October 21, 2014, 01:25:30 AM

Author Topic: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8  (Read 3725 times)

steliosk

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
    • stelioskritikakis.com
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #30 on: August 08, 2014, 07:02:23 PM »
i both have the 85 1.8 and the 100L
and the 70-200 2.8 IS II

i gotta say, each lens is for a different purpose.

the 85 1.8 has very nice bokeh, but suffers from CA, the good news is that its cheap and lightweight
the bad news except the CA is the minimum distance.. you can't "crop" a face with it as you would with the 100L
many many times i find this issue irritating and thats my main difference with the 85 1.8 which is a great lens.

The 100L is made for macro, which means that you won't have that softness as you would with the 85 1.8
way too contrasted but excellent image quallity, and nice build. Plus the IS and of course you can shoot tight portraits with it without cropping in post afterwards.

The 70-200 2.8 does a bit of everything. The good news is that this lens is sharp and focuses blazing fast. It doesn't think. It acts.
The bad news except the cost is the weight.. not versatile. I use this one for weddings mostly where i need a tiny window to shoot through at 135-200mm @ 2.8 but not to take photos of children at home. hell no. It is scary and uncomfortable.

I'd probably use the 85 1.8 or the 50 1.4 which i also have and love for that

Bottomline:
if i have space and time to play with i'd use the 85 1.8
if not, 70-200 2.8
I think i'm gonna sell the 100L, i'm too lazy to shoot macro anyway. Besides macro lenses are useless without proper lighting.
Bodies: 5D3 + 600D
Lenses: STM 40, EF 50 1.4, EF 85 1.8, EF 100L, EF 24-105L, EF 24-70 2.8 II, EF 70-200 2.8 IS II, Samyang 14mm, Samyang 8mm Fisheye, EF-S 10-22, EF-S 15-85 and my old 350D + 18-55 IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #30 on: August 08, 2014, 07:02:23 PM »

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2999
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #31 on: August 08, 2014, 07:19:53 PM »
So you didn't care for my advice, that's fine, but you said you were shooting portraits.  Shooting the 85 f/1.2 II at f/1.2 to 2 will give you photos unlike anything the 100L macro will give you and the lens is totally usable under f/2.  The 85 f/1.8 isn't as good at f/1.8 and is going to look soft, with less smooth bokeh, and a lot more CA than the macro, which is nearly perfect wide open.  I think you'll be disappointed by the IQ at f/1.8 up to about f/2.8.   That's why I made the suggestion.  And people who have trouble with the f/1.2 are either trying to shoot something other than portraits or don't understand how to shoot at f/1.2.  There is nothing wrong with the lens and while it is very expensive and took me a long time to save up for,but it is what it is, and the results speak for themselves.

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1440
    • View Profile
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #32 on: August 08, 2014, 07:26:36 PM »
i both have the 85 1.8 and the 100L
and the 70-200 2.8 IS II

i gotta say, each lens is for a different purpose.

the 85 1.8 has very nice bokeh, but suffers from CA, the good news is that its cheap and lightweight
the bad news except the CA is the minimum distance.. you can't "crop" a face with it as you would with the 100L
many many times i find this issue irritating and thats my main difference with the 85 1.8 which is a great lens.

The 100L is made for macro, which means that you won't have that softness as you would with the 85 1.8
way too contrasted but excellent image quallity, and nice build. Plus the IS and of course you can shoot tight portraits with it without cropping in post afterwards.

The 70-200 2.8 does a bit of everything. The good news is that this lens is sharp and focuses blazing fast. It doesn't think. It acts.
The bad news except the cost is the weight.. not versatile. I use this one for weddings mostly where i need a tiny window to shoot through at 135-200mm @ 2.8 but not to take photos of children at home. hell no. It is scary and uncomfortable.

I'd probably use the 85 1.8 or the 50 1.4 which i also have and love for that

Bottomline:
if i have space and time to play with i'd use the 85 1.8
if not, 70-200 2.8
I think i'm gonna sell the 100L, i'm too lazy to shoot macro anyway. Besides macro lenses are useless without proper lighting.

