Talk:Canon EF 200mm lens

Wrong Information about the Focus by Wire Feature of the 200mm f/1,8 L USM
The Article says, that the 200mm 1,8 and the 1200mm 5,6 were the only lenses featuring the "Focus by Wire" feature. This is incorrect: Many other like the 50mm 1,0L; 85mm 1,2L; 300mm 2,8L; 400mm 2,8L; 400mm 2,8L II; 500mm 4,5L and 600mm 4,0L are featuring it too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by E40-D (talk • contribs) 11:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

article comments
Says "Two versions of the lens were made, one f/2.8 and the other f/1.8." and then goes on to list three lenses.

The specification table lists the f/2 as an L series but doesn't have an L in the column header, but the other two lenses do.

The large box on the right is pretty but I'm not sure the photo matches. The photo shows a lens without a hood but says this lens has and integrated hood.

The last paragraph is a bit confusing as it does various comparisons between multiple models.

Talking about the 1.6 crop factor may confuse people a little.

The article does not explain clearly that Canon have made 4 models of EF 200 lens, all of which have been 'L-Series' lenses as follows: The photo in the article is of an EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM - the second edition of the f/2.8 model (without integral hood) but it has been incorrectly labelled as a 'first edition'.

It should be noted that the f/2.8L II is optically & physically very similar to the original f/2.8L model & apart from the removal of the integral hood only differs by having a few minor improvements - hence the 'II' second edition designation; however the f/2L IS is a completely redesigned lens & optically completely different to the original f/1.8L model even though they look a little similar.

For further details on the two currrent models see: Canon's EF 200mm f/2.8L USM Product Page & Canon's EF 200mm f/2L IS USM Product Page

DeeKay (talk) 14:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No doubt there are some "issues" with this article. The photo is of the first version, it might be hard to tell but the photo of the lens does show an intergrated hood, it works like the one on this lens: Canon EF 300mm f/4 USM L - Test Report / Review. Yes the last paragraph is confusing, no doubt caused by multiple edits, by different users, without proper proof reading. A few internal links might help alleviate any confusion concerning crop factor. I agree with User:DeeKay, there is such little difference with the f/2.8 versions that separate spec charts is not necessary. Nebrot (talk) 09:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I took the photograph that illustrates the article; it was a lens that I used for some time, and I can confirm that it did have an integrated hood. Agreed also with the rest of the comments. Rama (talk) 10:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Maximum Magnification
I corrected the max magnification for the f/1.8 and f/2 models, which had been swapped. Source is the Canon Museum specs, http://www.canon.com/c-museum/en/product/ef279.html for the 1.8 and http://www.canon.com/c-museum/en/product/ef397.html for the 2.0. 173.219.75.66 (talk) 01:16, 31 December 2015 (UTC)