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

Ran Plett wrote:

richiedodson wrote:

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.

That right there is a pretty good testimonial. I can imagine that lens paying for itself after a while. The 400mm not so much. That would more or less be a luxury item. Hmmm...

My 200 is an old f/1.8 without IS. I got it about 2 years ago now absolutely mint from a famous store in China (who have good Japanese 2nd-hand contacts) the lens looks like it never got taken out of the case and doesn't even have a single tiny mark on it. I know they are no longer repaired by Canon but I'd certainly recommend trying one if you can find one as it will be cheaper than the 200/2 IS and also the image quality (I have heard) will be sharper than the /2. I'd have no hesitation to use it wide open and with a 1.4 attached it will also be amazing.

I think a 135mm would be nice and will take extenders too. That will be my next lens to be used wide open mostly. I've never tried the 300 f/4 L but could be worth a look. 100-400 II  I'm sure would be excellent as the compression look at 400mm resembles bokeh too..

-- 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