Canon 200mm f/2.8 L II Reviews

Started Aug 17, 2013 | Discussions thread
chironNYC Senior Member • Posts: 2,374
it depends on what you want to shoot...

BubbaE1 wrote:

By distant landscape shots, I mean I would be stopping the lens down, so you're right, 2.8 becomes pointless. My wonder is at 200mm, which lens has the better optical quality, the 70-200 f/4 or the 200 f/2.8?

I will say, though, that I'd find many using shooting at f/2.8.

-- hide signature --

OM-D + 12-50 + 45

Fair enough. But remember that at 2.8 on a 200mm without IS, your shutter speed for hand-held would average around 1/200th. With the IS on the f/4, you would have to shoot at a maximum of f/4, but your shutter speed could average 1/25th or even less--as long as your subjects aren't moving. Personally, I have never found it too difficult to shoot people at slower shutter speeds--you just have to wait for the pause in their movement.

In terms of the optical quality of the various lenses, the 70-200L f/4 IS is excellent, and it is also worth contemplating that camera shake is one of the major sources of image degradation.

And in any case, 1/200th on a telephoto doesn't freeze much movement anyway--you have to go up to faster speeds if you are really shooting moving subjects at 200mm.

 chironNYC's gear list:chironNYC's gear list
Sony a9 Sony Alpha a7R III
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow