Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

Started Jun 25, 2012 | Discussions
brando090 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

How are these two lenses? They are both telescopic, yet the macro is well known to be highly detailed. Anyone have a comparison of the two?

Pedro Moreira
Pedro Moreira Regular Member • Posts: 289
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

Neither its macro, what 70-200 are you talking about?

-- hide signature --
 Pedro Moreira's gear list:Pedro Moreira's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS R6 Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM +1 more
OP brando090 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

The Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM is coming from the macro series... I thought it was made with macro glass,etc...

Don Daugherty Contributing Member • Posts: 641
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

The MFD on that lens is 1.5M I think. Not even close to a macro lens.

Check out the review at: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/

D

brando090 wrote:

The Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM is coming from the macro series... I thought it was made with macro glass,etc...

OP brando090 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

I did read it, and looks at the difference between IS and USM and i found that both Canon lenses only have one, and the best lenses have both... So does that mean Canon has yet to release a telescopic with both, and that is what i should be looking forward to?...

EvokeEmotion Contributing Member • Posts: 998
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

brando090 wrote:

I did read it, and looks at the difference between IS and USM and i found that both Canon lenses only have one, and the best lenses have both... So does that mean Canon has yet to release a telescopic with both, and that is what i should be looking forward to?...

What's a telescopic lens?

 EvokeEmotion's gear list:EvokeEmotion's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS M Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM +8 more
doctorbza Junior Member • Posts: 42
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

brando,

neither of these lenses is a macro lens. they are both telephoto lenses. the 70-200 is a zoom lens, the 200 is a prime lens meaning it does not zoom at all and is fixed at 200mm.

IS is image stabilization. USM is ultrasonic motor. both lenses have the latter. only the 70-200 is available with IS. (it is also available without it. there are 4 versions of the 70-200)

Schwany
Schwany Forum Pro • Posts: 10,169
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

Couple of things

The bokeh, or out of focus background, is much smoother with the 3200mm rime lens, and the 70-200 shows a strong vignette at 200mm if the background is a light color. The prime is probably a tad sharper. I don't read the charts, but I do own both.

It sounds like you have macro and prime lens confused. Neither of these lenses have macro on the focus distance scale.

 Schwany's gear list:Schwany's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +14 more
OP brando090 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

Thanks,

I think i may of gotten the macro confused, as i got a screaming deal on the non-l macro, but i do want to upgrade to the l-macro. I dont want a prime lens for a telescopic lens, so i guess ill get the 70-20mm f/2 IS lens.

meatatarian Junior Member • Posts: 30
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

Hey brando,

It unfortunately seems like you're still confused. There are no L or non-L macro at 200mm. The only focal length that has an L and non-L macro is 100mm. Canon makes both a 100mm f/2.8 Macro and 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro.

Also, the telephoto lens you're referring to is the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS. There's unfortunately no 70-200mm f/2 IS.

There is a HUGE price gap between these lenses. I'd highly recommend you become more acquainted with these lenses before you make any purchases.

 meatatarian's gear list:meatatarian's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM +1 more
NancyP Veteran Member • Posts: 6,579
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

The Canon tele macro is the 180mm f3.5L non-image-stabilized lens. It does a good job as an ordinary tele, but be sure to use the focus limiter on the autofocus, otherwise it may take a while to focus sometimes.

If you don't need macro or zoom, the 200mm f2.8 L is a bargain.

 NancyP's gear list:NancyP's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill
mmullen Veteran Member • Posts: 4,289
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

brando090 wrote:

How are these two lenses? They are both telescopic, yet the macro is well known to be highly detailed. Anyone have a comparison of the two?

If you are speaking of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, it will have better sharpness wide open than the prime. It also has better flare control, better contrast and focuses colors (like blue and red) more accurately. And the IS is a great benefit for handheld shooting at speeds at or below 1/400 second on a high pixel density APS-C camera like the 7D.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II also focuses more quickly and accurately.

-- hide signature --

Mike Mullen

 mmullen's gear list:mmullen's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 10-22mm F3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM +6 more
OP brando090 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

Correct, i do know there is no 200mm macro, but i do know they have a bigger macro at 180mm. So i guess the best lens to get is the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM len, either the first or second series.

Schwany
Schwany Forum Pro • Posts: 10,169
I don't know where that 3 came from

The 3200mm rime is a 200mm prime. Talk about a typo.

Schwany wrote:

Couple of things

The bokeh, or out of focus background, is much smoother with the 3200mm rime lens, and the 70-200 shows a strong vignette at 200mm if the background is a light color. The prime is probably a tad sharper. I don't read the charts, but I do own both.

It sounds like you have macro and prime lens confused. Neither of these lenses have macro on the focus distance scale.

 Schwany's gear list:Schwany's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +14 more
OldSchoolNewSchool Senior Member • Posts: 1,350
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

I recommend you study up on all these lenses before making a purchase decision. For one thing, you don't say a whole lot about what you'll be using the lens for. If you are looking for a long focal length lens that doubles as a macro, then the 180mm f3.5L is the ticket. If you're going to photograph in a variety of situations and locations (sans macro), you may want to consider the 70-200 f2.8L (image-stabilized or not). If you're on a budget and don't need macro right away, the 200mm f2.8L II lens is great. I've had mine for 12 years now, and it is a wonderful lens. After that, you could save your money and get an 85mm f1.8 USM lens to cover the shorter telephoto situations. Or, you could get the 100mm f2.8 macro USM lens after the 200mm f2.8L II lens. Just keep in mind you'd be hauling around two prime lenses instead of one zoom. I do it that way, but it's not for everyone.

Good luck.

Robert
--
My state of confusion has turned into a circle of confusion.

 OldSchoolNewSchool's gear list:OldSchoolNewSchool's gear list
Canon G9 X II Canon EOS 70D Olympus E-M1 Canon 6D Mark II Canon EOS 5DS +14 more
OP brando090 Forum Member • Posts: 51
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm

I will. I have the Canon 100mm macro AS non l, and ive got to get a bigger camera. Ive been meaning to upgrade, so here in my excuse. Im looking for a great lens to take track and field, volleyball, etc; photographs, including concerts i want to start shooting.

Scott Larson Veteran Member • Posts: 7,040
Re: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM vs Canon EF 70-200mm IS II

mmullen wrote:

If you are speaking of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, it will have better sharpness wide open than the prime. It also has better flare control, better contrast and focuses colors (like blue and red) more accurately. And the IS is a great benefit for handheld shooting at speeds at or below 1/400 second on a high pixel density APS-C camera like the 7D.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II also focuses more quickly and accurately.

I use both the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II and the 200mm f2.8 prime for sports, depending on how much I'm carrying. I think they're much closer than what you're describing. The 200mm f2.8 image quality is nearly identical to the excellent 135mm f2.0 wide open. It has no problem focusing colors (I assume you mean chromatic aberrations). The zoom does have better contrast. Put a lens hood on both of them and flare control is no different. I would say the prime focuses at least as fast as the zoom if not faster. Sharpness is identical although images appear to be sharper with the zoom due to the darker contrast.

The 200mm f2.8 prime is a great bargain. If you don't need a zoom or IS, you'll get nearly the same image quality as the heavier and more expensive zoom.

 Scott Larson's gear list:Scott Larson's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS-1D X +16 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads