200mm 1.8L FD versus EF

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>Is there a big price difference between the very rare FD version and the AF IS EF version for this heavy lens? I have read somewhere that they are identical optically.</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/200mmf18L.jpg</p>

<p>http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/EF-lenses/EF200mmf18LUSM/FDn200mmf18L.jpg</p>

[Glenn McCreery]

<p>There is an EF 200mm f:1.8 lens currently on eBay buy-it-now for only $2,600. It looks fairly well used in the photos. Several nicer looking versions are available for $3,000 to $4,000. Personally, I am happy with my 200mm FL f:4.5 version, which I use mostly on my Sony NEX 6, and which cost me $25 in close to mint condition. It is quite light and portable, whereas faster 200mm lenses become real tail-wagging-the-dog encumbrances on such a small camera.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Without knowing anything specifically about the 200mm f/1.8 ( http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/200mm.htm says it does exist, compare http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/EF-lenses/EF200mmf18LUSM/index.htm ), the majority of the early EF lenses were optically identical or very similar to their FD predecessors. Of course AF was added and a different mount attached.<br>

With the passage of time, small and large incremental changes were made. When large enough, these were dignified with a "II".<br>

Canon is not immune to the "collector syndrome" but it's nowhere near what it is for some marques which need not be named.</p>

[rick_janes]

<p>A beauty of the FD 200 1.8L is its lack of electronics: if the autofocus mechanism of an EF 200 1.8L becomes inoperable you also lose the manual focus function! For that reason alone I'd rather have an FD 200 1.8L.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>The EF 200/1.8 L does not have IS, as in your description. Yes, they are identical. It was primarily designed for what was then the very new EOS bodies. However since many pros had not made the switch to EOS yet it was reconfigured with an FD mount. </p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>I have never seen an FD version offered for sale online. I have never used an EOS camera, as I always have been against AF or anything that moves away from solid mechanical operation.<br>

I use a 200/2.8 IF which can be bought at a very reasonable price. </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Raid, have you tried the FDn 80-200/4 L? It's obviously a stop slower than the 200/2.8, but is surprisingly sharper.</p>

[alan_swartz]

<p>I did see a couple FD 200/1.8L's for sale ages ago, online. After I regained consciousness following my sighting of the prices, I did note that they were definitely retrofitted EF lenses, as has always been said. They don't look like FD lenses, they look like EF.</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>Hi Mark,<br>

I have such a zoom lens. It is an exception to the rule, as it is so sharp that primes are left behind. It is slow, though.</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>Hi Alan,<br>

Most likely, some professionals used this lens on EOS cameras on the job.</p>