I check out some other photography review channels (e.g. the Beautiful Couple, the Hairy Guy, Gordon Laing, Kai and Lok) but Frost has become my go-to reviewer if I'm thinking about buying a lens. Nice, no-nonsense approach, no clickbait titles, and a consistent format so I know what I'll learn in every part of the review. Very nice work!
@@leventebandi Seems to me like there are a lot of photo channels that just describe products and post affiliate links without really reviewing the products. What are your some of your favorite channels?
Yes it is and was, I actually had two copies of this lens...as one was stolen out of my bag at a wedding. I used it for both indoor and outdoor sports and portraits. It along with the 1DS, 1DS Mark II and 1D Mark IIn were all amazing camera's, which I used in that 2002-2004 era? CPS was amazing back then as well and took really good care of me. They fixed my Canon 1D Mark IIn and my Canon 500mm f/4EL, which had become stuck together from their mounts being bent. You literally couldn't remove the camera from the lens. They had it back to me in less than 24 hours and didn't charge me a dime!!! They said it would've been around $1000 repair and they hadn't really ever had a repair that expensive or at least not often, but they mentioned one customer paid $850 at the time for replacing some lens elements in a grouping on his 400mm f/2.8L IS. I guess they just decided to be kind to me or took pity on me as I was only a kid really, I think 17 years old? I started getting paid for photography at age 13 and at age 15 years old I got to shoot the 2002 World Series of MLB, between the Angels and Giants. I did weddings, portraits, sports and even some breaking news. Now I am a photojournalist and I cover events, breaking news, and whatever else the news agency wants. Such as selling off our used gear, since I used to also work for a well known big camera store and I was trained to be a used department buyer and seller. Anyways I think the newspaper had a couple of these lenses as well for awhile. They actually went up in value I believe at the time. We tend to get 50% repairs and around cost for pro-grade gear! I got a new in box Canon 500mm f/4L IS for only $4499 USD plus taxes and they were selling for about $7500 USD, in 2005! I've been fortunate to hold and use a few exotics and I don't mean all super-tele's, but I have had or used every super-tele from both Nikon and Canon. However, what I really mean is rare and cool lenses, such as the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L, the Canon 50mm f/1.0L, the Nikon 13mm f/5.6 AiS lens and the Nikon 300mm f/2!!! Although the 200mm f/1.8 is quite rare, those other lenses are much more rare. Nice video! Brought back memories, both good and bad. Boy was I crying when someone stole my 200mm f/1.8 at the wedding I was covering. Luckily the bride and groom felt so bad for me and I was just a kid, so they bought me another one. They thankfully were wealthy and it was another nice gesture. Those were good old days lol.
Beware, most 200 1.8 don't have that fast autofocus speed as the unit tested here is a very late model. Most early to mid production versions uses a way slower autofocus speed. And even with the late model, that speed is achieved only with a small number of camera models (the R5-R6-R7 models are not in the list). That must be the reason why that focus example was made with a camera like 6D2 or 5D4.
Chris I think you’ve become probably the single greatest resource for newer photographers interested in older gear. It’s so difficult to find modern examples for older optics and your channel is by far the best resource for that very problem
I absolutely love this lens, some of my absolute favorite images have been captured with it. In fact I couldn’t imagine being without it so much that I have two copies, one which I use regularly and a second copy that I found brand new, never used which I keep as a backup.
I have been into photography since 1974 with my first SLR and the "kit" lens, 50mm f1.8 from Konica. Entered the Canon world in 1990 with the 10s (film) a camera most have not heard of but the first to have THREE focus points so you could track movement....lol. I had never heard of the Canon 200 f1.8 until 2010 when I was working at the Vancouver Winter Olympics. While I was inspecting an entrance the media used I noticed a guy with this Canon lens. I had to go talk to him as I knew he was going to be shooting the Curling event. We talked for a while and he let me peer through his camera/lens. Needless to say, I have been curious about this lens for some time now, thanks for the review. At the time, the guy was representing Sports Illustrated. The organizations had to pay big bucks to get their photographers into the Olympic venues, one reason SLR, DSLR, and mirrorless aren't allowed in involving the public.
Nice! I actually had two copies of this lens...as one was stolen out of my bag at a wedding. I used it for both indoor and outdoor sports and portraits. It along with the 1DS, 1DS Mark II and 1D Mark IIn were all amazing camera's, which I used in that 2002-2004 era? CPS was amazing back then as well and took really good care of me. They fixed my Canon 1D Mark IIn and my Canon 500mm f/4EL, which had become stuck together from their mounts being bent. You literally couldn't remove the camera from the lens. They had it back to me in less than 24 hours and didn't charge me a dime!!! They said it would've been around $1000 repair and they hadn't really ever had a repair that expensive or at least not often, but they mentioned one customer paid $850 at the time for replacing some lens elements in a grouping on his 400mm f/2.8L IS. I guess they just decided to be kind to me or took pity on me as I was only a kid really, I think 17 years old? I started getting paid for photography at age 13 and at age 15 years old I got to shoot the 2002 World Series of MLB, between the Angels and Giants. I did weddings, portraits, sports and even some breaking news. Now I am a photojournalist and I cover events, breaking news, and whatever else the news agency wants. Such as selling off our used gear, since I used to also work for a well known big camera store and I was trained to be a used department buyer and seller. Anyways I think the newspaper had a couple of these lenses as well for awhile. They actually went up in value I believe at the time. We tend to get 50% repairs and around cost for pro-grade gear! I got a new in box Canon 500mm f/4L IS for only $4499 USD plus taxes and they were selling for about $7500 USD, in 2005! I've been fortunate to hold and use a few exotics and I don't mean all super-tele's, but I have had or used every super-tele from both Nikon and Canon. However, what I really mean is rare and cool lenses, such as the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L, the Canon 50mm f/1.0L, the Nikon 13mm f/5.6 AiS lens and the Nikon 300mm f/2!!! Although the 200mm f/1.8 is quite rare, those other lenses are much more rare. Nice video! Brought back memories, both good and bad. Boy was I crying when someone stole my 200mm f/1.8 at the wedding I was covering. Luckily the bride and groom felt so bad for me and I was just a kid, so they bought me another one. They thankfully were wealthy and it was another nice gesture. Those were good old days lol. You're right though the Nikon and Canon 200mm f/2 lenses just are not the same!
This particular lens was popular with professional astronomers, they were used as "telescopes" for wide field exoplanet transit surveys. They were usually run wide open for this purpose, without an electronic interface to the lens (focusing was a bit of a process due to the focus by wire as you mention in your review, from memory it was done by swapping between the professional cooled CCD camera to check focus and a Canon EOS body to make changes to focus). I never got to mount one on my camera to try it for normal photography so your review was very interesting!
BTW the one lens I really miss from the current systems is the 200mm 2.8 prime. I guess the comapnies stopped making those as the 70-200 2.8 zooms got to a point in image quality that they can replace the prime, but I do love the compactness. I'm still using a minolta af apo 200mm 2.8 with the laea5 on my A7RV and it's still a lighter and smaller package despite being 30+ years old and having an adapter than a current zoom, and it has surprisingly great image quality, plenty sharp, only those old coatings are leave me wanting. With mirrorless optimized lens design and modern ssm motors such a lens would be a beautifully small package
I have this lens because I was lucky enough to get a good deal on it. Outside it's losing a lot of paint, but it's absolutely fantastic. I originally had it with my 5DIV, but when I transitioned to an R6, it gained a second life, especially thanks to eye AF, as dept of field is so narrow that aiming for the subject could still mean a soft face. I use it for indoor sports and it gives some unique results. You can't trust it 100% of the time for a job because it will still hit and miss often, but once I ensure my safe shots of an event, I use this one. It is heavy, so either go to the gym, use a monopod or think your shots well before lifting it up. I agree with Christopher that I would probably go for the "successor" 200mm F2, because if this one fails, I still don't know where I would send it to repair it.
I love theese tests and always before I buy a lens I see if it's "frosted" first. I can't escape my sense of difference in "razor sharpness", looking at the finest of details in senter of the 5 circular samples. Is it me or does Sony lenses combined with Sony sensors the ability to uncover the smallest of details in the smallest box towards the middle of the circular charts where's others having a hard time defining the thinnest of lines in the senter. I see a real differense where several lenses gets the razor sharp sign of approval. In this test the inner lines was rendered kinda mushy without separation between the finest lines. I know this does not count for the overall appeal of the image but the term micro sharpness pops into my mind
The magic drainpipe is not that expensive and still takes great images. I have one and I love it. Thanks for an EF lens review. My 5Ds is still my favorite camera.
Kudos for the MDP, for the pretty low price it can be found now, provided that is a sample in good shape, it’s a no brained for me, still a very very good lens, another example of something way ahead of its time
Roger Cicala from lens rentals has tested multiple copies of this lens and states it’s just as sharp as the newer f2 model. The newer lens of course is lighter, has better weight distribution (not so front heavy), newer coatings, IS and is probably still repairable. There are many that believe the 1.8 lens has a unique render and feel to the images (because of the leaded glass) that can’t be replicated by the replacement f2 lens, hence the original f1.8 legendary status.
Having had the luck to have both at the same time, I can confirm both statements (and my 200 F2 was also checked by Canon, so I know I had good copy). And there is something in the F1.8 rendering that just made the images a tad more pleasing to my eyes (very subtle and difficult to describe, but it was there). Having to part with one of the two, guess which I kept? :)
Cool! So I actually had two copies of this lens...as one was stolen out of my bag at a wedding. I used it for both indoor and outdoor sports and portraits. It along with the 1DS, 1DS Mark II and 1D Mark IIn were all amazing camera's, which I used in that 2002-2004 era? CPS was amazing back then as well and took really good care of me. They fixed my Canon 1D Mark IIn and my Canon 500mm f/4EL, which had become stuck together from their mounts being bent. You literally couldn't remove the camera from the lens. They had it back to me in less than 24 hours and didn't charge me a dime!!! They said it would've been around $1000 repair and they hadn't really ever had a repair that expensive or at least not often, but they mentioned one customer paid $850 at the time for replacing some lens elements in a grouping on his 400mm f/2.8L IS. I guess they just decided to be kind to me or took pity on me as I was only a kid really, I think 17 years old? I started getting paid for photography at age 13 and at age 15 years old I got to shoot the 2002 World Series of MLB, between the Angels and Giants. I did weddings, portraits, sports and even some breaking news. Now I am a photojournalist and I cover events, breaking news, and whatever else the news agency wants. Such as selling off our used gear, since I used to also work for a well known big camera store and I was trained to be a used department buyer and seller. Anyways I think the newspaper had a couple of these lenses as well for awhile. They actually went up in value I believe at the time. We tend to get 50% repairs and around cost for pro-grade gear! I got a new in box Canon 500mm f/4L IS for only $4499 USD plus taxes and they were selling for about $7500 USD, in 2005! I've been fortunate to hold and use a few exotics and I don't mean all super-tele's, but I have had or used every super-tele from both Nikon and Canon. However, what I really mean is rare and cool lenses, such as the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L, the Canon 50mm f/1.0L, the Nikon 13mm f/5.6 AiS lens and the Nikon 300mm f/2!!! Although the 200mm f/1.8 is quite rare, those other lenses are much more rare. Nice video! Brought back memories, both good and bad. Boy was I crying when someone stole my 200mm f/1.8 at the wedding I was covering. Luckily the bride and groom felt so bad for me and I was just a kid, so they bought me another one. They thankfully were wealthy and it was another nice gesture. Those were good old days lol.
I will never get rid of my ef 200 2.8L prime even though I don't own any Canon bodies anymore. Super underrated. AF is still lightning fast with the sigma adapter on Sony. It is very sharp and has it's own character compared to newer glass. I'd honestly send it to you to review if you want.
"Just to add a little info to this thread I would like to add; I bought a really nice copy of the 200 1.8 in early 2006 and used it very happily until the new lens came to market. being a responsible business person I didn't think twice about selling the old lens (200 1.8) and buying the new 200 2.0 IS. Well guess what, after about a year and a half of using the new lens extensively I was consistently reminded that something was missing. The IQ that I was used to was gone! There is no other way to put it, the new lens is not even close to the original, something is missing. Something about the design or the materials used make the original 200 1.8 is magical, there is nothing in the known universe to equal this lens and if you shoot one you will find out what I am trying so pathetically to explain. It stands alone, nothing that Canon, Nikon or Ziess has ever made comes close to this lens.
@@ayfj4572 could well be, I’ve now got again also the 200 F2 and I’m slowly comparing the two, the new lens is definitely a tad sharper at large apertures, but at F2.8 the difference is really visible only in the corners; curiously enough, the old lens performs better with the 1.4x TC with both lenses wide open, while at F4 they are the same. The F1.8 has definitely a cooler rendering vs the F2
I got lucky and got an almost mint copy of this lens from Japan. Love it, love the resulting images. Right now don't use it a lot 'cos it is a bit heavy to carry around without a monopod. I hope Canon goes crazy again and crates some extreme lenses like this one.
I’ve always wanted to own this lens. Still, after owning a first generation 300mm F/2.8L (no IS) and finding out its electronic motorized manual focus, I sold it right away. I avoid all of the first generation super telephotos now. My friend's first generation 300mm AF motor died, and others are reporting their auto focus motors are starting to die out. And since it’s manual electronic focus, when that motor goes, the lens is done for. Getting parts is extremely difficult, and getting the motor replaced by someone is also difficult to find. They’re amazing lenses, but for actual day to day use, I’d avoid them. Canon ensured the next generation (any of them with IS) has a direct mechanical focus so it can keep going even if the AF motor dies and parts are gone.
I noticed that too, from the complete image seems that the top left corner was significantly fuzzier. And at 6:45 in the R7 test seems even worse. I thought about a misalignment in the lenses, but Chris didn't mentioned.
One of a better optics ever made, with lots of character to give away, it has even more esoteric brother which reach to 300mm, but that lens was unfortunately only technology exercise for one and only purpose.
always surprised when i see your greek book open. (i'm a Greek, if you need help with the translation let me know. Basically this is old-greek, a bit tough to understand even for us)
For those people interested in what exactly is going on when Christopher inevitably states "gets soft due to the effect of diffraction" there is this interesting video "How a Lens Creates an Image" about the physics of lens design by Huygens Optics. th-cam.com/video/SS2AbZVdk2A/w-d-xo.html
My favorite lens by far and the one I’ll never part with, neither its F2 successor nor the Nikon version have the same rendering, while the Zeiss Sonnar is not as sharp and has quite a dreadful bokeh at mid-distance. This is really the “lens to rule them all” 😊
@@NikosPer They are indeed two amazing lenses as well of course, but I’ve always found them somehow “flatter” straight out of camera vs the Eye of Sauron (especially the Nikon). Of course in capable hands all those lenses can yield incredible results ;)
@@admiralvontirpitz7115 I know what tou talking about.... Ken Wheeler talked about old lenses being "alive" in comparison with modern super sharp flat glass....and all this is due to less glass in older lenses + lead or even radioactive materials, since the ban of radioactive materials inside them, manufacturers had to put more glass/groups and coatings that took the life out of all those lenses.
Hello, what the best way to add ND filter on this lens? 48mm drop in filter is the way, has anybody found such a filter? I only see vintage 48mm drop in CPL so far. Thank you
I've been looking at the example images and I find that this particular version might not be the sharpest across. (look at the top left corner, and how it feels differently sharp on the bottom right vs the center) I have mine and from my experience even on an R5, it is razor sharp. Interestingly other ones that I've seen also have a bit of a scatter in how absolutely good they are. Weird, because mine is an early series one with a serial of less than 1000, and you'd guess they improved it by later on
Most awesome of this lens is full body portrait at F1.8. You can get similar or even better bokeh from 85/1.2 for half body portrait. You can only get the creamy bokeh by 200/1.8 for full body. At the full body distance, 85/1.2 has no more magic. 200/2 is less impressive.
Sometimes I am confused by your opinions. The image on f2.8 is less sharp than f11, but you say that image on f11 is less sharp because of the difraction, which is clearly not the case by looking at the photos. F11 is clearly sharper and more detailed than f2.8 so I am not sure about your visual judgment.
@@TomeRodrigo yeah i just noticed that but i guess hes still merely saying that the effect of diffraction starts to takes place at around f11, which does not necessarily state that the sharpness of f11 is softened more than the sharpness of f2.8
Film era lenses are engendered in a time when "electronic lens corrections" were not available, hence in my view more well engineered, than digital modern examples. But therefore the old ones are also usually heavier and larger. Impressive results !
Hard to justify investing into ancient glass. High risk of mold and internal mechanism problems. To me, the f2 seems a much safer choice. The image stabilisation alone is enough to tip the scales, let alone better sharpness and weight savings.
This lens works with the R7 really well and you can use extenders. But the quality with extender is really bad, way worse than what you can achieve with the 200 f2.
What a great lens, I'd love to get this or it's successor one day, but perhaps Canon will soon produce an RF version. Ideally I'd like them to make a RF 70-200mm f/2 zoom which would be the ultimate portrait/close action sports zoom and could share many components with their RF 100-300mm f/2.8. Another good review Christopher but I'd really like you to drop the background music which I find irritating and distracting.
I wish I knew. I am sure it has taken some amazing photos like how the Nikkor 105mm f2.5 AIS took that National Geographic Afghan Girl photo. @@arkansasoutpost
In the video to the 200 f/2 you speak about focus breathing (Link). Does the 200 f/1.8 also have focus breathing? th-cam.com/video/Qd2DZWDUuHA/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the review, I agree completely having tested both the 1.8 version, and later the f2.0 version. The latter I decided to keep, and it has stayed with me for some years now. I even use it with an adapter (Techart TCX-01) on my Hasselblad X2D, and there is almost no vignetting even on the larger sensor. As a bonus IS works perfectly on that camera, thus I have both IBIS and IS to stabilise the images. If you're interested, you can find my review on that camera here: th-cam.com/video/n8-RMHWJ7kI/w-d-xo.html - Greetings to your awesome channel, best regards, Bo
Lead has nothing to do with it, it was discontinued because the cost was too expensive. There are lenses with grown crystals in the design. I’ve had it for almost 12 years now and it’s funny to talk about lead, this is nonsense...
I check out some other photography review channels (e.g. the Beautiful Couple, the Hairy Guy, Gordon Laing, Kai and Lok) but Frost has become my go-to reviewer if I'm thinking about buying a lens. Nice, no-nonsense approach, no clickbait titles, and a consistent format so I know what I'll learn in every part of the review. Very nice work!
There are very few actually good photography channels
@@leventebandi Seems to me like there are a lot of photo channels that just describe products and post affiliate links without really reviewing the products. What are your some of your favorite channels?
@@arkansasoutpostHis weak spot is still a m43 system. If Chris start touching that mount, it will be a complete guidance of modern lens.
I must have contributed about 10 views to videos of lenses I'm comparing. Super easy to compare the charts and even bokeh tests.
Very true!!
What a masterpiece! Especially autofocus speed threw me off for a lens that is 35 years old and still focusing faster than most of my modern optics🤣
Yes it is and was, I actually had two copies of this lens...as one was stolen out of my bag at a wedding. I used it for both indoor and outdoor sports and portraits. It along with the 1DS, 1DS Mark II and 1D Mark IIn were all amazing camera's, which I used in that 2002-2004 era? CPS was amazing back then as well and took really good care of me. They fixed my Canon 1D Mark IIn and my Canon 500mm f/4EL, which had become stuck together from their mounts being bent. You literally couldn't remove the camera from the lens. They had it back to me in less than 24 hours and didn't charge me a dime!!! They said it would've been around $1000 repair and they hadn't really ever had a repair that expensive or at least not often, but they mentioned one customer paid $850 at the time for replacing some lens elements in a grouping on his 400mm f/2.8L IS. I guess they just decided to be kind to me or took pity on me as I was only a kid really, I think 17 years old? I started getting paid for photography at age 13 and at age 15 years old I got to shoot the 2002 World Series of MLB, between the Angels and Giants. I did weddings, portraits, sports and even some breaking news. Now I am a photojournalist and I cover events, breaking news, and whatever else the news agency wants. Such as selling off our used gear, since I used to also work for a well known big camera store and I was trained to be a used department buyer and seller.
Anyways I think the newspaper had a couple of these lenses as well for awhile. They actually went up in value I believe at the time. We tend to get 50% repairs and around cost for pro-grade gear! I got a new in box Canon 500mm f/4L IS for only $4499 USD plus taxes and they were selling for about $7500 USD, in 2005! I've been fortunate to hold and use a few exotics and I don't mean all super-tele's, but I have had or used every super-tele from both Nikon and Canon. However, what I really mean is rare and cool lenses, such as the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L, the Canon 50mm f/1.0L, the Nikon 13mm f/5.6 AiS lens and the Nikon 300mm f/2!!! Although the 200mm f/1.8 is quite rare, those other lenses are much more rare. Nice video! Brought back memories, both good and bad. Boy was I crying when someone stole my 200mm f/1.8 at the wedding I was covering. Luckily the bride and groom felt so bad for me and I was just a kid, so they bought me another one. They thankfully were wealthy and it was another nice gesture. Those were good old days lol.
Beware, most 200 1.8 don't have that fast autofocus speed as the unit tested here is a very late model. Most early to mid production versions uses a way slower autofocus speed. And even with the late model, that speed is achieved only with a small number of camera models (the R5-R6-R7 models are not in the list). That must be the reason why that focus example was made with a camera like 6D2 or 5D4.
Chris I think you’ve become probably the single greatest resource for newer photographers interested in older gear. It’s so difficult to find modern examples for older optics and your channel is by far the best resource for that very problem
I absolutely love this lens, some of my absolute favorite images have been captured with it. In fact I couldn’t imagine being without it so much that I have two copies, one which I use regularly and a second copy that I found brand new, never used which I keep as a backup.
Nice to see a modern test of an old lens as always!
Why is your comment publ8shed 8 months ago
shh don’t tell anyone I have a Time Machine
@@shaocaholica 🤨🤨
🤣@@shaocaholica
Nice to see an old comment on a modern video
I have been into photography since 1974 with my first SLR and the "kit" lens, 50mm f1.8 from Konica. Entered the Canon world in 1990 with the 10s (film) a camera most have not heard of but the first to have THREE focus points so you could track movement....lol. I had never heard of the Canon 200 f1.8 until 2010 when I was working at the Vancouver Winter Olympics. While I was inspecting an entrance the media used I noticed a guy with this Canon lens. I had to go talk to him as I knew he was going to be shooting the Curling event. We talked for a while and he let me peer through his camera/lens. Needless to say, I have been curious about this lens for some time now, thanks for the review. At the time, the guy was representing Sports Illustrated. The organizations had to pay big bucks to get their photographers into the Olympic venues, one reason SLR, DSLR, and mirrorless aren't allowed in involving the public.
Wow. That's a futureproof lens. Super sharp at 45mm, and still focuses better than my age matched lenses.
Great an example of how great glass doesnt go bad!
This and 50mm f/1.0 are the legendary canon lens
Agreed!
Rf 50 f1.2 is going to be legendary too...
I own this lens. I use it a lot for stage & event photos. Plus some outdoor portraits. It’s been worth purchasing.
Nice! I actually had two copies of this lens...as one was stolen out of my bag at a wedding. I used it for both indoor and outdoor sports and portraits. It along with the 1DS, 1DS Mark II and 1D Mark IIn were all amazing camera's, which I used in that 2002-2004 era? CPS was amazing back then as well and took really good care of me. They fixed my Canon 1D Mark IIn and my Canon 500mm f/4EL, which had become stuck together from their mounts being bent. You literally couldn't remove the camera from the lens. They had it back to me in less than 24 hours and didn't charge me a dime!!! They said it would've been around $1000 repair and they hadn't really ever had a repair that expensive or at least not often, but they mentioned one customer paid $850 at the time for replacing some lens elements in a grouping on his 400mm f/2.8L IS. I guess they just decided to be kind to me or took pity on me as I was only a kid really, I think 17 years old? I started getting paid for photography at age 13 and at age 15 years old I got to shoot the 2002 World Series of MLB, between the Angels and Giants. I did weddings, portraits, sports and even some breaking news.
Now I am a photojournalist and I cover events, breaking news, and whatever else the news agency wants. Such as selling off our used gear, since I used to also work for a well known big camera store and I was trained to be a used department buyer and seller. Anyways I think the newspaper had a couple of these lenses as well for awhile. They actually went up in value I believe at the time. We tend to get 50% repairs and around cost for pro-grade gear! I got a new in box Canon 500mm f/4L IS for only $4499 USD plus taxes and they were selling for about $7500 USD, in 2005! I've been fortunate to hold and use a few exotics and I don't mean all super-tele's, but I have had or used every super-tele from both Nikon and Canon. However, what I really mean is rare and cool lenses, such as the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L, the Canon 50mm f/1.0L, the Nikon 13mm f/5.6 AiS lens and the Nikon 300mm f/2!!! Although the 200mm f/1.8 is quite rare, those other lenses are much more rare. Nice video! Brought back memories, both good and bad. Boy was I crying when someone stole my 200mm f/1.8 at the wedding I was covering. Luckily the bride and groom felt so bad for me and I was just a kid, so they bought me another one. They thankfully were wealthy and it was another nice gesture. Those were good old days lol. You're right though the Nikon and Canon 200mm f/2 lenses just are not the same!
This particular lens was popular with professional astronomers, they were used as "telescopes" for wide field exoplanet transit surveys. They were usually run wide open for this purpose, without an electronic interface to the lens (focusing was a bit of a process due to the focus by wire as you mention in your review, from memory it was done by swapping between the professional cooled CCD camera to check focus and a Canon EOS body to make changes to focus). I never got to mount one on my camera to try it for normal photography so your review was very interesting!
As a Canon shooter, I was over the moon, with this review!!
BTW the one lens I really miss from the current systems is the 200mm 2.8 prime. I guess the comapnies stopped making those as the 70-200 2.8 zooms got to a point in image quality that they can replace the prime, but I do love the compactness. I'm still using a minolta af apo 200mm 2.8 with the laea5 on my A7RV and it's still a lighter and smaller package despite being 30+ years old and having an adapter than a current zoom, and it has surprisingly great image quality, plenty sharp, only those old coatings are leave me wanting. With mirrorless optimized lens design and modern ssm motors such a lens would be a beautifully small package
This is one of the few actually good photography channels on TH-cam. Thanks!
