Canon 85mm lens choice - who has used both?

Flats

Flats

Messages
1,285
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
Dilemmas dilemmas. I currently own the 85mm f1.2L II that I bought on a whim a while back. It has produced some of my favourite photos ever, even on a body seemingly as ill-suited as a 1D series. That said, I found myself not using it very often.

Needing to free up some cash, I was on the point of selling it. A couple of nights ago I took it out to see if I was making the right decision, but this time on a 5D mkII. I came back with a few photos I really like, and (see here: http://wansteadbirder.blogspot.com/2011/03/dogs.html the ability to use f1.2 (coupled with the extraordinary capabilities of the mkII at ISO 5000) has made me wonder what to do?

Over the course of the night, I was reminded that focussing can be REALLY really slow, or slow vs what I am used to in other lenses, and quite a few candid shots failed as a result of it not being quick enough. That said, halving the speed would have been problematic also.

Would the bargainiferous f1.8 lens have served me better or not? Would the low-light have defeated it? Can anyone who has used both comment on what would be a good thing to do? I could really use the cash (to pay for the 5D mkII!) and in all reality I do not use the 1.2 lens very often. I can basically free up a grand by downgrading, but every time I use it I am always pleased. I know that the 1.8 is supposed to a fine lens also - would I be as pleased though?! All very subjective, apologies. Perhaps I should buy the cheaper lens, use both for a while, and then sell one?

I am sure this question must have been asked time and again. Many threads I have read suggest that the 1.2L II, though the quality is undoubted, is overkill and that 95% of photographers will do just fine with the cheaper cousin. I am not a great photographer, the limiting factor will always be me and not a lens, should I do what seems sensible?

Rgds
Jonathan
 
Jonathan - I have both, obviously.

I think the f/1.2L is the most gorgeous lens available on the market, bar none. But I agree that it's probably a bit of overkill for most people, most of the time.

Advantages of f/1.2L:
* looks
* envious looks from other togs
* superb bokeh
* f/1.2 if you need it
* superior performance at more normal aperture like f/1.8 or f/2
* balances well on a heavy DSLR body

Advantages of f/1.8:
* price
* smaller and lighter
* faster to focus

The images you posted there don't seem to have any EXIF data. Were they all shot at f/1.2? How often do you shoot at f/1.2? Judging from the comparative tests on The Digital Picture, I'd say the f/1.2L is about 1/2 to 1 stop better than the f/1.8 at fast apertures. In other words, the f/1.2L can deliver the same image quality as the f/1.8 whilst being 1/2 to 1 stop faster. Does that matter more to you than having an extra £1000+ in your pocket?
 
Last edited:
It's tricky - looking at those images, I think you might regret it if you sold it. If you really like 85mm though, as I do, perhaps you could rent a 1.8 for a weekend and see how it fares against the L? I always felt there was something a little more clinical about the 1.8, but it's still a very good lens for sure.
 
I used to own the 85mm f1.8 and always lusted after the 85mm f1.2 but after trying it vs the Canon 135m f2 vs Sigma 85mm f1.4, my next purchase will be either the 135 or the Sigma. Neither of the Canon 85s would get a look in.

Btw, that's not because the 1.2 isn't a great lens, it is, but the slow focus & price tip the balance against it when such superb alternatives are available.
 
Just looked at your images at the dogs and I don't think you would be as happy with them if you had used the 85mm f1.8. The oof and bokeh of the 1.8 just isn't as smooth and pleasant. It's not horrible by any means but it tends to be messier in the oof areas and the bokeh can have distinct hard edges.
 
StewartR said:
Jonathan - I have both, obviously.


The images you posted there don't seem to have any EXIF data. Were they all shot at f/1.2? How often do you shoot at f/1.2? Judging from the comparative tests on The Digital Picture, I'd say the f/1.2L is about 1/2 to 1 stop better than the f/1.8 at fast apertures. In other words, the f/1.2L can deliver the same image quality as the f/1.8 whilst being 1/2 to 1 stop faster. Does that matter more to you than having an extra £1000+ in your pocket?
Click to expand...

