Google used to say "We're aiming for 100ms!" a lot quite some time ago. Now the their advocates are saying more like aim for 1000ms(1s) which is very realistic and good. 200ms will easily be eaten by SSL's 3 chunks of RTT(with the smaller initial cwnd cases).
My experience: https://medium.com/p/196b5024899c
Major browsers will not support h2c switching(switching from http, rather than TLS), and faster(but less secure) ciphers or null ciphers will not work for those browsers either, so speed in the HTTP/2 world will likely be something on top of SSL's latency.