Canon 200mm f/2.8 L II Reviews

Started Aug 17, 2013 | Discussions thread
mg_k Senior Member • Posts: 2,816
Re: Nonsense...

brightcolours wrote:

mg_k wrote:

BubbaE1 wrote:

I wanted a telephoto length and I don't mind that it's a prime. I would use this mainly for distant landscape shots.


-- hide signature --

OM-D + 12-50 + 45

Fact that you are using it for distant landscape shots means you have to stop the lens down,

Down to what, exactly? Are you one of those f22 shooters?


go luck handholding a tele lens without IS

No need for luck at all. I handhold my 70-200mm f4 L USM all the time for landscape stuff. 200mm is not exactly a focal length which one uses at night. Mind you, I use it on APS_C with bad high ISO performance and it being a 320mm FF equivalent.

IS is may be nice when shooting other stuff than landscape detail.

Sure you can handhold, but using a non-IS lens @ 200mm means you have to keep your shutter speed high.

Combined with f8-f11, it means you have to bump iso up to compensate for the shutter speed.  Using an IS lens will have a definite advantage in OP's situation.

I personally would go with the f4 IS version for your intended purpose.

That is a nice lens too, but it does not have the smooth bokeh and the close up qualities I enjoy from the non-IS version and from the 200mm f2.8 L.

OP says distant landscape?  Who cares about closeup qualities?  And did I mention landscape?  Smooth bokeh is irrevelant.

fyi f4 IS produces smooth bokeh too.

 mg_k's gear list:mg_k's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R II Ricoh GR Leica M Typ 240 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Carl Zeiss Tele-Tessar T* 4/85 ZM +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow