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

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

Started Sep 9, 2016 | Discussions thread
richiedodson
richiedodson Regular Member • Posts: 399
Re: Canon 200mm f2 L vs. 200-400mm f4 L

I have the 200-400 and also a 200f/1.8.

I understand what you mean about more useful.

My 200 1.8 is absolutely outstanding and although heavy, it gets far more use than my 200-400 which is too big to carry around for general stuff and only gets a show when at big professional events.

I find the 200mm length very good for so many types of scenarios - corporate dinners, tennis, bike races, weddings, conferences, portraits - even family picnic type settings etc. whereas the 200-400 can really only be used long outdoors.

Both give amazing image quality and have their strengths but I get far more use out of my 200 - which also means it has paid itself off many times over.

I guess I might put a 1.4X on the 200 possibly - but its strength is incredible bokeh without one - and isolating a subject at f1.8 from a distance means it doesn't matter about cropping into the image because the focused subject is so prominent anyway.

I have a 300f/2.8IS and also a 70-200f/2.8IS. Of course the 70-200 gets more use than anything else because it's a general walk-around size - but the 200f/1.8 gets a lot more use than the 300f/2.8IS because the focal length is so much more 'useful' and the bokeh is stunning. IS at that length is not a big deal at all as at f/2 there is usually plenty of light coming into the lens to increase shutter speed.

-- hide signature --

'high IQ'

 richiedodson's gear list:richiedodson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5DS +15 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow