DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Canon 200mm f2 L vs. 200-400mm f4 L

Started Sep 9, 2016 | Discussions thread
OP Ran Plett Senior Member • Posts: 1,051
Re: Canon 200mm f2 L vs. 200-400mm f4 L

RogerZoul wrote:

Ran Plett wrote:

Ray Chen wrote:

I was wondering if anyone else felt the same way, or if the 200 f2 + 2x teleconvertor would have poor enough IQ not to bother.

I personally do not like the 200 IS + 2x extender. Even I think the image is sharp enough, there is a lot of contrast loss wide open. I guess you can stop it down, but then you are most likely to be better off with a 100-400 IS II. To me, the 200 is a specialty lens. Shooting it at f/2 naked is the strength of this lens, and that is how I use mine.

I see. Guess I'll have to rent it and see if it's too much. The 100-400 is a much cheaper / smaller option for the reach but I just want faster than 5.6! Wish there was a 400mm f4 L.

There is. It is called the Canon EF 400mm f/4 IS DO II. And it is wonderfully sharp with great characteristics.

Yeah, right after I wrote that, I went and looked into the 400 DO, in case it would change my mind about DO lens characteristics. It does look exceptional. My understanding of diffractive optics was based on the older version and especially the mediocre 70-300. Since then I never gave it a second thought. But apart from the cost, it looks great.

Do you have one?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow