Canon 200 1.8 L

Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Ever since I got to use one of these beauties at the Mac's major midget hockey tournament several years ago Iv dreamed of getting one for my own. I know this is a nikon forum but since Im shooting both Canon and Nikon these days and others can lust after non nikon glass I thought , hey why not.

The Canon 200 1.8 is still the fastest 200mm ever built to my knowledge. And the fact that it originally came in both FD and the new EF also makes it kind of unique. I notice that Keh has a couple of these incredible lenses for a nice price. Even if you are a die hard nikon user you got to give Canon there due. The Canon 200 1.8 L was/is one of a kind.

I still love my Nikkor 200 2 ED-IF AIS and from everything Iv seen the new Nikkor 200 2 VR is an incredible in every way.
Lead glass aside, for shear speed, nothing has bested the Canon 200 1.8 L.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Going from 1.8/2.? .Yes thats always seemed a little funny to me. I thought nikon was the only company that goes backwards:wink:. From what I can gather, sticking all the extra glass to give it IS/VR doesn't do anything for it's light gathering/ bokkeh abilities(The Nikkor 200 2 VR not withstanding:smile:) I wonder if using non lead glass in the new Canon 200 2 IS L version had anything to do with the loss of speed.
 
L

LSSE

Guest
Going from 1.8/2.? .Yes thats always seemed a little funny to me. I thought nikon was the only company that goes backwards:wink:. From what I can gather, sticking all the extra glass to give it IS/VR doesn't do anything for it's light gathering/ bokkeh abilities(The Nikkor 200 2 VR not withstanding:smile:) I wonder if using non lead glass in the new Canon 200 2 IS L version had anything to do with the loss of speed.

it's just the end of an era. nikon and canon used to do crazy lenses just because they could. I saw that monster nikon 1200-1700 zoom posted the other day and I'm sure nobody will ever make anything like it again. both companies seems more practical and mature nowadays. with high iso looking so clean, f/2 on those prime lenses was just as marketeable yet cheaper to make so it makes sense both canon and nikon chose f/2 as the future for that particular model.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
1,485
Location
Florida
The Canon 200 1.8 is still the fastest 200mm ever built to my knowledge. And the fact that it originally came in both FD and the new EF also makes it kind of unique. I notice that Keh has a couple of these incredible lenses for a nice price. Even if you are a die hard nikon user you got to give Canon there due. The Canon 200 1.8 L was/is one of a kind.

Hmmm, you need to take that with a grain of salt, not sure that the F/1.8 necessarily translates to actual light transmission, probably one of the reasons why canon went to F/2.0.

I know it's highly speculative , but I have used Nikkor lenses marked as F/1.4 and F/2.0 and their actual T/stop was closer to F/1.8 or F/2.2 respectively.

I really wish these high end lenses would be measured in T/stops
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
4,553
... I know it's highly speculative , but I have used Nikkor lenses marked as F/1.4 and F/2.0 and their actual T/stop was closer to F/1.8 or F/2.2 respectively.

I really wish these high end lenses would be measured in T/stops

Is that really necessary or beneficial nowadays? The actual geometric f-stop determines the depth of field. Modern cameras use TTL (through the lens) metering, so no matter what figures are printed on the lens barrel, the meter takes into account the T-stop.

If one uses incident light meter, one can solve the t-stop discrepancy so much faster and easier with a couple of test shots and histogram, than one ever could with film.

T-stops were never in widespread use in still photography, the typical 1/6 or 1/3 stop transmission loss (present in all lenses) has not been a major obstacle.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Interesting, Iv heard that before. When I was researching my Nikkor 300 2 ED-IF AIS I found one that had been converted to a Cini mount and t-stops. I believe the Nikkot 300 f2 ED-IF AIS was T-stop 2.2. It would be interesting to know the real light transmission of the glass we ***-u-me is f 1.0, f1.2 ,f1.4 ,f1.8, f2.0. ...OO
What I do know is the Nikkor 200 2 ED-IF AIS lets in the same amount of light as my Nikkor 300 2.0 ED-IF AIS. So are they both T-stop 2.2?

As far as the Canon 200 1.8 L i pretty sure it was a 1.8 judging by the shutter speeds I was able to use over the Nikkor 180 2.8 ED AIS I was using along side it. But it was several years ago. Anyway, if what your saying is true maybe none of are lenses are the actual light gathering abilities we think they have. Which is interesting. Anyone know how to measure a T-stop?
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
1,485
Location
Florida
Is that really necessary or beneficial nowadays?

The actual geometric f-stop determines the depth of field. Modern cameras use TTL (through the lens) metering, so no matter what figures are printed on the lens barrel, the meter takes into account the T-stop.

If one uses incident light meter, one can solve the t-stop discrepancy so much faster and easier with a couple of test shots and histogram, than one ever could with film.

T-stops were never in widespread use in still photography, the typical 1/6 or 1/3 stop transmission loss (present in all lenses) has not been a major obstacle.

Necessity is a personal matter, what's necessary for me may not be for someone else, but if you state that the camera already measures the T/Stop in order to get the right exposure, then I'd guess a simple menu option to display it would be beneficial to some of us.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
4,553
... As far as the Canon 200 1.8 L i pretty sure it was a 1.8 judging by the shutter speeds I was able to use over the Nikkor 180 2.8 ED AIS I was using along side it....

Unless the Nikkor also has a t-stop 1/3 lower than the indicated f-stop.... The shutter speeds would match, if the Canon had a t-stop of 2.0 and the Nikkor 3.2. Sorry, just joking, couldn't resist. :tongue:

How about comparing the camera spot meter with the specific lens, and a reflected-light hand holdable meter? Metering off a grey card with various lenses should be able to go down to 1/3 stop accuracy. And zoom lenses are the usual suspects... they tend to have the most transmission losses.
 
P

Post215

Guest
Ever since I got to use one of these beauties at the Mac's major midget hockey tournament several years ago Iv dreamed of getting one for my own. I know this is a nikon forum but since Im shooting both Canon and Nikon these days and others can lust after non nikon glass I thought , hey why not.

The Canon 200 1.8 is still the fastest 200mm ever built to my knowledge. And the fact that it originally came in both FD and the new EF also makes it kind of unique. I notice that Keh has a couple of these incredible lenses for a nice price. Even if you are a die hard nikon user you got to give Canon there due. The Canon 200 1.8 L was/is one of a kind.

I still love my Nikkor 200 2 ED-IF AIS and from everything Iv seen the new Nikkor 200 2 VR is an incredible in every way.
Lead glass aside, for shear speed, nothing has bested the Canon 200 1.8 L.

I'm not sure I'd be wasting money with Canon's 200/1.8 when a perfectly good 200/2 Nikkor and a $35 F/EOS adapter ring works just fine on an EOS body. I did it with my 1D Mk III and Nikkors of 500mm and wider. Can't beat a Nikkor on an EOS, well at least till the D3 was introduced.
 
L

LSSE

Guest
I am too busy trying to keep up with what I have, much less what someone else offers..

it's history anyways. today it's all f/2 for both camps. I guess lucky those that did get them while they could.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom