The £2k lens thread...

M

mrthingyx

Messages
228
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, all.

I've been lucky enough to score a new job which means more money to finally fill a new Vertex 100.

I've been besotted by the Canon 200mm f1.8 (I have nothing over 50mm in my bag) and like using my prime lenses (have access to the Sigma 85mm f1.4 when I need it) as a telephoto option and am fully cognisant of its catastrophic weight and the fact that it's no longer repaired... and I still want it. The samples I've looked at on eBay which have sold have gone for around the £2k mark.

The spanner in the works is the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 OS: something that seems to be coming out as VERY sharp and generally pretty awesome from all the reports and samples I've seen so far.

So the question is this: is the Canon THAT awesome (in practice, as opposed to legend) that it makes up for the potential failure problems, reach and OS of the Sigma?

Yes, I'm aware that they're very different lenses, and yes, I'm looking for a lens that will get me remote candids (as such) of my kids and family in parks, etc., but I'm lookin for something that will get me the best IQ in the most situations (big aperture/OS/etc.).

Whilst e-peen does come into it, the only person I can joke with is my younger brother - he and my dad are the only ones that understand photography in my family.

Whilst I won't be buying the lens straight away (October is the target month), I'm trying to find as much vicarious experience as possible...
 
Chris Primadona said:
I would get the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS mkII and extender for when you need more reach (Prob not very often from what you described).
Click to expand...

I vote second on the Canon 70-200 f2/8 mkII. If budget is really really tight then i will go for the Sigma. I use Sigma 70-200 f2.8 myself but thats because i cannot afford for the nikon 70-200 f2.8 and the sigma does the job fine for my need :)
 
Chris Primadona said:
I would get the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS mkII and extender for when you need more reach (Prob not very often from what you described).
Click to expand...

badboy1984 said:
I vote second on the Canon 70-200 f2/8 mkII. If budget is really really tight then i will go for the Sigma. I use Sigma 70-200 f2.8 myself but thats because i cannot afford for the nikon 70-200 f2.8 and the sigma does the job fine for my need :)
Click to expand...

Possibly, but I can use my younger brother's 70-200 f2.8L whenever I need. It is by using that that I realised I only really use 150mm upwards before dropping down to the 85mm prime.

I thought about the 70-200 IS II, and may look at it again, but would prefer to go for a 135mm f2L and then the 200mm f2.8L "just because they're primes." Unless it's THAT much better than those other two lenses...

Laudrup said:
You could save up some more and get the 200mm f/2 IS.
Click to expand...

Possibly... another £2k (for camera stuff, anyway) will only take another 6 years to save up. :( :D
 
Well I recently got the 135L 2.0 and its an awesome prime indeed, but remember these have no IS and can be tricky for handheld stuff in low light (not really an issue since mine will mostly see studio work). I personally would be inclined to buy the 70-200 for my longer reach stuff and stick with primes up to 85mm.
 
The old 200mm f/1.8 is simply the best lens ever made and thats from a Nikon shooter, stick a 1.4x converter on and its still sharper than the 300mm f/2.8 and the best bokeh ever
 
Hi, all.
I've been besotted by the Canon 200mm f1.8
So the question is this: is the Canon THAT awesome

Yes its is that awesome.. I have owned a fairly Large collection of Canon Primes and its the sharpest of the Lot it gives images a kind of 3d look making them really stand out
I dont know where you Live but I am from the Leeds area and if your Local or want to travel you can have a play with it and see for your self

cheers
Chris
 
Gary Coyle said:
The old 200mm f/1.8 is simply the best lens ever made and thats from a Nikon shooter, stick a 1.4x converter on and its still sharper than the 300mm f/2.8 and the best bokeh ever
Click to expand...

Not sure I'd go that far, but if you like fast and exotic discontinued lenses Nikon did a 300mm f/2.

Someone on here was flogging a 200 1.8 a few months back, but the rear element was damaged I think if memory serves. There's one on ebay that's damaged as well.
 
mrthingyx said:
Yes, I'm aware that they're very different lenses, and yes, I'm looking for a lens that will get me remote candids (as such) of my kids and family in parks, etc., but I'm lookin for something that will get me the best IQ in the most situations (big aperture/OS/etc.).


.
Click to expand...

I am a Nikon user so can't help you on your Canon specific options but I do take a lot of candid photo's of my kids in the park. I find my 70-200 F2.8 great for this and even a little bit short sometimes even on a crop body. My children are young but on scooters/bikes they're very mobile!
 
Gary Coyle said:
So have you used one??????
Click to expand...

No, but it isn't the best lens ever made. Having owned high quality Canon, Nikon and Leica lenses there really is no 'best lens ever made'.

The OP should try and find a nice second hand 200 f/2 or a 120-300 OS seems to be generating good reviews. Or even a 300 f/2.8 IS.
 
