Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Canon EF 200mm F/2.8L II USM Any Good?  
User currently offlineRAAFA From Australia, joined Jun 2009, 8 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5104 times:

EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM would it be good for all round aviation photography

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2878 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5098 times:

If you need a focal legth of 200mm and you'll be needing a wide aperture, then yes, it's an excellent choice. However, given your other questions, I would suggest it's a little too specialised and limiting for your current needs.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5084 times:

One of Canon's best in terms of quality, but this is really a bit of a specialist lens - ideal for indoor sports or certain types of wildlife photography.

Unless you are getting a really good price on this, then something like the 70-200mm f4 would be perhaps a better general purpose lens, though for aviation most people prefer something a bit longer.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineSIA6696 From Australia, joined Dec 2009, 90 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5052 times:

The 200mm is too specialised. Go for a telephoto zoom instead, unless you are going to get really close to the taxiway/runway then you would be better off with a wide angle.


The best seat in a plane is the one you are in.
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4885 times:

You are probably going to get a lot of differing opinions on this question, so I might as well add mine..............yes, it is a "prime" ( single focal length ) lens; it is a superb lens, extremely well built, very sharp, and definitely not inexpensive!
Will it do all the things a zoom lens, such as the 70-200 mentioned will do ? Obviously, no it will not..........it can't......it only has one focal length; but it will do a heck of a lot, and do it better and sharper than most zoom lenses! ( gonna get a lot of "flack" for that )

I used to shoot with a Canon F-1 back in the 80's, before auto-focus was invented; I had a FD 200/ 2.8.......still have it;
I took more pictures with that lens than all the other lenses I had at the time; I finally bought a couple of TC's for it, and took a lot more pics at 300mm and 400mm with the TC's; to be fair, zooms were in their infancy back then, and I didn't own one; just a bag full of great prime lenses. That 200mm is "specialist"...........is pure....."folderol" ( IMHO )

Now, back to the original question.........could you use all the dollars / pounds / rupee's / or whatever that the 200/f2.8L
is gonna cost, and maybe get a zoom ( with maybe f 4.5-5.6 ) and be able to cover a bunch more "possibilities" ?
( And maybe have a few "quid" left over ? )

Lot of answers to that question, and unfortunately, they all depend on different folks different opinions ! I personally own a 80-200 f/2.8 that I really love, and on my D 300s it gives me 120-300, and that's still at f 2.8, before any TC's are added. If I ever have a very pressing need to shoot at 200mm, I suppose I'll have to buy me a D-700 with a FX sensor...
( What's another $2,500, right ? )

If your Canon has a less than full frame sensor..........you need to think about that possibility; if it's a full frame......you are back to just 200mm. The whole thing is a bunch of compromises, really; the only reason ANYONE buys slow zooms, is because they can't, or don't want to spend 3 or 4 times as much for a fast zoom ( which would cost even more than the lens you are asking about ) At the end of the day, I don't think anyone can answer that question for you........it all depends on too many things.........how "deep" are your pockets ? What you REALLY need to think about is............photography is more about "knowledge" and "experience", than it is about "hardware". Without either, you will never be able to make good choices, and you will always be dependent on other peoples opinions.

In the meantime, just remember...........if your Canon has a less than full frame "chip", that 200L is gonna be a 300L .

And MERRY CHRISTMAS !
Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon EF 400mm F/4 Do Is USM posted Fri Jan 25 2008 19:31:43 by GavinConroy
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III USM Telephoto Zoom posted Wed Jun 6 2007 07:57:07 by Rsmith6621a
Canon EF-S 17-85mm 1:4-5.6 Is USM posted Mon Jul 17 2006 13:41:22 by FlyingZacko
Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM Review Wanted posted Thu Apr 6 2006 12:01:46 by Deaphen
New Canon EF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Wed Oct 19 2005 00:12:17 by TRVYYZ
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Wed Mar 16 2005 01:57:38 by APFPilot1985
Comments On The Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III Usm? posted Thu Jul 25 2002 17:19:00 by OH-LZA
Canon EF 75-300mm F/4-5.6 Is USM posted Tue Jul 9 2002 14:59:50 by Granite
Canon Announced EF 70-200mm F/2.8L Is II USM posted Tue Jan 5 2010 09:13:20 by SNATH
Canon EF 55-200mm F/4.5-5.6 II USM Telephoto Zoom posted Sun Jan 7 2007 03:34:22 by PilotNTrng