# Canon  200mm f/2.0L IS at the San Diego Zoo



## gatorbill-75

I rented a Canon 200mm f/2.0L IS lens a couple of weeks back and took it out for a test ride at the San Diego Zoo coupled with a 1D Mark IV. It's an awesome piece of glass, I found it to perform much better than my current Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens. The AF response and accuracy with the prime lens is simply much better than that of the zoom lens. 
I think I'll try out the new 70-200mm f/2.8L IS Mark II next to see if it's a worthy upgrade from the current Mark I lens.

1) Indian Peafowl







2) Lesser Spot-nosed Guenon






3) Victoria Crowned Pigeon






4) Sunda Wrinkled Hornbill






5) White-breasted Kingfisher






6) Chestnut-bellied Partridge






7) Nicobar Pigeon






8) Male Bulwer's Wattled Pheasant






9) Giraffe






10) Greater Indian One-horned Rhinocerous






All of the above samples images and a few others I took that day are at the following Zenfolio gallery:
Zenfolio | Bill Fleites Photography | Latest Zoo Animals

I've included 100% crop of some of the shots at the following Zenfolio gallery:
Zenfolio | Bill Fleites Photography | 100 Percent Crops

Comments and suggestions are always welcome,
--gatorbill-75


----------



## carlos91

awesome captures


----------



## DScience

Dang, very soft compared to nikons 200mm f/2


----------



## fokker

Love the detail on the giraffe!


----------



## gatorbill-75

Thanks for the encouraging comments carlos91 & fokker !!!  I just shot a session with the new 70-200mm f2.8 Mark II lens to see if it could be a less costly alternative to the prime lens.


----------



## Mitica100

DScience said:


> Dang, very soft compared to nikons 200mm f/2



Can you post here some of the pictures you took with your Nikon 200mm so we can compare? At least one, I'm sure the OP won't mind.


----------



## gatorbill-75

Mitica100 said:


> DScience said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dang, very soft compared to nikons 200mm f/2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you post here some of the pictures you took with your Nikon 200mm so we can compare? At least one, I'm sure the OP won't mind.
Click to expand...

 
Mitica100,
I'm sure Mr DScience is a fine photographer and the Nikkor 200mm f2 is a fine lens.  I happen to have owned a Nikon D3 and Nikkor 300mm f2.8 lens (and several other fine Nikkor lenses) since 2008 which I've used quite frequently as you can see in the following Zenfolio gallery:

Zenfolio | Bill Fleites Photography | Nikon D3

However, I'm also mature enough to simply ignore thoughtless and unconstructive comments either about my photographic skills or the equipment I use.  I post photos as a check to see if I can do something to improve based on the feedback of others who love photography as much as I do, and not to promote one brand vs another.  On another forum I recently received excellent suggestions on how to improve a set of landscape shots I had taken, things I never would have thought of which I found extremely helpful.

Thanks,
--gatorbill


----------



## jtee

gatorbill-75 said:


> I rented a Canon 200mm f/2.0L IS lens a couple of weeks back and took it out for a test ride at the San Diego Zoo coupled with a 1D Mark IV. It's an awesome piece of glass, I found it to perform much better than my current Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens. The AF response and accuracy with the prime lens is simply much better than that of the zoom lens.



 Those are quite nice, you will find that "good primes" will always perform better than any zoom they focus very fast and deliver the IQ.Looks like a great lens to look at .


----------



## HoboSyke

The first pic is very awesome, sharp, wonderful colours and great composition..

As mentioned, the others do seem quite soft...


----------



## reznap

HoboSyke said:


> As mentioned, the others do seem quite soft...



I think they're sharp, focus is on the eye..  Sure you're not just seeing a very shallow depth of field?  Could just be me..


----------



## gatorbill-75

reznap said:


> HoboSyke said:
> 
> 
> 
> As mentioned, the others do seem quite soft...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they're sharp, focus is on the eye.. Sure you're not just seeing a very shallow depth of field? Could just be me..
Click to expand...

 
I agree, I think people don't seem to realize that these are all taken at f2.0 and as you state a very narrow DOF.  So only the critical part of the animal that I wanted in sharp focus (i.e. the eye/head) is in sharp focus and the rest of the animal and the background quickly dissolve OOF.

Thanks for the comment,
-gatorbill


----------



## gatorbill-75

I think the following shot of a Paradise Tanager and the corresponding 100% crop taken with the same Canon 200mm f2.0 lens shows just how shallow the depth of field of this lens is when used wide open. It shows that any part of the bird in a shallow area around it's eye is in sharp focus, and everything else falls very quickly OOF. For example, even the feathers at the top of his head start to go out of focus.





100% Crop





--gatorbill


----------



## smackitsakic

Very nice pics.  Love the colours, and the clarity.  I'd say a successful test drive!!


----------



## Jacki

Gorgeous photos!! I look forward to seeing more.


----------



## D-B-J

beautiful photos! Not sure where people are seeing the non-focused parts. Definately a successful test!


----------



## HoboSyke

gatorbill-75 said:


> reznap said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HoboSyke said:
> 
> 
> 
> As mentioned, the others do seem quite soft...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they're sharp, focus is on the eye.. Sure you're not just seeing a very shallow depth of field? Could just be me..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree, I think people don't seem to realize that these are all taken at f2.0 and as you state a very narrow DOF.  So only the critical part of the animal that I wanted in sharp focus (i.e. the eye/head) is in sharp focus and the rest of the animal and the background quickly dissolve OOF.
> 
> Thanks for the comment,
> -gatorbill
Click to expand...


After a closer look I have to concur.. Very shallow at f/2. Like my 135mm f/2L...  :thumbup:


----------



## ben_007

good lens and beautiful photos


----------



## dab_20

Some great shots here!! If you don't mind me asking... about how much does it cost to rent a lens like this?


----------



## gatorbill-75

dab_20 said:


> Some great shots here!! If you don't mind me asking... about how much does it cost to rent a lens like this?


 
Renting a pricey lens over the weekend is a good way to test it out before plunking down the cash for it.  Calumet charged me $70 rental to try it this lens out over the weekend.

--gatorbill


----------



## gatorbill-75

I've posted a set of comparison shots of a Paradise Tanager taken with the 200mm f2 prime, 70-200mm f2.8 Mk I, and the 70-200mm f2.8 Mark II zoom lenses in the following thread which may be of interest to you guys:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-canon-200mm-lens-comparison.html#post1891162

--gatorbill-75
Zenfolio | Bill Fleites Photography


----------

