The 50's and 85's. Help and suggestions required.

James Thomas 75

James Thomas 75

Messages
693
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone.

Apologies in advance as I know there's probablyloads of threads on this subject already.
But unfortunately I've only got access via my iphone for the coming week or so and can't search.:(

Basically I'm looking into getting a 50mm and 85mm since going to a FF only setup a few weeks back.
Which 2 out of the Canon 50 1.2 and 1.4 and the 85mm 1.2 and 1.8 would you all recommend?

First of all,after spending what I have on my camera I'm not just simply looking into the possible cheaper option of each.
I'd like to know if the premium pair are worth their extra asking prices over their cheaper counterparts hands down,or if the 1.4 and 1.8 pair are better bang for buck in comparison?

I realise the bokeh and maybe certain other aspects are better on the 1.2 pair,but what about in terms of IQ?

The thought of the 1.2 pair is obviously very tempting :D but are they the X amount of pounds better than the cheaper?

Many thanks in advance.

James.
 
Not tried the 85mm L but the f/1.8 version is a stunning lens.
 
I would recommend the 50mm f/1.2 over the f/1.4 but the 85mm f/1.2 isn't worth the brass upgrade when the f/1.8 version is (much) faster focusing and already an extremely competent lens for 1/6th of the price.
 
I have both the cheaper lenses and like them a lot. The 1.2 50mm has great bokeh but then there is the matter of controlling the VERY narrow of depth of field..there's a video comparing them on you tube - however, you can't take it with you so if you have the money - why not!?
 
Thanks for the replies everyone.
I'll look into the 85 1.8 (along with the 50 1.2) as recommended if it's as good as you all say.

Chipper. You're right I can't take it with me - but I'm sure there's other kit calling my name that I can put the saved money towards ;)
 
Last edited:
Are you going to shoot wide open or stop down slightly?

For wide open both 85mms are great, with 1.8 being a lot faster focusing
50mm f/1.2 will be sharper and more contrasty, but to be fair I'd rather have sigma there for fraction of price

if you stop down past f/2.0 then the cheaper version are the ones to go for

if you get cheaper kit, you could bag a 135mm L or Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for the difference :)
 
Last edited:
I got the 85 1.2 and am ill be getting a 50 1.4 as 0.2 isn't so big of a step for £750. The 85 was definitely worth it though, I very rarely take it off my 6D but I only ever take pictures of my daughter. She's 4 months old and doesn't move so the AF isn't a worry, though it isn't that slow, it's by no means fast, I'd like to get a 135 to go with it as I've read it has fast AF and reach for when she's up and running around!
 
Thanks for the reply Daugirdas.

To be honest I very much doubt I'd frequently shoot either wide open (the 1.2 especially) and was more looking towards overall IQ and sharpness etc of each lens against it's counterpart.

Saving the cash towards a 135 sounds promising though - as that's another on my eventual list.
But I hadn't really considered the Sigma alternatives.:thinking:
 
jonoooo125 said:
I got the 85 1.2 and am ill be getting a 50 1.4 as 0.2 isn't so big of a step for £750. The 85 was definitely worth it though, I very rarely take it off my 6D but I only ever take pictures of my daughter. She's 4 months old and doesn't move so the AF isn't a worry, though it isn't that slow, it's by no means fast, I'd like to get a 135 to go with it as I've read it has fast AF and reach for when she's up and running around!
Click to expand...

Have you ever shot with the 85 1.8 for comparison Jono?
When you say the AF is slow,is it noticeable against anything that's likely to move - or just a tad slow? :)
 
In most reviews the Sigma 50mm f1.4 beates the Canon 50mm f1.4 and the Sigma 85mm f1.4 has been favourable compared to the Canon 85mm f1.2L. I have both of these Sigma lenses and they're both good lenses IMVHO with the 85mm in particular being an outstanding lens. The Canon 85mm f1.8 can produce angular bokeh and I prefer the more rounded bokeh of the Sigma, bokeh being very important in a lens like this IMVHO.

IMVHO the Sigma 50 and 85mm f1.4's are THE lenses to go for in preference to the Canon alternatives :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
In most reviews the Sigma 50mm f1.4 beates the Canon 50mm f1.4 and the Sigma 85mm f1.4 has been favourable compared to the Canon 85mm f1.2L. I have both of these Sigma lenses and they're both good lenses IMVHO with the 85mm in particular being an outstanding lens. The Canon 85mm f1.8 can produce angular bokeh and I prefer the more rounded bokeh of the Sigma, bokeh being very important in a lens like this IMVHO.

