Canon 85mm f1.4L IS USM First Impressions and images...
- Thread starter JoFT
- Start date
Yes, I use filter for weather sealing.
Well, the primary use for a lens hood is indeed to avoid flare. however, I haven't had any issues with rain on any other lens except the 17-40 (which isn't sealed.)
Even my 35 L II doesn't get rain on the front element like the 85 did today....
Well, the primary use for a lens hood is indeed to avoid flare. however, I haven't had any issues with rain on any other lens except the 17-40 (which isn't sealed.)
Even my 35 L II doesn't get rain on the front element like the 85 did today....
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
That's the norm for hood design, and I'm sure that's true in this case, as well.
Viggo said:hne said:
Ha! Perhaps! I know a place where I can have things 3D printed.
Would another ET-83 hood fit? The ET-83BII (for the 200/2.8L II) is deeper.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
Why on earth would you presume that? The lenses that require a front filter to complete the weather sealing all have in common an inner moving barrel which does not extend in front of the plane of the filter threads. That includes the front filter-compatible UWA L zooms with internal barrels that move with zooming, and the 50/1.2 with an internal barrel that moves with focusing. They also have in common a statement to that effect in the manual.
Since the 85/1.4L IS focuses internally and has no such statement in the manual, the logical presumption is that a filter is not required to complete the sealing.
Viggo said:
Incidentally, the 17-40 is a weathersealed lens (although that requires a front filter as discussed above).
Upvote
0
slclick said:
Yes, "based upon the elements" in this application I read as the FOV. But where the front element is physically located w.r.t to the hood matters, so in this case, internal vs. external focusing considerations matter. For instance, if the 85 f/1.2L II hood attached to that telescoping inner barrel (see pics from prior post), one would presume it wouldn't need to be so big.
That said, Canon doesn't always deliver a perfect hood from a flare perspective. Since Canon moved from the reverse zooming + gargantuan hood of the 24-70 f/2.8L I (which optimally shades at both ends of the zoom range) to the standard direction zooming + smaller hood of all the 24-something zooms we see today, we only get optimal shading at the 24mm end.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
That's a necessary compromise with all 'typical' zoom lenses (i.e., both internally zooming and those where the barrel extends as the focal length increases).
However, the 85/1.4 is a prime lens, so the hood design can be optimized for that focal length.
Upvote
0
Shane1.4 said:
That was a great a great video. The rendering from both lenses are so similar it's an easy choice for me.
Canon CPS coverage, image stabilization, smaller size/weight, with first party autofocus and no need to recalibrate. All at the expense of a little additional chromatic aberration?
Yes. I loved the Sigma 85 Art, but after 3 days testing them side-by-side, I sold the Sigma last Friday. I'm in love with this lens and it complements my 135L nicely.
Upvote
0
LSXPhotog said:
+1. Great video. The images from the two lenses seems to be very equal in both sharpness and bokeh. Size, weight, IS and first party AF will be the deciding factor for most of us, I think. Interesting to see the green tint produced by the Sigma lens. I preferred the Canon in that regard.
Upvote
0
Larsskv said:
+1, And I still think the Sigma lenses look "sticker on background" while the Canon has more 3d pop. I looks like the Sigma has a very steep focus fall off and that might be it. But I see the same in my images from the 85, things really do pop, reminds my of the Zeiss 100 f2 classic with less bit less fringing.
If its the LoCa that makes it so smooth and makes the subject pop, then I'll take that over sharpness any day...
Upvote
0
You guys. This lens is incredible. Today we are having an early Thanksgiving/Christmas with my family that can't get together later. The bokeh is amazing!
Upvote
0
Nice images! I see the bokeh balls still have the same mirror box cut off of the 85/1.2L II.
Upvote
0
Viggo said:
Interesting about your opinion on the sticker effect, that we have discussed earlier regarding the 50 ART. To my eyes, the 85 ART seems better in that regard than my impression on the 35 and 50 ART lenses. I think it is difficult to back such a claim based on the video. The pictures aren’t viewed in a large size, and I must admit that I do like the look of the pictures coming from Sigma 85 ART. That said, I also slightly prefer the look in the Canon images, and might agree that some of them have a slightly better 3D rendering. At the same time, I cannot rule out my Canon bias counting in. ???
I can feel the GAS, and might give in to it if I can get a good deal on a Black Friday offer...
Upvote
0
Act444 said:
I just ordered one. I'm leaving for Germany/Switzerland on Sunday, and my new lens will be waiting for me when I return.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