I have this lens because I was lucky enough to get a good deal on it. Outside it's losing a lot of paint, but it's absolutely fantastic. I originally had it with my 5DIV, but when I transitioned to an R6, it gained a second life, especially thanks to eye AF, as dept of field is so narrow that aiming for the subject could still mean a soft face. I use it for indoor sports and it gives some unique results. You can't trust it 100% of the time for a job because it will still hit and miss often, but once I ensure my safe shots of an event, I use this one. It is heavy, so either go to the gym, use a monopod or think your shots well before lifting it up.
I agree with Christopher that I would probably go for the "successor" 200mm F2, because if this one fails, I still don't know where I would send it to repair it.
Old legendary great white lenses 😊
I love theese tests and always before I buy a lens I see if it's "frosted" first. I can't escape my sense of difference in "razor sharpness", looking at the finest of details in senter of the 5 circular samples. Is it me or does Sony lenses combined with Sony sensors the ability to uncover the smallest of details in the smallest box towards the middle of the circular charts where's others having a hard time defining the thinnest of lines in the senter. I see a real differense where several lenses gets the razor sharp sign of approval. In this test the inner lines was rendered kinda mushy without separation between the finest lines. I know this does not count for the overall appeal of the image but the term micro sharpness pops into my mind
The magic drainpipe is not that expensive and still takes great images. I have one and I love it. Thanks for an EF lens review. My 5Ds is still my favorite camera.
Kudos for the MDP, for the pretty low price it can be found now, provided that is a sample in good shape, it’s a no brained for me, still a very very good lens, another example of something way ahead of its time
Roger Cicala from lens rentals has tested multiple copies of this lens and states it’s just as sharp as the newer f2 model. The newer lens of course is lighter, has better weight distribution (not so front heavy), newer coatings, IS and is probably still repairable. There are many that believe the 1.8 lens has a unique render and feel to the images (because of the leaded glass) that can’t be replicated by the replacement f2 lens, hence the original f1.8 legendary status.
Having had the luck to have both at the same time, I can confirm both statements (and my 200 F2 was also checked by Canon, so I know I had good copy). And there is something in the F1.8 rendering that just made the images a tad more pleasing to my eyes (very subtle and difficult to describe, but it was there). Having to part with one of the two, guess which I kept? :)
Cool! So I actually had two copies of this lens...as one was stolen out of my bag at a wedding. I used it for both indoor and outdoor sports and portraits. It along with the 1DS, 1DS Mark II and 1D Mark IIn were all amazing camera's, which I used in that 2002-2004 era? CPS was amazing back then as well and took really good care of me. They fixed my Canon 1D Mark IIn and my Canon 500mm f/4EL, which had become stuck together from their mounts being bent. You literally couldn't remove the camera from the lens. They had it back to me in less than 24 hours and didn't charge me a dime!!! They said it would've been around $1000 repair and they hadn't really ever had a repair that expensive or at least not often, but they mentioned one customer paid $850 at the time for replacing some lens elements in a grouping on his 400mm f/2.8L IS. I guess they just decided to be kind to me or took pity on me as I was only a kid really, I think 17 years old? I started getting paid for photography at age 13 and at age 15 years old I got to shoot the 2002 World Series of MLB, between the Angels and Giants. I did weddings, portraits, sports and even some breaking news. Now I am a photojournalist and I cover events, breaking news, and whatever else the news agency wants. Such as selling off our used gear, since I used to also work for a well known big camera store and I was trained to be a used department buyer and seller. Anyways I think the newspaper had a couple of these lenses as well for awhile. They actually went up in value I believe at the time. We tend to get 50% repairs and around cost for pro-grade gear! I got a new in box Canon 500mm f/4L IS for only $4499 USD plus taxes and they were selling for about $7500 USD, in 2005! I've been fortunate to hold and use a few exotics and I don't mean all super-tele's, but I have had or used every super-tele from both Nikon and Canon. However, what I really mean is rare and cool lenses, such as the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L, the Canon 50mm f/1.0L, the Nikon 13mm f/5.6 AiS lens and the Nikon 300mm f/2!!! Although the 200mm f/1.8 is quite rare, those other lenses are much more rare. Nice video! Brought back memories, both good and bad. Boy was I crying when someone stole my 200mm f/1.8 at the wedding I was covering. Luckily the bride and groom felt so bad for me and I was just a kid, so they bought me another one. They thankfully were wealthy and it was another nice gesture. Those were good old days lol.
Thank you for your adequate understanding.For more than 10 years of using this glass, I HAVE NEVER REGRETTED ANYTHING.🥰
What fun. I enjoy my EF200 f/2.8 II quite a bit. Same size as their EF 70-200 f/4
Most underrated lens ever. I will never get rid of mine and I don't even use Canon bodies anymore.
Thanks Chris, great to see a new review of this famous lens on the R5.
WOW!!! Just plain Wow!!! Lucky you!!! Nice Video 👍
I will never get rid of my ef 200 2.8L prime even though I don't own any Canon bodies anymore. Super underrated. AF is still lightning fast with the sigma adapter on Sony. It is very sharp and has it's own character compared to newer glass. I'd honestly send it to you to review if you want.
Hopefully Canon will release the RF improved version of that lens. Really looking forward to it.
Chris we need you to review EF 1200mm f/5.6
I can imagine this lens must have taken pictures of a lot of movie stars and national leaders over the last 40 years.
