Canon 200mm f/2L IS USM and Canon 800mm f/5.6L IS USM Lenses

Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
edited January 25, 2008 in Accessories
PhotographyBLOG
«1

Comments

  • jdryan3jdryan3 Registered Users Posts: 1,353 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2007
    That 200 f/2 looks like a black hole: it'll just suck the light in and never let it out.

    :s85

    I wonder what the specs/dimensions are? Looks like the 400 f/2.8 or 400 DO f/4, but no scale in that picture
    "Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
    -Fleetwood Mac
  • NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2007
    Ric Grupe wrote:
    PhotographyBLOG
    Nice! Thanks for posting this!thumb.gif
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2007
    jdryan3 wrote:
    That 200 f/2 looks like a black hole: it'll just suck the light in and never let it out.

    :s85

    I wonder what the specs/dimensions are? Looks like the 400 f/2.8 or 400 DO f/4, but no scale in that picture

    I don't know about the light...but I am sure it will suck your credit card dry! I'm gonna guess to the tune of about $3.5k.
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2007
    I've seen shots from the old 200 1.8 that were stunning.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited October 15, 2007
    wxwax wrote:
    I've seen shots from the old 200 1.8 that were stunning.
    At $3,483.95 they better be...eek7.gif
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2007
    Better pic at dpreview
    Ain't she purdy! :ivar

    canon2002.jpg
  • claudermilkclaudermilk Registered Users Posts: 2,756 Major grins
    edited October 16, 2007
    Drool. Looks like it comes with all the toys, too. I'm certain it will be well out of my budget. :cry
    Chris
    http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,949 moderator
    edited October 18, 2007
    The 200 will sell like hotcakes. The first was an awesome lens and those that
    have owned it and sold it have had lots to say about how much they miss it.

    The 800? Not sure about that.
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited October 18, 2007
    ian408 wrote:
    The 800? Not sure about that.

    This could be the ultimate birding lens. Lots of birders have been clamoring for a 500 F5.6, and this blows the doors off of that. I expect the image quality will be better than the 600mm F4 + TC1.4X, (which of course is excellent already) and lighter and more compact for hiking. If they price this thing right, they will sell a lot of them.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,949 moderator
    edited October 18, 2007
    kdog wrote:
    This could be the ultimate birding lens. Lots of birders have been clamoring for a 500 F5.6, and this blows the doors off of that. I expect the image quality will be better than the 600mm F4 + TC1.4X, (which of course is excellent already) and lighter and more compact for hiking. If they price this thing right, they will sell a lot of them.
    I thought about that but man, if it's anything like the 600, it will be heavy.
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
  • LiquidAirLiquidAir Registered Users Posts: 1,751 Major grins
    edited October 18, 2007
    For comparison's sake, consider the aperture size which is probably a fair predictor of weight:

    600/4 = 150mm
    800/5.6 = 143mm
    400/2.8 = 143mm
    500/4 = 125mm
    300/2.8 = 107mm
    200/2 = 100mm

    Unless Canon has worked some magic in this lens, my guess is that it won't be any lighter than either the 600/4 or the 400/2.8. I'll bet the 800/5.6 is for high end wildlife photography with the 1DsMIII because the 600+TC isn't quite up to the demands of a 20MP sensor.
    Liquid Air - Gallery - Blog
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,708 moderator
    edited October 20, 2007
    The Sigma 300-800 f5.6 weighs 12.9 pounds, and I'll bet this is fairly close to what the Canon 800 f5.6 will weigh as well.

    A 800mm fixed focal length lens will be challenging to use, but there will be a significant market for it.

    The 200 f2 looks very appealing also. I do hope it is less expensive than the 300 f2.8
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • gluwatergluwater Registered Users Posts: 3,599 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2007
    pathfinder wrote:
    The Sigma 300-800 f5.6 weighs 12.9 pounds, and I'll bet this is fairly close to what the Canon 800 f5.6 will weigh as well.

    A 800mm fixed focal length lens will be challenging to use, but there will be a significant market for it.

    The 200 f2 looks very appealing also. I do hope it is less expensive than the 300 f2.8
    So do you have both pre-ordered? lol3.gif
    Nick
    SmugMug Technical Account Manager
    Travel = good. Woo, shooting!
    nickwphoto
  • PineapplePhotoPineapplePhoto Registered Users Posts: 474 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    New White Lenses! (Canon L series!)
    How come this is not posted here yet? headscratch.gif

    Canon EF 800mm f5.6L IS USM
    ef_800_56.jpg
    http://www.pictureline.com/products/15146/Canon_EF_800mm_f5.6L_IS_USM/

    and

    Canon EF 200mm f2.0L IS USM
    ef_200_2.jpg
    http://www.pictureline.com/products/15147/Canon_EF_200mm_f2L_IS_USM/

    Canon Links:
    http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20071015_eflens.html
    http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/genhtml_photo/20071015_pkit_eflens.html
    Body: Canon 1D Mark II N | Canon 30D w/BG-E2 Flash: Canon 580EX II | Quantum T4d | Strobes & Monolights
    Glass: Sigma 70-200 f2.8 | Sigma 20 f1.8 | Canon 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM
  • gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    PineapplePhoto wrote:
    How come this is not posted here yet? headscratch.gif

    It has been posted ...nik made it from memory.
  • salazarsalazar Registered Users Posts: 392 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    gus wrote:
    It has been posted ...nik made it from memory.

    Here's the thread: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=73778
    Please feel free to retouch and repost my images. Critique, Suggestions, and Technique tips always welcomed. Thanks for your interest.
  • PineapplePhotoPineapplePhoto Registered Users Posts: 474 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    Sorry, I didn't see it ne_nau.gif
    Body: Canon 1D Mark II N | Canon 30D w/BG-E2 Flash: Canon 580EX II | Quantum T4d | Strobes & Monolights
    Glass: Sigma 70-200 f2.8 | Sigma 20 f1.8 | Canon 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM
  • saurorasaurora Registered Users Posts: 4,320 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    Oh drool! I think I could trade in all of my lenses for that 200! (Right...) rolleyes1.gif IS would sure be helpful. :D
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,708 moderator
    edited November 3, 2007
    Nick, a 200mm f2.8 L is one of the cheaper L lens.
    Is one stop more really going to be worth $3k morene_nau.gif

    Probably not to me, unless I can swap out something else I already own

    You think they'll take a 6 year old motorcycle?
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,949 moderator
    edited November 3, 2007
    pathfinder wrote:
    The 200 f2 looks very appealing also. I do hope it is less expensive than the 300 f2.8
    If you're shooting something like gymnastics (action in a cave) or weddings,
    yes. It'd be useful.
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    PineapplePhoto wrote:
    Sorry, I didn't see it ne_nau.gif
    No sweat. Also, you can't do three letter/symbol searches, so 200 and 800 wouldn't work as search terms.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    ian408 wrote:
    If you're shooting something like gymnastics (action in a cave) or weddings,
    yes. It'd be useful.
    nod.gif

    It's really a specialty-use item. Heavy, bulky. Really needs a monopod. Perfect uses: A pro or someone who regularly shoots gymnastics, hoops, hockey... or if you do outdoor portraits and have lots of room.

    The lens is probably gonna be sharp as all getout... but again, it's specialty-use IMO. As PF said, the 200 f/2.8 prime is incredibly sharp, and 1/4th the price. But if you need f/2, well then, it's a great addition to the lineup :)
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2007
    merged two threads.
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited January 23, 2008
    Whatabeauty!

    objetivocanon.jpg
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • LiquidAirLiquidAir Registered Users Posts: 1,751 Major grins
    edited January 23, 2008
    Andy wrote:
    nod.gif

    It's really a specialty-use item. Heavy, bulky. Really needs a monopod. Perfect uses: A pro or someone who regularly shoots gymnastics, hoops, hockey... or if you do outdoor portraits and have lots of room.

    The lens is probably gonna be sharp as all getout... but again, it's specialty-use IMO. As PF said, the 200 f/2.8 prime is incredibly sharp, and 1/4th the price. But if you need f/2, well then, it's a great addition to the lineup :)

    I've got the 200/2.8L and it is optically stellar. I do, however, wish it had IS. Its a nice, small, hand-holdable lens and yet 200mm is just a bit too long for hand holding in a lot of situaions. I find I need to shoot at a minimum of 1/250 to get adequately sharp exposures which rules the 200 out for a lot of the lighting situations I work in. That said, while I'd love to have a 200/2 IS, realistically if I am going to be buying a big white it'll be the 300/2.8 IS.
    Liquid Air - Gallery - Blog
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,949 moderator
    edited January 23, 2008
    Manfr3d wrote:
    Whatabeauty!

    objetivocanon.jpg

    You got one ear.gif
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited January 24, 2008
    ian408 wrote:
    You got one ear.gif

    I wish ne_nau.gif

    Canon released the prices for these two lenses,
    it doesn't look like I'm going to own one anytime
    soon.

    200mm/2.0 L IS will be 5999$ available in April
    800mm/5.6 L IS will be 11999$ available in May

    http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9206-9236
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • patch29patch29 Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 2,928 Major grins
    edited January 24, 2008
    Manfr3d wrote:
    200mm/2.0 L IS will be $5999 available in April


    I wonder what the street price will be?

    Does anyone know the list price of the Nikon 200/2.0? I saw B+H sells it for $4000.
  • KEDKED Registered Users Posts: 843 Major grins
    edited January 24, 2008
    Manfr3d wrote:
    I wish
    Nice Photoshop effort then! It just amazes me what some of you guys can whip up so effortlessly.
    KED
    __________________
    www.browngreensports.com
    http://browngreensports.smugmug.com
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited January 24, 2008
    KED wrote:
    Nice Photoshop effort then! It just amazes me what some of you guys can whip up so effortlessly.

    I didn't make this photo, I thought it was real ... headscratch.gif
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
Sign In or Register to comment.