IMVHO the Sigma 50 and 85mm f1.4's are THE lenses to go for in preference to the Canon alternatives :D
Click to expand...

Thanks for the very honest opinions Alan. Much appreciated.:D
Just had a read up on them and many say the 50mm (I think) has severe focusing issues.
Is this common or possibly user error?
 
Do you really need a 50 and an 85? I find that I hardly ever use my 50, and would much prefer a 35/85 combo.
 
Aledafis said:
Do you really need a 50 and an 85? I find that I hardly ever use my 50, and would much prefer a 35/85 combo.
Click to expand...

It's a user preference. While I could imagine how I'd use 35mm prime, the 50mm gets used in a subtly different way, where 35mm would be too wide (but perhaps I could make 85mm do that job). The 50 and 85mm are different enough
 
James Thomas 75 said:
Thanks for the very honest opinions Alan. Much appreciated.:D
Just had a read up on them and many say the 50mm (I think) has severe focusing issues.
Is this common or possibly user error?
Click to expand...

I've always ignored internet Sigma panic and although I may just be the luckiest person in the UK I've never had any focusing issues with my Sigma 20mm f1.8, 30mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, 150mm f2.8, 12-24mm, 28-300mm or any of my Tamron or Canon lenses on my 300D, 10D, 20D or 5D and I've had no issues with my MFT kit either :D Buy from a reputable dealer and if there are any problems you should be ok.

Just to show I'm not completely trusting... I would avoid buying any lens that there was a known and definate design or manufacturing problem with.
 
I have been through a 85 f1.2 mkI, a Sigma 85 f1.4 and an 85 f1.8 (which is what I currently have). For me the diffence between the cheaper and more expensive options is huge, don't get me wrong the f1.8 is a cracking lens but the f1.2 that I had was a different level - however it was a mkI so was painfully slow to focus, the mkII is much faster. I got frustrated by the AF on the mkI so sold it for the Sigma f1.4 which is must faster to AF. I was very happy with the Sigma and the results were very close to the Canon (I love to shoot them wide open). I made the mistake of selling the Sigma (decided that I wasn't using it enough) and went back to a Canon f1.8, which is good but just not the same. I am now trying to battle the overwhelming urge to buy another f1.2, if you can afford one then go for it, I wish I still had one.
 
James Thomas 75 said:
Have you ever shot with the 85 1.8 for comparison Jono?
When you say the AF is slow,is it noticeable against anything that's likely to move - or just a tad slow? :)
Click to expand...

I haven't, it's a bit slower than the 50 1.8 I had a few years ago but that's me guessing from memory, I wouldn't use it at anything over walking speed but as I only really use it at 1.2, the other versions weren't a choice, even if their AF is faster. With that said, I think I'd be happy with the 50 1.4 as 0.2 is not worth £750 to me.
 
James Thomas 75 said:
Thanks for the replies everyone.
I'll look into the 85 1.8 (along with the 50 1.2) as recommended if it's as good as you all say.

Too right! There is always more kit... and they manage to make us want it even when we know we have great stuff already. :bonk:

Chipper. You're right I can't take it with me - but I'm sure there's other kit calling my name that I can put the saved money towards ;)
Click to expand...
 
postcardcv said:
I have been through a 85 f1.2 mkI, a Sigma 85 f1.4 and an 85 f1.8 (which is what I currently have). For me the diffence between the cheaper and more expensive options is huge, don't get me wrong the f1.8 is a cracking lens but the f1.2 that I had was a different level - however it was a mkI so was painfully slow to focus, the mkII is much faster. I got frustrated by the AF on the mkI so sold it for the Sigma f1.4 which is must faster to AF. I was very happy with the Sigma and the results were very close to the Canon (I love to shoot them wide open). I made the mistake of selling the Sigma (decided that I wasn't using it enough) and went back to a Canon f1.8, which is good but just not the same. I am now trying to battle the overwhelming urge to buy another f1.2, if you can afford one then go for it, I wish I still had one.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply Peter.

When you say a different level. Do you mean in terms of general IQ,sharpness or what?

Also,out of the 2 cheaper models would you regard the Sigma 1.4 higher than the Canon 1.8 from what you said about regretting the sale?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top