Sorry about that, I think picasa strips all that. The images posted were taken at an average of f1.6 - the first two are at f1.2, however many of them were f1.8, with a few at f1.4 in there too. I was using ISO 5000 so had a bit of leeway with shutter speed.
 
i'd say conisder the sigma 85mm 1.4 instead, you get almost the same speed as the 1.2, more than the 1.8 and its faster focusing than the 1.2, the bokeh on it is also superb. I have had the 1.8 and now have the 1.4, its better than the 1.8 in my experience
 
joescrivens said:
i'd say conisder the sigma 85mm 1.4 instead, you get almost the same speed as the 1.2, more than the 1.8 and its faster focusing than the 1.2, the bokeh on it is also superb. I have had the 1.8 and now have the 1.4, its better than the 1.8 in my experience
Click to expand...

Someone posted a link (was it you????...) to a review a while ago and the reviewer said that the Siggy was better than the Canon f1.2.

I'm very tempted by this lens, their 50mm is superb, in fact all of the Siggy lenses I have are superb.

PS. That Siggy review...
http://hofferphotography.com/2010/11/16/my-sigma-85-f1-4-vs-canon-85l-review/
 
They're not almost the same speed. You get almost half an EV of light extra with the 1.2 (unless you mean af speed?)

How does the Sigma compare to the (older version) Nikkor 85/1.4? That was/is a great lens, so if it's anything like that it should be an ideal middle ground.
 
The L is a better Lens obviously at that price I have used both and the Low Light gathering capabilities of the L has to be seen to be believed

the non L version does not bring the stunning Bokeh
the only area where I think the L loses out is slow autofocus and price but as you already have it thats not an issue
so the question to trade/sell
if it were mine I would keep the L

the non L is a great little lens but I was shocked at how much better the light gathering is ove F1.8
and that Bokeh
 
py6km said:
They're not almost the same speed. You get almost half an EV of light extra with the 1.2 (unless you mean af speed?)

How does the Sigma compare to the (older version) Nikkor 85/1.4? That was/is a great lens, so if it's anything like that it should be an ideal middle ground.
Click to expand...

almost half an ev of light extra to me is "almost the same speed" i mean what would be effect on iso here, 1.5 times. So if your iso was 400 you'd have to up it to 600 for the same shutter, no big deal.

at the upper levels an iso of 3200 would need it upped to 4800 and on a 5d mark 2 the impact on the noise etc is very negligable here between those two iso's
 
Last edited:
I know I'm no canon user, but the point you made about the focusing in the OP... that would swing it for me straight away. It matters not how amazing the IQ is, and this that and the other... if it wont focus in time, you wont get the shot. As such, If I were to use canon, and I had to get an 85mm, I'd get the sigma.
 
I know what you're saying, but either of the Mark I or Mark II 85L's focus perfectly quickly. The 'slowness' only occurs when the motor has to move all of that big lump of glass from one extreme in the focal range to the other (i.e. from wanting something in focus at close distance, to instantaneously wanting something further away). When you're dealing with subjects which are within substantially the same focal plane (and I'm talking here about a range of several metres rather than several centimetres - it's quick over that kind of range), it's as fast as just about anything else (the Mark II especially). Also, a steady change in distance is no problem.

Therefore, if you're shooting something which very rapidly moves from a position 2m from your camera, to a position 20m from the camera for example, it's not the best choice. If you were standing at one end of a 100m track, it would have no trouble focussing and tracking Usain Bolt coming at you however as there's no requirement for an overly rapid and extreme change in the region of focus. If you suddenly decide to swing around to focus on someone doing something in the stands however, it will take some time for the glass to move and catch up (maybe 1.5-2s in the limit). It's not therefore particularly suited to sports where you need to swap around over large distances on a pitch for example. It's obviously not designed for that though, so I'd be surprised if anyone bought one for that kind of thing.
 
Last edited:
Py6km makes a good point and while I wouldn't disagree that the ' relatively ' slow focusing would be a limiting factor it really depends on how you use the lens. I have to say though that the bokeh the 1.2L produces is simply the sweetest. In the days of film, my favourite lens was my 85/1.8 so unsurprisingly I bought one not too long ago. It's a great lens, focuses fast, bokeh's fine too though not in the same league as the L lens. However having been spoilt by the 24-70, I found myself hardly using it...... :shrug:

If you like the 85mm focal length, want a good all-rounder and do not wish all that capital tied up in one lens then you won't be disappointed with the 85/1.8 Jonathan. It may not be an L but it's a good lens and more than a capable performer. Having seen your pictures I also believe you can shoot with any lens.



a010.gif


H
a035.gif
 
Last edited:
I'm in the same boat as well, except I "only" have the 85L mkI.

