Canon 85mm F1.2L - worth it?

G

good_fella7777

Messages
411
Edit My Images
No
Having recently seen some amazing images from Canon 85mm F1.2L i've been possessed by a sudden impulse to splurge a fortune on getting one.

I am quite keen on doing more portraits and headshots and already have the canon 100mm F2.8L IS which is fantastic - super sharp and nice bokeh.

So if the 85mm 1.2 really worth the money?
 
good_fella7777 said:
Having recently seen some amazing images from Canon 85mm F1.2L i've been possessed by a sudden impulse to splurge a fortune on getting one.

I am quite keen on doing more portraits and headshots and already have the canon 100mm F2.8L IS which is fantastic - super sharp and nice bokeh.

So if the 85mm 1.2 really worth the money?
Click to expand...

No. Unless you want a lens with virtually no dof (at f1.2) and takes an age to focus because of all that glass that needs to be pushed/pulled into focus the thing.
However, those that have one do really love it, personally I bought the 1.8 after looking/reviewing the 1.4 & 1.2 on paper (I couldnt find one in stock) as it was a much better cost option and it is one of my favourite lenses on a FF body.

Maybe rent one and then decide?

Matt
 
MatBin said:
No. Unless you want a lens with virtually no dof (at f1.2) and takes an age to focus because of all that glass that needs to be pushed/pulled into focus the thing.
However, those that have one do really love it, personally I bought the 1.8 after looking/reviewing the 1.4 & 1.2 on paper (I couldnt find one in stock) as it was a much better cost option and it is one of my favourite lenses on a FF body.

Maybe rent one and then decide?

Matt
Click to expand...

Renting one might be a good idea. I've seen a lot of comments on forums and blogs that the DOF at 1.2 isn't easy to control.
 
For a cheaper option you could consider the Sigma 85mm f1.4. I have one and IMVHO it's a very good lens, better than their 50mm f1.4.
 
woof woof said:
For a cheaper option you could consider the Sigma 85mm f1.4. I have one and IMVHO it's a very good lens, better than their 50mm f1.4.
Click to expand...

I opted for the Sigma 85 1.4 and price vs performance is a winner for me. I was heavily tempted by the Canon 1.2 but honestly, I needed a slightly faster AF.
 
I had a mkI Canon f1.2 and changed to the Sigma f1.4 and didn't regret it for a moment, the AF is so much faster and the images were equally as good as from the Canon. However I do think that the mkII is a different beast and having just sold my Sigma to fund another new toy I reckon that when I get another 85mm in the future it will be a mkII Canon. I've also had a Canon f1.8 which is a superb lens for the money, gives excellent results so if you don't need the ultra thin DoF and the unmatchable bokeh of the f1.2 then save yourself over a grand and buy the f1.8. Just don't do what someone I know has done which is buy the f1.2 because of all he has read about it and then proceed to use it at f8 in a studio, it really is a lens that only makes sense if you plan on shooting it wide open...

Wish I hadn't started typing this reply as I'm now getting sorely tempted to deviate from my planned lens and get an 85 f1.2 mkII instead... I just hope I don't stubble across a good used one!
 
futureal33 said:
I played with an 85L II this weekend on a 1DX and the AF definitely didnt seem slow.
Thats coming from a Sigma 85mm 1.4 user
Click to expand...

That's because the 1D series has more power to drive the focus faster. That said, I've read on numerous occasions that the focus on other bodies isn't THAT slow as many state. From MFD to infinity it will be much slower than many other L lenses, but I understand that when it locks it's more accurate than the 1.8.

OP - just hire it and judge for yourself whether it's worth the premium for your intended use.
 
pridash said:
That's because the 1D series has more power to drive the focus faster. That said, I've read on numerous occasions that the focus on other bodies isn't THAT slow as many state. From MFD to infinity it will be much slower than many other L lenses, but I understand that when it locks it's more accurate than the 1.8.

OP - just hire it and judge for yourself whether it's worth the premium for your intended use.
Click to expand...

I think that was my initial impression. From using Canon after Canon lens generally with USM, going to this was bit of a shock. I do agree that it is not as slow to focus once you understand what you have. If only they could have it the size of the 50mm 1.8 :lol:
 
That lens is fantastic obliterating backgrounds even in full body shots. If you can get one now, if not then maybe get 135mm f/2L or 85mm f/1.8 in that order if thin DOF is you aim. Your 100mm is getting rather close to 85/1.8, particularly if you stop down just a tiny bit.
 
I also opted for the 85 1.8 after reading how hard it is to master the razor thin DoF @ 1.2.

The 1.8 is fast to focus & sharp, with excellent bokeh...not only that, the money saved allowed me to buy another lens as well.

But it's your decision of course and as others have said, rent one and see how you get on with it first.
 
