Best Canon 200mm Primes Lenses - The SLR Lounge Canon Lens Wars Episode 16

[@joel5811]

For what it's worth I have the 200/2.8 and love it. Pye and some commenters seemed to question why someone would own that over a 70-200 so here is my reasoning: 1) I really disliked the size and weight of my 70-200. During weddings I basically only used it for the ceremony and then had to carry it around in my bag all day. The 200/2.8 prime is easy to carry around and is light enough to handhold without IS. 2) Again, because I use the telephone so rarely, it didn't feel like a good allocation of funds. Why spend $2k on a lens I only use for ceremonies and 1-2 portraits? Selling my 70-200 allowed me to upgrade to a 50/1.2 which is my most used focal length. 3) I almost always used my 70-200 at 200mm anyway. Again, this was my reasoning. Everyone has their own style and preference so I can see why Pye or someone else might prefer a 70-200, it's just not for me.

[@trevorsowers]

I agree the 200L 2.8 is just a really good workhorse lens that is small enough to even fit into some of my jacket pockets so I always have it handy. It's a lens I've owned for about 10 years and it never disappoints.

[@ADivaForLife]

Thank you 🙏🏽 thank you for this explanation

[@blurayauthority]

I like this guy. It's nice to see someone review camera equipment that doesn't take himself too seriously.

[@tomer.aviation]

I own the 200mm f/2.8. It’s an amazing lens with delicious bokeh, although chromatic aberration is a problem in bright conditions.

[@michaeljohannsen4872]

I can confirm that too

[@sebsrandombeamclips]

The 200 2.8 prime is a great value lens, especially today when they can be picked up for as low as $250!

[@TimothyCappPhoto]

I've got the 200 1.8L. I LOVE IT. Give the most amazing portraits, with that creamy goodness and that compression. It was my dream lens for a while, now it's pretty much all i use for portraits.

[@nelly13b]

Wow, where can I find this rare 1.8 200mm!?

[@TimothyCappPhoto]

nelly13b Ebay!

[@nelly13b]

haha wait I thought your 1.8 was just a typo. Is there really a 200mm 1.8 canon lens?

[@TimothyCappPhoto]

nelly13b Yes. Its pretty amazing. Fastest 200mm ever made. Super sharp. very unique look. You can get it for about 3000. Its quite a steal. BUt be careful, they don't service them anymore.

[@Diostillrocks]

nelly13b Yes there was. Here is a review of it. www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-200mm-f-1.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

[@Aurongel]

Great informative video, also surprisingly well lit and produced.

[@captainkanji]

Just got my 200 2.8 in the mail.

[@PeacePham1991]

How do you like it?

[@stubones]

That 200mm f/2L IS is something special.

[@kiwipics]

The 200mm f1.8 is even better .... an even sexier beast of a lens.

[@philip851]

I'm so glad to have only watched this video in 2022....he really struggled to demonstrate that the $6k was superior. That and misinforming people that the 70-200 f2.8l was comparable.The truth is the 200mm f2.8l is a fantastic lens, and the difference in sharpness,dof to the 70-200 is greater than the differences he attempted to persuade you of here. Why was he fos? who knows perhaps Canon dropped him a few quid to promote the upgrade.

[@nomadicsouls3290]

The 200mm f2 or f1.8 are the best lenses ever made. In the hands of a skilled photographer nothing produces images like these lenses.

[@kiwipics]

Why not compare it to the classic 200mm F1.8 L??

[@reallycoolguys]

I didn't even know the 200 2.8 prime existed!

[@trevorsowers]

It's existed since the FD mount!

[@CamerasdirectAustralia]

Nice work. yes the 200mm f2 will give you a 'better' photo but unless you are loaded or a serious shooter for the likes of Vogue, we don't believe you will get 7-8 times the value as you would from the 200mm f2.8

[@hemidesign]

got both lenses and the 200mm 1.8L which is the 200mm killer

[@ronaldov09]

I think this is why the 135 f2 is so popular, great compression with the 135mm focal length, creamy bokeh like the 200mm,sharp wide open and its a lot smaller, lighter and cheaper! Though it is still not a replacement for that 200mm f2 but its pretty darn close for portraiture.My 2 cents

[@moonlightlife3747]

im confuse choosing 200mm f2.8 or 135 f2 for portraits can u please help

[@heartlandlight6862]

Thanks for the help.

[@khooby922]

why did you skip over the 135 f/2?

[@cardiacade]

Because it's not 200mm!

[@geiryvindeskeland7208]

Sorry for my inadequate English. I really love this review! Dispite that you are talking quite fast, I understood most of it. And thank you soo much for not add any stupid disturbance music or similar weird sounds while you tell me something. But didn't you forgot something? Do you mentioned that the f2 has a lot of focus-settings?

[@ReubenShaverd]

Thank you for a great review. I have 200mm f/2.8 L and 70-200mm f/4.0 no IS. Which lens would be a better option to take it to a wedding shoot?

[@CaptDicker]

the 50mm 1.4 or 85mm 1.8, 200mm @2.8 will struggle indoors

[@michael_swardh]

EF200 f2 is the Eye of Sauron 2.0 (EF200 f1,8 is the original)

[@jimhunt3661]

The 200mm f2 also works great with a 1.4x. No need to own a 300mm f2.8.

[@davidjewels]

Great lens review. I'm torn between buying the 200m m f2.0 or the Zeiss OTUS 85mm f1.4 (manual focus) and I have ti make this decision in less than a week.

[@sigmaoctantis_nz]

+davidjewels I would have gone for the 200mm f/2

[@davidjewels]

I actually bought them both

[@sigmaoctantis_nz]

davidjewels Which one do you prefer for portraits?

[@ignatprokhoropchyuck4652]

Buy canon ef 200 1.8

[@Afiarchives]

Can anyone recommend some small, good video quality not bland/dull sort of more a cinematic view - type cameras around £200?

[@PaulChoate-s4v]

The 200 f2 is totally necessary for even noobs

[@Canoneosmiami]

About adding 2x teleconverter to 200 f 2 ,like 2 of them which would make it 800mm f8 ? Could you plz test how bad the image would be since this is such a sharp lens to start with ? That would be awesome to know .

[@AstroPinoy]

I have the Yongnuo 2X TC III, I can shoot @400mm F4 but you have to nail focus. I have the A7R2 with metabones IV .. This becomes my favorite lens as soon as I acquired it.. I have some samples @F8 www.flickr.com/photos/129168751@N04/27470568423/sizes/o/ F5.6: www.flickr.com/photos/129168751@N04/28812723985/sizes/o/

[@andrewford80]

That dragonfly shot is amazing

[@nomadicsouls3290]

Mad skills, that dragonfly pic is exceptional.

[@sebastianballestas778]

Bullocks. You cannot consider to get the 70-200 IS version rather than the 200 2.8. It cost almost twice as much as the later one.

[@bozmundarts2614]

literally every time he says the 200mm f/2 is "still sharper" i cannot tell the sharpness apart from one to the other. considering the images then are already zoomed in, the difference if there is, is worth crap.

[@nomadicsouls3290]

Have you forgotten that your watching a KZbin video and he is in front of a professional monitor?

[@bozmundarts2614]

@@nomadicsouls3290 even though this comment is old already... if so you think so, maybe he should've made a higher res video instead of a "seemingly" (as you've explained) pointless comparison?

[@stitchilalu]

Why are you talking about zoom lenses in a prime review!? recommending a far more expensive zoom lens over an affordable prime that has better IQ is just weird, what are you even talking about?

[@AdurianJ]

Fairness is such a Human concept. This comparison shall in fact be..... Completely Unfair! :)

[@kaydawgy1999]

that 2.0 looks nice.....but for $5,200 more than the other lens??

[@kpopfanphotos]

It's actually dropped in price significantly since this video. They regularly sell for $2800 these days

[@Flyer4EVER7]

Why don't you compare Nikon as well?

[@horacepastrana7437]

+Flyer4EVER7 Canon guy .

[@victoroliveira3256]

I'm not sure it's worth 6gs, although the bragging rights would be most amazing you would be the star of the party, worst case scenario people might think that your over compensating for.................. Nah, great video the war continues thank you

[@soothingsoundvideos]

I used to have the 200/2.8L. I hated it. Then I sold to buy a 70-200/2.8L non-IS. Boy, was I the happiest guy!

[@PeacePham1991]

Why did you hate it? I'm planning to buy one, and I'm looking for reviews :)

[@soothingsoundvideos]

I might have got a bad copy, I guess. I used it on my 5DMk2 and no matter what I could never micro AF adjusted it. I've tried it from -20 to +20 and the AF was a bit off. The color rendition was different too than my 70-200L. It was too orangey.

[@kiwipics]

Tran Thai Binh ... I have a 200mm f2.8 Mk1 and I love it. I've used it on an EOS 1, 600, 650 35mm bodies ... and on 10d, 400d, 5d Mk1 and 50d digital bodies It is fast focusing and as sharp as a tack, and I'd assume the Mk2 version is a bit better. Bad focus issues are normally a body issue, and not the lens.

[@PeacePham1991]

Thank you John.

[@kiwipics]

No problem ... I'm sure you will love the lens. It's one that I don't think I'll ever sell on. I also have the 35-350mm L ... no longer made but a lovely lens. I only have one other on my wish list, and that's the 35mm f2L.

[@lucuslopez6866]

100% worth it for the bragging rights

[@WoodDuckProductions]

Definitely not worth the price jump at all.

[@RickyLJones]

Excellent review SLR Lounge -www.slrlounge.com #Canon #canonusers #canonphotography #canonphotographers #EOS

[@JeffCowan]

Finally! We're starting to get into the real high end lens porn.... Mmmmmm...

[@phynx2006]

Or for those with more money than brains hahaha, 70-200mm F2.8 IS all day, excellent lens!

[@CamerasdirectAustralia]

*Checkout this honest and independent review of Canons 200mm twins* Well almost twins - only their mother could tell them apart. www.camerasdirect.com.au/lenses/canon-lenses/canon-200mm-lenses #camerasdirect #camerashop #cameras #digitalcameras #canon #canonlenses #200mm #buy #cheapprices #online #australia #brisbane #goldcoast #sydney #melbourne #canberra #adelaide #perth #tasmania

[@CamerasdirectAustralia]

www.camerasdirect.com.au/lenses/canon-lenses/canon-200mm-lenses to see both lenses side by side

[@JustLearning]

It was a site selling the two lenses and at about $300 more than B&h,

[@johnfairweather9188]

On a full frame camera, I would never use a lens between 150mm and 300mm. That’s a range that is too long for portraits and too short for sports and nature.

[@chantestephens]

Really? That's my setup on the basketball court, 5D MK IV w/ 70-200 f2. I'd love to hear a different recommendation or setup for shooting on the sideline.

[@johnfairweather9188]

A zoom, yes. A 200mm telephoto, no.

[@chantestephens]

@@johnfairweather9188 I gotcha!

[@jonathanpoon7024]

the lenses are full of your saliva!

[@thegoldenhours]

Why say WOA then keep explaining what it means? You can just say max aperture like a normal person.

[@Nguyen12121]

How can you say it equalized at f/2.8. The 2.0 is soo creamy compare to that shitty busy bokeh on the right. F.2 won hands down.

[@MrAkatta]

the f2.8 has the same image quality with the more versatile 70-200 so ....by saying the 2.8 is shitty you are revealing your qualities as a wedding photographer

[@Nguyen12121]

@@MrAkatta Are you blind? First of all, they are comparing 200 f2 with 200 f2.8. Second, anyone that says 200 f2 has the same image quality as 70-200 is an idiot that doesn't know anything about the lenses. Third, we are talking about image quality, not versatility.

[@yesbore]

Buddy, when you make a video to compare LENS, your face needs to be seen less. The video is about lens, unless that's the lens you are filmin with. You face was too much on this tutorial and only short timing on actual images being compared