the RF 85mm 1.2. I would say that the only lenses in the RF system that can come close to the EF 200mm f/2 are the RF 85mm 1.2 and the 135mm 1.8. However, due to field compression, the EF 200mm f/2 is even more impressive.
The f1.8 is great fun ... try it.
I wonder how well this lens would focus on the Sony A9 with the Sigma MC-11 adapter.
Just get a Canon body if you want to use this lens.
I love this lens. I've rented the lens 2 times. Just a bit too much to purchase. Great review
The Canon EF 135mm 2.0 L and the 1.4x Extender combo that I had was maybe not quite as sharp, but it was much lighter and much more versatile and with a close focus of 0.9 meter it was very good for Dragonflies and Butterflies. I would never chose the 2.5 Kg 200mm 2.0.
Hit the gym bro... 💪🤪 but for real though - this lens is, in 2021, just for fun and personal gratification. New 70-200's are just as sharp, more versatile and offers close to same bokeh. This lens is even more huge in real life than what it looks like in videos.
@@hiawrj A 200 2.8 cannot offer the same bokeh as a 200 F2! It's simple physics.
Just woww, please do tamron 17-70mm and the new 50mm 1.2 sony
I’m just here for the effects of diffraction
Can you recommend a reliable place to purchase one? They are very difficult to find.
please review old D nikon lens...
You should take a look at Nikon 200mm f2 as well I think.
Canon has discontinued this lens (RF version coming?)
maybe but that would cost $$$$ but would have better quieter IS
Hi chris,what is a friendly budget lens for landscape?.I'm using eoa rp
24-105 f4 L RF is great.
You are living at one of the nicest places
The similar full frame F mount Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200mm F/2.0 is equally good and very expensive. The Canon 200mm f/2 is discontinued long ago despite being not a very old lens and Nikon 200mm f/2.0 is rarely available new by major shops.
I doubt that such a lens will appear for e-mount or Z mount and RF mount any soon.
They are the dream of every portrait photographer.
Much better than any 200mm f/2.8 or the classic 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.
This lens was discontinued just a day or 2 ago, not long ago?
Just saw your 400 Do ii video unfortunately you not test with R5 like this.
Well the R5 wasn't even available back then.
@@christopherfrost you could have time travelled... lol
I've seen some other reviews on this lens and they often refer to this as one of Canon's "God" lenses. That bokeh is unreal.
8:33 is amazing
Does Nikon have a 300mm f2? Heard about it..
I think both Canon and Nikon did produce a very limited number of them a long time ago - the last I heard they were used for snapping photo finishes at race courses years ago. The Canon one was f/1.8
Legend
One of those "When l win the lottery l'm buying one" lenses.
Does the Canon M6 use the same 32,5 MP sensor like the 90D?
Yup
Next up: Tamron 35mm f/1.8? 😊
ruclips.net/video/QfC6ZAoo6ck/видео.html Canon ef 200mm f/1,8 Lset II Unboxing - キヤノンef200mm f/1,8Lset IIアンボックス
5 grand! And here I just got myself a Tamron 70-200/2.8 LD IF Di for $200 😯
Well you got a steal so... :D
Just been discontinued.... Thankfully I have one. ;-)
I want one. If not for photos, I could use it for exercise!
My wife also knows what it's like to have a camera pointed at her every day, haha😄
Chris, just a test review suggestion : The Kamlan 21mm 1.8 looks very interesting but the reviews are so few. Judging from those few reports, it seems to have similar performance to the 28mm 1.4 you've tested. Stay safe mate!
Aaaaand it just got discontinued in literally just the last 24 hours. But it's okay, a patent for an RF 200mm f/2 was spotted a while ago...
Wow what timing, canon just discontinued this lens
My dream lens 🥰
I'm astonished this lens can be so sharp, because the equipment to measure the sharpness like you just did wasn't invented when it was designed.
What equipment, a piece of paper with pictures and patterns on it? :p I'm sure manufacturers knows how to measure sharpness :p we weren't in the stone ages in 2008.
@@hiawrj A 35mm sensor to capture the detail on that paper. 45 megapixels is more resolution than any sensor available at the time could provide, and more resolution than any fine grain film can render.
What you are saying is very true, however manufacturers doesn't just throw lenses together and then check out their sharpness in a RUclipsr test. :) They engineer them and create manufacturing processes, so they know how sharp lenses are and what they sacrifice in return etc. Also, high megapixel sensors have been available for a long time, they just aren't sold comercially to consumers.
There's the design, then there's the process and the final product. It's nearly impossible to do quality assurance when you lack the equipment to verify that the design and the process ended up as you intended them to. I'm just saying they did a darn fine job.
Indeed they did. :)
do fuji 200 f2
I had the Fuji 200mm f2 for a weekend and it is *spectacular*! Exceptional sharpness, contrast, colour and bokeh. But that focal length is a bit awkward on an APS-C camera.