I wonder how it compares to the 200mm F2. I can't imagine by that much considering its only a 3rd of a stop difference
I always enjoy these reviews, not least as we clearly live in the same area and I recognise many of the locations 😁
This is spectacular Lens
"Just to add a little info to this thread I would like to add;
I bought a really nice copy of the 200 1.8 in early 2006 and used it very happily until the new lens came to market. being a responsible business person I didn't think twice about selling the old lens (200 1.8) and buying the new 200 2.0 IS.
Well guess what, after about a year and a half of using the new lens extensively I was consistently reminded that something was missing. The IQ that I was used to was gone!
There is no other way to put it, the new lens is not even close to the original, something is missing. Something about the design or the materials used make the original 200 1.8 is magical, there is nothing in the known universe to equal this lens and if you shoot one you will find out what I am trying so pathetically to explain. It stands alone, nothing that Canon, Nikon or Ziess has ever made comes close to this lens.
Totally agree, same here 😊
IMHO it's the leaded glass that was used in the 1.8 that is now banned.
@@ayfj4572 could well be, I’ve now got again also the 200 F2 and I’m slowly comparing the two, the new lens is definitely a tad sharper at large apertures, but at F2.8 the difference is really visible only in the corners; curiously enough, the old lens performs better with the 1.4x TC with both lenses wide open, while at F4 they are the same. The F1.8 has definitely a cooler rendering vs the F2
5:46 the top left corner looks noticably less sharp than the bottom right. Is that a real effect? Is the lens decentred?
Very cool lens! Wasn’t aware a 200mm f1.8 existed 😮
Tnak You
I got lucky and got an almost mint copy of this lens from Japan. Love it, love the resulting images. Right now don't use it a lot 'cos it is a bit heavy to carry around without a monopod. I hope Canon goes crazy again and crates some extreme lenses like this one.
What a sublime lens. Thank you for your nice review.
The dream lens!!!!
Your next beast to test would be te Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM, I'm sure you would love to test it.
Absolutely wonderful portrait lens.
No coma? Could be good for astro on a sky tracker, I think. Cheers.
Why would you need a filter thread when it's drop-in filter slot is there already 🤔
I’ve always wanted to own this lens. Still, after owning a first generation 300mm F/2.8L (no IS) and finding out its electronic motorized manual focus, I sold it right away. I avoid all of the first generation super telephotos now. My friend's first generation 300mm AF motor died, and others are reporting their auto focus motors are starting to die out. And since it’s manual electronic focus, when that motor goes, the lens is done for. Getting parts is extremely difficult, and getting the motor replaced by someone is also difficult to find. They’re amazing lenses, but for actual day to day use, I’d avoid them. Canon ensured the next generation (any of them with IS) has a direct mechanical focus so it can keep going even if the AF motor dies and parts are gone.
Do you still have the lens that has the AF motor died?
Excellent review, thank you
My dream lens
I own (and Love) this lens. The Mrs. looks great. You are a lucky man.
Thanks, Christopher!
What's going on with the top left corner at f1.8? @5:47
centering was quite a issue there, some was pretty much usable only on one side...
I noticed that too, from the complete image seems that the top left corner was significantly fuzzier. And at 6:45 in the R7 test seems even worse. I thought about a misalignment in the lenses, but Chris didn't mentioned.
Was surprised he didn't mention it, as I found it quite obvious. It would have been interesting hearing his take on it!
One of a better optics ever made, with lots of character to give away, it has even more esoteric brother which reach to 300mm, but that lens was unfortunately only technology exercise for one and only purpose.
Nice as always. Regarding Bokeh: there was (maybe) a change in aperture depending on serial number. What serial number or range had yours?
Hi cris very good review. please do review on fujifilm 8-16 f2.8. Thanks
insane lens
always surprised when i see your greek book open. (i'm a Greek, if you need help with the translation let me know. Basically this is old-greek, a bit tough to understand even for us)
Wow, the corners wide open have better IQ than the center of most newest lenses today! Insane!
Beautiful pictures, thanks for another nice review! Just pity to get to know you are not a big LOTR fan :)))
For those people interested in what exactly is going on when Christopher inevitably states "gets soft due to the effect of diffraction" there is this interesting video "How a Lens Creates an Image" about the physics of lens design by Huygens Optics.
th-cam.com/video/SS2AbZVdk2A/w-d-xo.html
Yes, really good channel! Very technical, which I love, but it's not everyone's cup of tea.
I had their fast 600mm. You really need to bring a lackey and a table with you wirh that monster. I had a Canon 2x extender on it.
I have a copy where a lens element came loose, who can fix it?
My favorite lens by far and the one I’ll never part with, neither its F2 successor nor the Nikon version have the same rendering, while the Zeiss Sonnar is not as sharp and has quite a dreadful bokeh at mid-distance. This is really the “lens to rule them all” 😊
😮 I thought both f2 and the Nikon were top notch. I ve only seen examples in flickr and was amazed
@@NikosPer They are indeed two amazing lenses as well of course, but I’ve always found them somehow “flatter” straight out of camera vs the Eye of Sauron (especially the Nikon). Of course in capable hands all those lenses can yield incredible results ;)
@@admiralvontirpitz7115 I know what tou talking about.... Ken Wheeler talked about old lenses being "alive" in comparison with modern super sharp flat glass....and all this is due to less glass in older lenses + lead or even radioactive materials, since the ban of radioactive materials inside them, manufacturers had to put more glass/groups and coatings that took the life out of all those lenses.
