Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon 200 F2 IS L  (Read 8741 times)
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 501



WWW
« on: September 09, 2008, 01:47:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Pinched one of the new 200 F2's from CPS (Australia) the other day to give it a run and see if there's a place for it in my bag.

I don't use long lenses in my work much - the 135  and 85's have been my most regular since getting the DsIII's so I didn't really know what to expect.

Well, I think I'm going to change the way I shoot from now on and if the subject is closer then 2 meters I'm not interested - very impressive lens IMO, mine arrives on friday !  

Some frames hand held @f2 - 160/250 ISO  default CS3 sharpening.



Detail from above -





Logged

daethon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2008, 07:17:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Pinched one of the new 200 F2's from CPS (Australia) the other day to give it a run and see if there's a place for it in my bag.

I don't use long lenses in my work much - the 135  and 85's have been my most regular since getting the DsIII's so I didn't really know what to expect.

Well, I think I'm going to change the way I shoot from now on and if the subject is closer then 2 meters I'm not interested - very impressive lens IMO, mine arrives on friday !   

Some frames hand held @f2 - 160/250 ISO  default CS3 sharpening.



Detail from above -






[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220268\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the samples.  Looks incredible, and the bokeh!
« Last Edit: September 09, 2008, 10:00:32 PM by daethon » Logged

Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 801



WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2008, 11:31:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Looks incredible, and the brokeh!
It's "bokeh"[/color] and, yes, the examples are wonderful.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2008, 01:15:22 PM by Chris_Brown » Logged

~ CB
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 537



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2008, 12:36:23 PM »
ReplyReply

I think "brokeh" refers to the cost of such outstanding OOF performance  

I still miss my 200 f1.8L a lot. Best lens I ever owned.
Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 801



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2008, 01:15:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think "brokeh" refers to the cost of such outstanding OOF performance.
   
Logged

~ CB
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 501



WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2008, 09:33:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I still miss my 200 f1.8L a lot. Best lens I ever owned.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220383\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This new model is now my favorite lens for sure !

I'm trying it out with the 1.4 extender and a 12mm tube later today or tomorrow and will post some more shots.
Logged

daethon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 75


« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2008, 10:01:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's "bokeh"[/color] and, yes, the examples are wonderful.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thank you for the correction, I've fixed the post.  I find it incredible that this is the first time that I've been corrected.  

Thanks a ton!
Logged

NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2008, 03:40:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Is there some problem with my eyesight? I find the bokeh too busy in these shots. Can't say I'm impressed judging solely by the above shots. Have seen much better bokeh samples from the Nikon 200 F2.0 lens but haven't looked at other sample photos from the Canon.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2008, 03:40:52 AM by NikosR » Logged

Nikos
wildlightphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 652


« Reply #8 on: September 12, 2008, 06:59:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Is there some problem with my eyesight? I find the bokeh too busy in these shots.
I agree, the OOF highlights are hard-edged and eliptical.
Logged
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 501



WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 12, 2008, 07:15:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree, the OOF highlights are hard-edged and eliptical.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220993\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hmm, I guess I hadn't looked at it in that much detail..
Logged

Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 801



WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 13, 2008, 01:22:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I find the bokeh too busy in these shots. Can't say I'm impressed judging solely by the above shots. Have seen much better bokeh samples from the Nikon 200 F2.0 lens but haven't looked at other sample photos from the Canon.
Perhaps you'd prefer this lens. Very creamy-soft bokeh. Very controllable.
Logged

~ CB
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 14, 2008, 11:33:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Perhaps you'd prefer this lens. Very creamy-soft bokeh. Very controllable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221250\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You don't have to use a special soft focus or 'bokeh control' lens to get creamy backgrounds. Both the Nikon AF-D 85 1.4 and the 200 2.0 prove so. This Sony lens (I believe it's an old Minolta design) is interesting though. Nikon's portrait (DC) lenses work by modifying spherical aberration I think.
Logged

Nikos
lovell
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2008, 11:22:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Is there some problem with my eyesight? I find the bokeh too busy in these shots. Can't say I'm impressed judging solely by the above shots. Have seen much better bokeh samples from the Nikon 200 F2.0 lens but haven't looked at other sample photos from the Canon.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=220970\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Your really can't say what you wrote for sure until you shoot the same exact compositions, and side by side with the Nikon 200mm.

Your comments come off too fanboy, and lack objectivity, to be sure.

It would be far better for you or someone to have a shoot out with both lenses, shooting the same exact compositions.
Logged

After composition, everything else is secondary--Alfred Steiglitz, NYC, 1927.

I'm not afraid of death.  I just don't want to be there when it happens--Woody Allen, Annie Hall, '70s
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2008, 11:53:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Your really can't say what you wrote for sure until you shoot the same exact compositions, and side by side with the Nikon 200mm.

Your comments come off too fanboy, and lack objectivity, to be sure.

It would be far better for you or someone to have a shoot out with both lenses, shooting the same exact compositions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221774\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Step 1 Go back read my post again. I was referring to the pics posted and the comments about great bokeh.

Step 2 Check all my other posts in this site. Do I come off as a fanboy?

Step 3 Bugger off to dpr
« Last Edit: September 16, 2008, 11:56:28 PM by NikosR » Logged

Nikos
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4112



« Reply #14 on: September 20, 2008, 07:46:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I am familiar with the old 200/1.8 (I used mine a lot, while I still had the energy to carry it around).

These images have pretty bad bokeh. Maybe a comparison of the new and old design would show optical differences. Or maybe the photographer stopped the lens down ? I seem to remember that the sweet aprture is F4.

In the mean time, I'm keeping my old model.

Edmund
Logged
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 501



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 21, 2008, 02:46:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Those are all at F2.

I didn't buy it's 'bokeh' as much as it's max aperture and length, it should make getting tighter live shots in crap light a little bit easier than the 70-200 2.8.

It's also done it's first day on the set of a TVC and was awesome for picking off 3/4 lengths without getting in the way of the film crew.
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4112



« Reply #16 on: September 21, 2008, 04:44:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Those are all at F2.

I didn't buy it's 'bokeh' as much as it's max aperture and length, it should make getting tighter live shots in crap light a little bit easier than the 70-200 2.8.

It's also done it's first day on the set of a TVC and was awesome for picking off 3/4 lengths without getting in the way of the film crew.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My issue with my own lens is just size. The Leica 200 (or is it 180) is tiny, and has a pull-out hood.

Edmund
Logged
Panopeeper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1805


« Reply #17 on: September 21, 2008, 08:10:18 PM »
ReplyReply

I too find the bokeh rather harsh in the third and the fourth shot. I have the 200mm f/2.8L; it's bokeh is more pleasing for my taste.

I have a collection of bokeh examples with seven different lenses at http://www.panopeeper.com/Bokeh/ among others with the 200mm f/2.8L as well.
Logged

Gabor
dchew
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574



WWW
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2008, 08:11:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Much of the harshness may be from the very light, blown out background.  Panopeeper's background examples are light but they still have color, so they aren't nearly as challenging.

Dave Chew
Logged

GiorgioNiro
Guest
« Reply #19 on: September 27, 2008, 12:08:30 PM »
ReplyReply



This image is not going to be helpful in the Bokeh discussion, but this is what I use my 200IS for.

I have used the EF 200/1.8 as well as the 200VR from Nikon and I find the lenses all very pleasing.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad