Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM on the Way [CR3]

[wockawocka]

Interesting if true, I'd prefer to of seen a 1.8 IS and a mkiii 1.2 with a rear focusing unit. The size and weight at a biggie for me.

 

[PureClassA]

I haven't read back through everything but I LOVE THIS!!

Canon now has a 50MP 5DSR and a 30MP 5D4 and they will only get greater pixel density as time goes on.

Canon recognizes that we can't ALWAYS be shooting with tripods, which are otherwise necessary to take full advantage of 50MP. At the sacrifice of a half stop, we get IS on Canon's most popular (I think...) portrait prime. For guys like me who shoot the 5DSR, that's huge. I mostly shoot the 135L because I love the look and 85L 1.2 is about the same DOF when factoring focal length differences. But it's not always practical to shoot tripod mounted, nor can one always ensure being able to use much higher than normal shutter speeds to compensate short of dialing the ISO higher and higher which you prefer NOT to do when shooting for portrait.

If they can produce this lens with a a bit shorter minimum focusing distance, this will be a total homerun beyond belief. Between this rumor and possible new 135L and still waiting for a new 50L .... oh man, Canon is getting some money from me again next year and 2018. I JUST bought the new 35L II after spending 10 days with it from CPS.

 

[pixel8foto]

WTF Canon? The 200 1.8 goes to F/2, the 50 1.0 to 1.2. And now the same to the legendary 85 1.2L?? WTF???
Whats the point of having a large diameter lens mount if you're not gonna take advantage?

Large diameter lens mount has little to do with it.
The lenses you mentioned: 50/1.0, 200/1.8 and 85/1.2 all come from the film days. Film, being generally limited to 400 ISO, required super bright lenses to allow one to photogrph in limited natural light.
These lenses represented the effort to make them bright at nearly any cost. This is why they are so heavy, unwieldy, with atrotious AF speed, horribly soft out of centre, and huge amount of distrtions. Also extremely expensive.
With digital cameras that produce high quality low noise images at 3200 ISO, it simply makes no sense to design these monsters.

+1

Also the resolution of today's sensors reveals the limitations of those older designs and pushes the market for lenses which will resolve >35/50Mpix at 35mm.

 

[Antono Refa]

WTF Canon? The 200 1.8 goes to F/2, the 50 1.0 to 1.2. And now the same to the legendary 85 1.2L?? WTF???
Whats the point of having a large diameter lens mount if you're not gonna take advantage?

Large diameter lens mount has little to do with it.
The lenses you mentioned: 50/1.0, 200/1.8 and 85/1.2 all come from the film days. Film, being generally limited to 400 ISO, required super bright lenses to allow one to photograph in limited natural light.

IIRC, 1600 ASA film was common back in the day, though I was told it couldn't be enlarged as much.

 

[Viggo]

Wow, I'm thinking this will be my next lens to buy. It will for sure follow the recipe for the 35 L II, and be completely epic. 8)

 

[SPL]

Boooo, not f/1.2! (Hey that rhymes), no seriously, this looks to be an awesome lens!, with IS!

 

[JRPhotos]

Why would the not go with 1.2? Is this not a replacement for that lens?

 

[Ozarker]

I see a lot of people disappointed that this lens isn't going to be f/1.2.

What I'm wondering is this:

1. Will the one stop matter at all since there will be IS?
2. Will the f/1.4 cause bokeh to not be as nice?

I honestly don't know.

I don't think bokeh will suffer, but I don't know enough. Somebody here will know. The focal length is still nice for f/1.4.

I've dreamed of having the 85 f/1.2L. The only things that have kept me from it are the reputed slow focus and what looks like a very vulnerable rear element.

If the focus is much faster, the bokeh very nice, and the rear element not so exposed to damage I'm thinking this might really be a winner. Hope so anyway.

 

[Viggo]

I see a lot of people disappointed that this lens isn't going to be f/1.2.

What I'm wondering is this:

1. Will the one stop matter at all since there will be IS?
2. Will the one stop cause bokeh to not be as nice?

I honestly don't know.