I think the OP is looking for some comparative images at the same subject distance, wide open to show background blur. Maybe without any post.
I am curious, too (for merely academic reasons). Can you share some images, if you have the time?
Thanks.
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

Hjalmarg1

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 250
  • Photo Hobbyist
    • View Profile
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #33 on: August 21, 2014, 01:00:49 AM »

I would really love to get a fast 85mm that works great wide open and narrowly missed on the 85/1.2 refurb'd today. Probably for the best though- what I want is an 85/1.4 with faster AF, and it seems Sigma is preparing my Christmas present as we speak.

the 85mm f1.8 won't give you the same IQ and color rendition & contrast that you get from 100mm 2.8L. I had both and end up selling the 85mm and using the 100mmL for portraits and macro work.
Wait for the new sigma 85mm 1.4, hence you'll see a positive difference. I had the current version but needed to sell it.... and now waiting either for the new Sogma 85 f1.4(Art) or a new Canon 85mm w/IS
Body: 5DIII. Prime Lenses: 15mm f2.8, 100mm f2.8L IS, 35mm f2 IS, Extender EF 2X III.
Zoom Lenses: 16-35mm f4L IS, 24-70mm f2.8L, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II. Others: Flash 580EX II, 270EX II & MR-14EX II

Ruined

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #34 on: August 21, 2014, 03:30:54 PM »

The specular highlights produced by the 85 1.8 look angular, not circular. That's part of my consideration when I sold it. Also maximum usable aperture is probably about 2.5 which is too close to my 100L's 2.8. Bokeh is not 135L quality. Nobody should expect that. But it's far better than 50 1.4. Personally like 100mm blur better though. Also it has no weather sealing.

On the good side the 85 focuses faster than the 100L. The focus seems more consistent and reliable. This is only based on my personal experience.

The 85 is a great value lens. You should definitely try it. Nothing to lose.

Don't agree with you on the usable aperture of 2.5.  It's the best lens I own and virtually never take it off 1.8 for professional portrait work - it's a belter of lens, I reckon by far the best bang for buck in the Canon line up.

85 f/1.8 is great value but I agree with the previous poster that if you need to stop it down to f/4 for a group shot the angular bokeh is ugly.  I wish Canon would update this with a 85mm f/1.8 IS design similar to the 35mm f/2 IS.

I personally would rather have the 100L of the two for its dual purpose macro/general as well as more pleasing bokeh stopped down.

drmikeinpdx

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
  • Celebrating 20 years of naughty photography!
    • View Profile
    • Beyond Boudoir Photo
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #35 on: August 22, 2014, 09:26:11 AM »
I have the 85 1.8 and the 100 2.0.   Bought the 100 first on the recommendation of a friend and found it to be a bit long for my needs.  I use the 85 about 10 times as much as the 100 for my work.  Have never had a problem with insufficient minimum focus distance.

I thought about getting a 100 L for greater sharpness, but after due consideration I realized that when shooting people, maximum sharpness is a disadvantage more often that it is an advantage.  I would just have to spend more time in photoshop smoothing skin.

Current bodies:  5D3, 7D, 550D, S100
Favorite lenses: 135 f/2.0 L, 85 f/1.8 200 f/2.8 L, 50 f1.4 Sigma, 40mm pancake, 24-105 L.
blog:   http://www.BeyondBoudoirPhoto.com

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1440
    • View Profile
Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #36 on: August 22, 2014, 01:05:46 PM »

The specular highlights produced by the 85 1.8 look angular, not circular. That's part of my consideration when I sold it. Also maximum usable aperture is probably about 2.5 which is too close to my 100L's 2.8. Bokeh is not 135L quality. Nobody should expect that. But it's far better than 50 1.4. Personally like 100mm blur better though. Also it has no weather sealing.

On the good side the 85 focuses faster than the 100L. The focus seems more consistent and reliable. This is only based on my personal experience.

The 85 is a great value lens. You should definitely try it. Nothing to lose.

Don't agree with you on the usable aperture of 2.5.  It's the best lens I own and virtually never take it off 1.8 for professional portrait work - it's a belter of lens, I reckon by far the best bang for buck in the Canon line up.

85 f/1.8 is great value but I agree with the previous poster that if you need to stop it down to f/4 for a group shot the angular bokeh is ugly.  I wish Canon would update this with a 85mm f/1.8 IS design similar to the 35mm f/2 IS.

I personally would rather have the 100L of the two for its dual purpose macro/general as well as more pleasing bokeh stopped down.

Interesting that you liked the 100L bokeh stopped down? I didn't like it even wide open. Can you share some images- in case it was my technique which was the issue (and it might well be... :) )
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 100mm 2.8 vs 85mm 1.8
« Reply #36 on: August 22, 2014, 01:05:46 PM »