I need this for my wedding photography, where to buy?
Lens and sensor the most important ! the rest is gadgets aka Extras like AF etcetera !
how would compare this to the Sigma Art 105mm f1.4? which would you prefer?
Hello, what the best way to add ND filter on this lens? 48mm drop in filter is the way, has anybody found such a filter? I only see vintage 48mm drop in CPL so far. Thank you
If using apse Fuji x camera, the image quality, still good or not quite ?
I've been looking at the example images and I find that this particular version might not be the sharpest across. (look at the top left corner, and how it feels differently sharp on the bottom right vs the center)
I have mine and from my experience even on an R5, it is razor sharp. Interestingly other ones that I've seen also have a bit of a scatter in how absolutely good they are. Weird, because mine is an early series one with a serial of less than 1000, and you'd guess they improved it by later on
Why not test it on an R7?
Most awesome of this lens is full body portrait at F1.8. You can get similar or even better bokeh from 85/1.2 for half body portrait. You can only get the creamy bokeh by 200/1.8 for full body. At the full body distance, 85/1.2 has no more magic. 200/2 is less impressive.
Never seen this lens in such pristine condiction :o.
wow, a big lens😍😍👏👏
Is this a camera lens? Or an inert artillery shell? 😅
Sometimes I am confused by your opinions. The image on f2.8 is less sharp than f11, but you say that image on f11 is less sharp because of the difraction, which is clearly not the case by looking at the photos. F11 is clearly sharper and more detailed than f2.8 so I am not sure about your visual judgment.
he literally said the softness begins to creep in when you further stop it down to f16
@@futoenjoyer He also mentioned what I said in the comment, probably in the different part of the video that you are mentioning.
@@TomeRodrigo yeah i just noticed that but i guess hes still merely saying that the effect of diffraction starts to takes place at around f11, which does not necessarily state that the sharpness of f11 is softened more than the sharpness of f2.8
What a beefy boi that lens is, the image quality is very surprising for the age, Canon really did a good job on this one.
Lens is a beast. Great review. Canon to bring out an rf zoom version lol
Cool lens
A very interesting lens
Film era lenses are engendered in a time when "electronic lens corrections" were not available, hence in my view more well engineered, than digital modern examples.
But therefore the old ones are also usually heavier and larger.
Impressive results !
@11:17 the wife enrager lol 😅
Hard to justify investing into ancient glass. High risk of mold and internal mechanism problems. To me, the f2 seems a much safer choice. The image stabilisation alone is enough to tip the scales, let alone better sharpness and weight savings.
The kings
Why it's called eye of Sauron ??
Arwen be flapping her eyelashes at you when you be carrying Eye of Sauron...
Imagine Canon building an RF 200mm F1.8. It's be even more epic than the RF 28-70mm F2.0.
Does this lens work with Canon r7, and second question, does it works with extender x1, 4 and x2, thanks for your answer 😊
This lens works with the R7 really well and you can use extenders. But the quality with extender is really bad, way worse than what you can achieve with the 200 f2.
This lens does NOT work with extenders! The quality degrades just too much, it was a great dissapointment when I got this lens....... @@OtusEzylryb
What a great lens, I'd love to get this or it's successor one day, but perhaps Canon will soon produce an RF version. Ideally I'd like them to make a RF 70-200mm f/2 zoom which would be the ultimate portrait/close action sports zoom and could share many components with their RF 100-300mm f/2.8.
Another good review Christopher but I'd really like you to drop the background music which I find irritating and distracting.
Any guess of the MOST FAMOUS Photo ever taken with this lens?
I wish I knew. I am sure it has taken some amazing photos like how the Nikkor 105mm f2.5 AIS took that National Geographic Afghan Girl photo. @@arkansasoutpost
Lens is worth more than my life.
WOW
Now that you have tested it, I truly wish you'll be into the lord of the rings someday 😅😊❤ Love from India
In the video to the 200 f/2 you speak about focus breathing (Link). Does the 200 f/1.8 also have focus breathing?
th-cam.com/video/Qd2DZWDUuHA/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the review, I agree completely having tested both the 1.8 version, and later the f2.0 version. The latter I decided to keep, and it has stayed with me for some years now. I even use it with an adapter (Techart TCX-01) on my Hasselblad X2D, and there is almost no vignetting even on the larger sensor. As a bonus IS works perfectly on that camera, thus I have both IBIS and IS to stabilise the images. If you're interested, you can find my review on that camera here: th-cam.com/video/n8-RMHWJ7kI/w-d-xo.html - Greetings to your awesome channel, best regards, Bo
subject seperation tunred to: yes
I wonder if lens are just as collectable as Rolex
Do a review of the Nikon 300mm f2....just kidding. you probably wouldn't be able to find one.
Lead has nothing to do with it, it was discontinued because the cost was too expensive. There are lenses with grown crystals in the design. I’ve had it for almost 12 years now and it’s funny to talk about lead, this is nonsense...
why is everyone reviewing this lens these days saying that they're not into LotR?
I presume at f1.8 this is the consumer version. I’ll wait for the f1.2 pro version😂.
LOL " indoor sports photography " as we see a little lamb. Just what...?
With that much focus breathing you might as well call it a 200-210mm f/1.8
I shot with this and the eye control on the EOS 5 in 1995.... You're a bit late to the game
1🎉
technology and modernity doesn't necessarily mean its better, look at this lens. no modern lens matches this.
First ❤