Last edited:
Well i would suggest you go and try one and i bet my next 10 years salary it'll be the best ever lens you've used, anyone and everyone who has owned or used the 200mm f/1.8 will tell you it's the best ever lens theyve used and i guarantee that 100%
 
Chris Primadona said:
Why did they stop making them? I would love to try one myself, but they are so damn rare these days. Every one I seen up for sale was either broken or stupidly expensive :(
Click to expand...

They stopped making them as inside it has some Lead which is not ECO friendly and obviously was not cost effective to keep it in production
its a brute of a Lens to hand hold and the tripod mount is right in the way for hand holding making it awkward and very heavy weighing in at a hefty 8lbs

and after holding it all day at an airshow really makes the arms longer LOL
stick a 1,4x converter on and its still amazing and stick a 2x converter on and the autofocus is still faster than the 100-400mm Canon zoom lens
stacking converters on it and the autofocus still works (centre point)

This Lens and the 85mm Canon L Lens are the only two Lenses where I think you have to actually use them to appreciate just how good they are just seeing iimages posted does not do them justice
my 2p
Chris
 
Last edited:
vulcan2912 said:
Only thing missing is a couple of Asbestos gaskets!

Just out of curiosity Chris,WHY have I never had the chance of having a play with the thing.Out of all the times I've spent the day in your company you've not once brought that bad boy with you.

Gary
Click to expand...

Gary me old mate we will sort that out soon.... will get in touch something like a cycle race up whinlatter pass or similar and I will be up there, so you can see for your self
 
A few samples of why I like this lens so much
G-ABVE-RUN-X3.jpg


40789614_Do8ZK-X3-1.jpg


248409614_fHxvQ-X3.jpg


1057837292_uAJKE-X3.jpg


1186011189_VVbnk-X3.jpg


205501815_gWLoo-X3.jpg
 
Hmm... Was seriously considering the Sigma and now I'm back to the Canon...

Is there a high street shop that actually has the Sigma in stock? I've been into the local city centre Jessops store in Brum to no avail...
 
Gary Coyle said:
Well i would suggest you go and try one and i bet my next 10 years salary it'll be the best ever lens you've used, anyone and everyone who has owned or used the 200mm f/1.8 will tell you it's the best ever lens theyve used and i guarantee that 100%
Click to expand...

If I had your 10 years salary I'd still buy the 200mm f/2:

The Canon EF 200mm f/1.8 L USM Lens is sharp wide open and extremely sharp stopped down to f/2.8. Corner performance is excellent. The ISO 12233 Resolution Chart sample crops for this lens were carefully shot twice (using AF, MF and lots of bracketing each time). The first test results were repeated in the second test. I shot the test twice because I expected this lens to be sharper wide open in the center. My actual-use confirms these results - My 300 f/2.8 IS and 400 f/2.8 IS lenses are sharper in the center wide open.
Click to expand...

I found the 200 f/1.8 to be a sharp lens, but not as sharp as the 200 f/2.0 L wide open. The 200mm f/1.8 L has less-advanced focus-by-wire electronic manual focusing and did not yield the AI Servo autofocus hit-rate that the 200 f/2 is delivering for me. The 200 f/1.8 was not as comfortable for me to hold and shoot with (I found it to be front-heavy), and I did not care for the tripod ring location. The 200mm f/2.0 L focuses closer (6.2'/1.9m vs. 8.2'/2.5m) and has 4-stop IS. The 200mm f/1.8 has a 1/3-stop wider aperture. Canon no longer services the 200 f/1.8.
Click to expand...

Having owned the Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS which was a fantastic lens and up there with my 85mm f/1.2 II as stated above the 300 was found to be sharper in the centre than the 1.8. I still prefer my Leica 50mm Summicron to all of the Canon or Nikon lenses though.
 
I own the 300mm F2.8IS and sharp as it is - the 200mm beats it for 3d and Bokeh seperation and its no good posting a few copy & paste's saying whats the sharpest because we could sit here all day posting back and forth
'MY' experience is that the 200mm is the sharpest Lens I have ever owned and a lot of others who have actually 'owned' it say the same - like I said earlier in this thread you have to use and actually see the results in real world usage to appreciate how good it is
and I would not even think of telling you how good or bad your Leica 50mm Summicron is as I have never used it and as such cannot offer 'MY' opinion on it!!!
 
Laudrup said:
If I had your 10 years salary I'd still buy the 200mm f/2:.
Click to expand...

And to be honest so would i but only because you cant get service or repair and parts for the 200mm f/1.8

By the way ive used several different models of both the f/1.8 and f/2.0 and the older f/1.8 wipes the floow with the f/2.0 by a big margin, the 1.8 is sharper with a 1.4x than the 2.0 is without even at f/4, the focus is much faster as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top