01-19-2011, 01:52 PM
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1295441790' post='5641']
Wow; the bokeh and loca look almost perfect but that flare - ouch. I thought the nano-coating was suppose to make that a thing of the past <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[/quote]
For comparison, here's the Canon 200/2L IS's flare:
The contrast has been kept low in this one to make the skin look more flattering - http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3567080200/
![[Image: 3567080200_6031025377_o_d.jpg]](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3339/3567080200_6031025377_o_d.jpg)
Here the WB has been stylised to give a "gold" look but if you look at the garment you can see fairly deep blacks - http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3929464372/
![[Image: 3929464372_decba1b941_o_d.jpg]](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2581/3929464372_decba1b941_o_d.jpg)
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1295441790' post='5641']
Still the lens is TOOOO heavy. If they could make one lighter than 400g it might be interesting <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[/quote]
Umm if you mean 400g lighter than the 2900g of the 200 f/2 VR then the Canon 200 2L IS is exactly that:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=458&LensComp=751&Units=M
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
GTW
Wow; the bokeh and loca look almost perfect but that flare - ouch. I thought the nano-coating was suppose to make that a thing of the past <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='

[/quote]
For comparison, here's the Canon 200/2L IS's flare:
The contrast has been kept low in this one to make the skin look more flattering - http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3567080200/
![[Image: 3567080200_6031025377_o_d.jpg]](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3339/3567080200_6031025377_o_d.jpg)
Here the WB has been stylised to give a "gold" look but if you look at the garment you can see fairly deep blacks - http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3929464372/
![[Image: 3929464372_decba1b941_o_d.jpg]](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2581/3929464372_decba1b941_o_d.jpg)
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1295441790' post='5641']
Still the lens is TOOOO heavy. If they could make one lighter than 400g it might be interesting <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='

[/quote]
Umm if you mean 400g lighter than the 2900g of the 200 f/2 VR then the Canon 200 2L IS is exactly that:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=458&LensComp=751&Units=M
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='

GTW