Prefer the metal construction of these old canon lenses to the new RF lineup.
Thank You!!!
Just you wait for that RF 200mm F2/1.8 or whatever they make it
The Q&A video with your wife would very interesting 😅
more use than the Noct
I don't believe this new fast 200 has better image quality than the original 200/1.8, in fact the original has beautiful rendering many consider superior to the new lens because of the now banned leaded glass used. Where the new lens is superior is, IS, better AF, weather sealing and the newer coatings. The old lens had 3 large magnificent UD elements which contained lead so a new optical formula was derived to cater for a 1/3 stop slower lens and unleaded glass. The original lens is faster, razor sharp however a bit harder to use as it's heavier, a bit larger and front heavy. (I know I have a beautiful copy).
While the "original" F1.8 is still an amazing lens per se with some unique traits, every review/comparison that I've read pointed to the fact the the newer lens is a tad sharper, at least in the center. Some things that get often overlooked is that the newer model weighs 500gr less and is much less front-heavy, making much easier to hand hold it (I do it all the time) and it focuses 60cm closer as well, which is a nice bonus. Both are anyway pretty unique lenses and you can't go wrong either way :)
@@admiralvontirpitz7115 Roger Cicala from Lens Rentals has tested multiple copies over the years and reckons sharpness is indistinguishable between the two models. So it comes down to the rendering, for me I think the 1.8 just looks different, is it better who knows (better for me). However, I would never buy one today as the AF motor can fail and the part is not available, so it can become a table leg or an oversized paperweight whereas the 2.0 can be repaired for a long while yet. I mentioned all the weight stuff. If I could get a 2.0 at a reasonable price I would snap it up. I showed some recent swimwear photos to a client and he commented about my great photoshop skills. I said the photos were basically straight out of camera with minor processing. He was so used to looking at the 200mm/f2.8 images and these looked so different, he loved them.
@@ayfj4572 The 1.8 has contrast problems. Its worse then the 2.0 and very bad in backlite situations. bokeh and rendering is not much diffrent. CAs are also better on the new one. i cannot find any. And btw. you cannot repair the 1.8 version there are no spare parts left. If you brake it its over. If someone wants to buy one, get the 2.0.
No question about the quality. It's too expensive, tough. At 1/2 the price it still would carry a tidy profit.
The Eye of Sauron.
Finally!!!!
Can I find this used for $2399.00?
I think it is hard to find any used 200mm 2.0, but you can find the Canon EF 200mm 1.8 used if you are fast enough on ebay, some say that the 1.8 are better than the 2.0
@@Anarki2U true the EF glass looks way better than RF glass tbh. The RF looks plain while the EF looks like something from a Star Wars movie
@@alphaandomega2709 I mean if „Star Wars movie“ is the look you’re going for...
@@julius4858 I was using a metaphor to express how cool EF glass looks. Humble your self.
@@alphaandomega2709 well if you’re a big Star Wars fan, sure :) do your thing!
That's the buying power of the US $ always the same as we pay in £s what costs $s in US. About a third more.
Wow
A much cheaper, fantastic option is the Canon 200mm f/2.8L USM II prime lens. Small, light, sharp, affordable and gives such a stunning image even wide open, better than the 70-200 2.8. (I use mine adapted on the A7iii and it works well with the MC-11)
not even in the same ballpark. i had both
Which has better IQ, this lens or the latest Sigma 40mm 1,2 ART ?
Amazing lens! And they’ll sell 500 of them....maybe a few more.
Pretty sure they sold many thousands of them. It's a very popular lens for sports and event photographers.
@@todanrg3 sarcasm isn’t a thing you understand then?
@@PhullyNo1 That was not sarcasm
@@todanrg3 I know your comment wasn’t, my original was. Hence my response.
Awesome review as always.
Now then, I just need to sell 3 of my kidneys to afford one.
Hear me out though: RF 70-200mm F/2.... If any company can do it, its canon...
Sigma also showed few quite interesting designs, like the the 18-35 f/1.8
but if either they or Canon does it, it will likely lack IS
@@666Tomato666 They also made a 50-100mm f/1.8, arguably a more impressive lens. That said, they're both aps-c lenses. In theory, it should be easier to make faster lenses for aps-c. Similar to how 2.8 tends to be the standard for full frame, but medium format is closer to 3.5
It JUST got discontinued =C
this lens is fantastic I will not look at its price !! 😂🤣
At this price I'll keep my Tamron 28-200 3.8-5.6 as it works fine as I'm a amateur photographer and don't need pro lens
Exactly how ridiculous does an M6 Mk II look like with this lens attached to it...
Please test Nikon 200mm f2!!!!!!!!!!
Jual ginjal😂
I own one of these and man are they not worth it lol
Hehe same. They are for fun and games. x) new 70-200 are better in every way except light transmission/background blur. But it's so minor that you need pictures side by side to tell the difference.
unsubscribed due to effects of diffraction