I have the 1.2L 85mm II and these are my thoughts

Cons
heavy
Slower than others at focusing
Expensive
Insanely shallow DOF at 1.2 from the nearest focus point

Pros
Incredibly sharp
built like a tank
Amzing DOF control (once you have mastered it)
Beautiful bokeh (i love this lens for the effect it gives to OOF elements)

This is a very expesnive lens that shines when used correctly. The Bokeh is amazing. Have a look at flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon85mmf12/pool/

However, it is not cheap, takes a lot of practice and is not for sports. I was initially quite frustrated with this lens. I could not get the hang of it. Then i took a photo of my son in his cot looking up and loved the fact that his eyes, nose and lips were in focus and then, at the edge of the chin it started to be OOF. Really drew to eys to the centre of the face.

I use if for family protraits, indoor, low light and providing the subject matter is relatively stationary your OK.

Makes a great wedding lens providing the B&G arent moving too swiftly.

i would highly recomend renting one and using it non stop for a weekend. it will take a few days just to get the hang of it.
 
I'm agreeing with everyone, rent then regret!

I've only used one F/1.2 lens and whilst they produce absolutely amazing bokeh and blur wide open, it's really not nice when you have a shot you're definitely after. The DoF is WAFER thin, so even manually focusing doesn't guarantee the best results.
 
Remember that it isn't compulsory to shoot with it wide open. The ultra-thin depth of field look is seductive when you first get the lens and it is tempting to shoot everything at f1.2. But stop it down to f1.8-2.0 and it really is sharp, noticeably better than the f1.8 version. And the bokeh of the lens is amazingly smooth at most wide-ish apertures.

The f1.2 aperture comes into its own in getting great separation of subject from background. If your subject and the background are relatively close together (compared with the camera to subject distance) then separation is hard unless you have an ultra fast lens.

I've used Canon's f1.8 version, two f1.2s and a Sigma 1.4, all on 5d2 or 1d3 bodies. The sigma is fine but in a side-by-side comparison I liked the 1.2's shots better and my son unerringly picked them out too in a blind test. I thing the f1.8 is the best value for money prime Canon do, but the effect of the extra £1000 is obvious - problem is, only you can say whether it is worth it.

After much umming and ahhing I finally sold my 85/1.2 last week. It was the best lens I ever owned and I figure I'll buy one again someday, but I can get close enough what I want with Canon's other great value lens - the 100L macro - and I've a Fuji x-pro1 to play with now. But writing this I am looking at three shots of my kids on the wall, and two of them are with the 85/1.2 (both taken wide open!)
 
I must thank everyone for the valuable feedback.
The primary reason that made me start looking at this lens was the praise for the bokeh and the sharpness and that seems to be the consensus here too.

postcardcv said:
I had a mkI Canon f1.2 and changed to the Sigma f1.4 and didn't regret it for a moment, the AF is so much faster and the images were equally as good as from the Canon. However I do think that the mkII is a different beast and having just sold my Sigma to fund another new toy I reckon that when I get another 85mm in the future it will be a mkII Canon. I've also had a Canon f1.8 which is a superb lens for the money, gives excellent results so if you don't need the ultra thin DoF and the unmatchable bokeh of the f1.2 then save yourself over a grand and buy the f1.8. Just don't do what someone I know has done which is buy the f1.2 because of all he has read about it and then proceed to use it at f8 in a studio, it really is a lens that only makes sense if you plan on shooting it wide open...

Wish I hadn't started typing this reply as I'm now getting sorely tempted to deviate from my planned lens and get an 85 f1.2 mkII instead... I just hope I don't stubble across a good used one!
Click to expand...

I have been looking at a few Mk 1 and could get one for a good price.
Is the difference between MK 1 & 2 primarily the slow/ faster focus speed or it goes significantly beyond that.
Personally I wouldn't mind mind too much if the focus is a bit slow (I often use the 100mm for portraits and it isn't the fastest to focus )
gpc1 said:
I have the 1.2L 85mm II and these are my thoughts

Cons
heavy
Slower than others at focusing
Expensive
Insanely shallow DOF at 1.2 from the nearest focus point

Pros
Incredibly sharp
built like a tank
Amzing DOF control (once you have mastered it)
Beautiful bokeh (i love this lens for the effect it gives to OOF elements)

This is a very expesnive lens that shines when used correctly. The Bokeh is amazing. Have a look at flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon85mmf12/pool/

However, it is not cheap, takes a lot of practice and is not for sports. I was initially quite frustrated with this lens. I could not get the hang of it. Then i took a photo of my son in his cot looking up and loved the fact that his eyes, nose and lips were in focus and then, at the edge of the chin it started to be OOF. Really drew to eys to the centre of the face.

I use if for family protraits, indoor, low light and providing the subject matter is relatively stationary your OK.

Makes a great wedding lens providing the B&G arent moving too swiftly.

i would highly recomend renting one and using it non stop for a weekend. it will take a few days just to get the hang of it.
Click to expand...

portraiture is what I am looking to use it for and If I can capture some memorable family moments in a great image then the lens would have paid its worth for me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top