REVIEWS - Canon EF 200mm F2.8 L II USM

OVERVIEW

Deciding whether a prime is a better gear choice over the zooms is a question I struggle with often. When on vacation, lenses like the Canon 70-200mm F4 L IS and Canon 70-300mm F4-5.6 L IS have worked well, more so the latter with its extra 100mm of reach. But at times their performance at the tele end can be lackluster, and they certainly do not offer much wow in the bokeh department. Canon 200mm F2 IS II is sort of holy grail lens, but at ~6 pounds, it is a beast. So the Canon 200mm F2.8 L USM II is a bit of goldilocks lens - definitely better than the zooms and alot lighter than its F2 big brother.

HANDLING

The 200mm F2.8 is well balanced with its weight evenly distributed. On the Canon 1Ds Mark III the 200mm F2.8 feels light and does not pull the camera downward. The 200mm F2.8 feels durable and there are no rattles or clunks inside the lens. In comparison, some of Canon’s IS lenses feel fragile because their inner workings move around as the lens as handled. For me those sounds are a concern - will something get knocked out of alignment if the lens jostled around in a camera bag? In comparison the 200mm F2.8 feels like a lens you can “use” and not worry if it gets bounced around in the camera bag.

Speaking of bag space, the 200mm F2.8‘s lens hood is long, so with the hood attached the overall kit is large and bulky. To reduce the bulk, sometimes I do not use the lens hood. Under normal conditions (such as shooting with the sun at your back) shooting without the hood works fine.

The Canon 200mm F2.8 uses a rear inner focus system, so lens length remains constant. The filter threads do not rotate as the lens is focused - which is good when using circular polarizers and gradient filters. The rear focus design improves focus speed (less mass being moved). The 200mm F2.8 uses Canon Ultrasonic (USM) autofocus motors which are almost silent and focus quickly in most settings. Autofocus speed can be further enhanced by setting the focus limiter selector to 3.5 meters.

Manual focus is mechanically linked and available at all times, so the lens can be auto-focused and adjusted manually if desired. The 1Ds Mark III’s viewfinder is large and bright, so I tend to manual focus because it is quicker than selecting the appropriate AF point. I wish Canon would add IS to the 200mm F2.8 because at times the view through the viewfinder is very shaky when handheld - especially when holding the camera in an awkward position. The Canon 70-200mm IS zooms have a big advantage in keeping the viewfinder steady, making it MUCH easier to keep the focus point on target. My keeper rate is higher with IS zooms, so I highly value the IS options.

PERFORMANCE

The Canon 200mm F2.8 is very sharp on the Canon 1Ds Mark III, especially at F4 to F8. Sharpness at F2.8 is okay, but not much of a wow-factor. The 200mm F2.8 produces rich colors, and this may be the lens’ best attribute. Keep in mind the images posted in this review have been edited in Photoshop. The contrast at F2.8 can lack punch at times, but with some levels adjustment in Photoshop, the contrast comes to life. The bokeh (background blur) is pleasing, but not as extreme as I would like. Flare has not been issue, nor have there been any other ugly surprises such as chromatic aberrations.

In June 2008 we got two puppies and this was a whole new shooting realm (for me). Servo focus on the Canon 1Ds Mark III was pretty quick, but many pictures were OOF’d (out of focus). Some of that was my inexperience because I rarely shot in servo mode. Most often the puppies where coming towards me and were quickly closer than the 200mm’s minimum focus distance. For the setting and working space, 200mm was too long. A Canon 135mm L would have been easier to manage in that setting, and frankly, a zoom would have been best.

Generally speaking, I am not too fussed about the Canon 200mm F2.8 L II USM's optical performance. It is not an expensive lens and its optical performance is in line with its price. What causes me grief is the lack image stabilization and whether I will use 200mm often enough to justify carrying a dedicated prime. From utilization perspective, zooms are more practical (for me) versus carrying a dedicated 200mm prime. On the flip side, I often get frustrated with optical trade offs in most zooms (decreased sharpness / resolution and less oomph in the bokeh), so I get itchy to have a prime instead. Back and forth it goes...

CONCLUSION

Over the years I have owned the 200mm F2.8 several times and sold it each time. At best, my opinion on the 200mm F2.8 L is mixed:

• If wide open performance is the most important consideration, I would pick the Canon 135mm F2 L USM. The 135L is sharper at F2, has more contrast and its bokeh has the wow factor.
• If debating between a Canon 135L and the 200L (F2.8), I would choose the 135L for its bokeh. Overall I think the 135L is a better lens, but the 135mm focal length can be awkward - too long indoors, not enough reach outdoors.
• The price difference between the new Canon 200mm F2 L IS and F2.8 L is huge, but... If I was hard-core portrait or sports shooter and earned a living from photography, I might be able to justify the 200mm F2 L.
• For travel use, the Canon 70-300mm F4-5.6 L IS is more practical. It offers a huge zoom range, is weather sealed and the image stabilization is excellent.
• If weight is not a concern, the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS Mark II is a stunning lens. Very sharp wide open, great bokeh and again - terrific image stabilization. If buying the 200mm F2.8 for “performance”, the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS II would my choice for its focus speed, zoom range (flexibility), sharpness and exemplary IS.
• If looking for a 200mm lens to use on the Sony A7II or Sony A7rII, after having tried around ten different 180-200mm primes, I would opt for the Canon 200mm in this case. It is a fairly light lens (for 200mm), performs well and offers auto focus a-la the Metabones T Smart Adapter.

The Canon 200mm F2.8 L II USM is not a "bad" lens. Its problem are the alternatives which tend to offer more value, and/or they will be used more often than dedicated 200mm prime. My kit usually was the 70-300mm F4.-5.6L IS for its reach and image stabilization, and then the Canon 135mm F2 L for its bokeh - great for outdoor portraits. If just wanting a long-ish prime portraits, bokeh and some added fun from time to time, the Canon 135mm F2 L USM would be my recommendation.