I use this lens VERY rarely (the odd wedding and concert) but when I do it creates proper magical images.

The head says "sell" but the heart says I will regret forever letting this glass go so it is staying in my kitbag for the foreseeable future. The OP's "dogs" photos clearly show he is making the most of this good glass.

Good luck with your choice.
 
Houston1863 said:
If you like the 85mm focal length, want a good all-rounder and do not wish all that capital tied up in one lens then you won't be disappointed with the 85/1.8 Jonathan.
Click to expand...

Haha, thought you were talking to me for a mo, then realised the OP is called Jonathan also :D

Good name, that ;)
 
The 85mm 1.2L is just a stunning lens in every way and nothing is going to replace that incredible bokeh. I loved using mine but had to face the fact that I just wasn't using it enough. That, coupled with the fact that I have the 50mm 1.2L meant it really ought to go, but it was a wrench!

If I was still doing weddings I'd definitely have kept it.
 
Aside from the fact that you'll never be quite as happy having a 'second-string' lens having previously owned the best available, I'd say it depends on what you can sell the f/1.2 for and how much a replacement will cost - either the Canon f/1.8 (which is better than OK) or the Sigma f/1.4 (which is excellent - if I didn't already have an 85mm, I'd certainly buy this one if purchasing new).
 
I am in the same position Jonathan. I bought the 85/1.2 having sold a back-focussing 85/1.8 (to a buyer who was aware of the problem, I should add). Each time I see what the 1.2 sells for I think I should get rid of it.

But then I look round the house and of all the shots I have framed on the wall over half were with the 1.2. Of my website pictures, it is the most commonly used lens for portraits. I have owned 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2 versions of 85mm lenses and while it has loads of problems (excessive CA, slow AF, it is heavy, it is damned expensive...) the 1.2 is also special. Sometimes I think the excessively thin dof is a bit gimmicky but then sometimes it just sings and no other lens will get you that.

I am sure the Sigma 1.4 is a lovely lens and I have seen lots of superb shots with it. And I managed shots I was happy with using the Canon 1.8. But like cobra_lite says, I think I would always regret going a step backwards.
 
Perhaps I should buy the cheaper lens, use both for a while, and then sell one?
Click to expand...

If you have the money to do so then this seems the most obvious & risk free option given you would lose very little if you end up re-selling a low use 1.8. You can then decide for yourself at your leisure which to keep.
 
I've had both the Canon 85mm f/1.2 II + f/1.8 versions in the past.

I rarely used the 1.2 (although I admit I'm considering getting one again as it would suit some of the photography I'm now doing.)

In truth I found very very few photos benefit from being taken @ f/1.2. The best I've seen are full length portraits when it can help the model jump from the background when they are at a distance. Often f/4 or f/5.6 is a better aperture to make subjects pop as it gets the whole head in focus. More than the occassional 'eyes only in focus' shot gets on my nerves!

Obviously the low-light aspect is undeniable, but a decent 85mm f/1.8 is pretty sharp wide open and crystal from f/2.0 so not exactly slow with high ISO's available.

I always worry about the focussing on Sigmas - I usually get flamed for this comment, but I've tried around 19 copies of the 30mm f/1.4 on 4 different bodies and noticed focussing anomalies (typically one foot out @ 8 foot subject distance, worst was 6 foot out @ 25 foot subject distance) on all of them. I briefly had a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 - lovely lens, but while fine on my old 5D randomly mis-focussed on my old 50D. The digital picture review found similar inconsistencies in its performance. Of other Sigmas I've owned - the 150mm Macro (two of them) were fine, an old 70-300APO was great, a 50mm Macro was useless on focussing @ non-macro subject distances even after recalibration by Sigma. Having said all that, my more recently acquired 1D3 has a tendency to slightly front-focus on most of my lenses and requires MA to bring it back in.

I'd guess in practice the Canon 85mm f/1.8 would be more than adequate, but a part of you would miss the beauty of the f/1.2.

Phil
 
Last edited:
I enjoyed that, lovely girl :love:

I really fancy a fast 85mm but watching that vid made me realise that it'd probably be too long for my 20D. Another shock is listening to the shutters of those cameras in the review, my 20D makes an absolutely horrible noise, truly awful... way too loud.
 
i liked that vid but the images from the 85mm look no where near as good as what im getting from that lens
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top