I don't think bokeh will suffer, but I don't know enough. Somebody here will know. The focal length is still nice for f/1.4.

I've dreamed of having the 85 f/1.2L. The only things that have kept me from it are the reputed slow focus and what looks like a very vulnerable rear element.

If the focus is much faster, the bokeh very nice, and the rear element not so exposed to damage I'm thinking this might really be a winner. Hope so anyway.

It's no where near a full stop slower. One stop slower than 1.2 is 1.8.

I see a difference that matters in the dof and therefor separation between the 200 f1.8 and the f2. However, the quality of the bokeh and eveything else is much better with the f2. Same goes for the 50 f1.0 vs f1.2. So I'm sure that will also be the case with the new 85.

Make no mistake, Canon knows that people love the 85 L because of bokeh despite other things not being that great. They will not release a new lens that doesn't do well with bokeh. The 35 L is much sharper and better than the mk1, yet it's equal or better bokeh.

 

[drmikeinpdx]

Too late Canon! I bought the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 stabilized lens and it works great for me.

BTW, I'm keeping my old Canon 85mm f/1.8 to use on my Rebel class bodies when I don't need my pro gear. It works great in that role!

 

[TeT]

this is great news,

let's hope it will compare to the Sigma optically, have best possible AF and IS on top, great

Regarding the price of the 35mm 1.4, it will not come for free

Not cheap, should not have a problem v the sigma (see 35 1.4 L II)

 

[TeT]

Canon is tough to figure out: IS on the 85 1.4, why no IS on the recent 35 L II?

Who knows what the 50 will have? Would YOU want to place that bet? Not me...

 

[Viggo]

Canon is tough to figure out: IS on the 85 1.4, why no IS on the recent 35 L II?

Who knows what the 50 will have? Would YOU want to place that bet? Not me...

My guess is that the 35 L II is already big and heavy and it's the same aperture as the old one with shorter mfd. if it had IS also it would be too big, heavy and expensive for the majority who would sacrifice IS for the things mentioned.

The 85 L is big and heavy, and a newer better corrected version would be even bigger. So they go down on aperture to include both much better IQ and implement IS without charging double for a giant lens.

 

[Ozarker]

I see a lot of people disappointed that this lens isn't going to be f/1.2.

What I'm wondering is this:

1. Will the one stop matter at all since there will be IS?
2. Will the one stop cause bokeh to not be as nice?

I honestly don't know.

I don't think bokeh will suffer, but I don't know enough. Somebody here will know. The focal length is still nice for f/1.4.

I've dreamed of having the 85 f/1.2L. The only things that have kept me from it are the reputed slow focus and what looks like a very vulnerable rear element.

If the focus is much faster, the bokeh very nice, and the rear element not so exposed to damage I'm thinking this might really be a winner. Hope so anyway.

It's no where near a full stop slower. One stop slower than 1.2 is 1.8.

I see a difference that matters in the dof and therefor separation between the 200 f1.8 and the f2. However, the quality of the bokeh and eveything else is much better with the f2. Same goes for the 50 f1.0 vs f1.2. So I'm sure that will also be the case with the new 85.

Make no mistake, Canon knows that people love the 85 L because of bokeh despite other things not being that great. They will not release a new lens that doesn't do well with bokeh. The 35 L is much sharper and better than the mk1, yet it's equal or better bokeh.

I was wrong. Thanks! Wouldn't one full stop slower than f/1.2 be f/2.8? I might not know what I am doing reading the scale. Nope, I'm wrong again. Thanks again! I see now how f/1.8 is correct. From wiki:

 

[LSXPhotog]

The new Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art is shipping (mine arrives Monday) and then Canon Rumors makes this post...great. LOL

I'm looking forward to the Art lens, but if I have any issues with AF, the Canon may end up replacing it.

 

[LordofTackle]

Canon is tough to figure out: IS on the 85 1.4, why no IS on the recent 35 L II?

Who knows what the 50 will have? Would YOU want to place that bet? Not me...

My guess is that the 35 L II is already big and heavy and it's the same aperture as the old one with shorter mfd. if it had IS also it would be too big, heavy and expensive for the majority who would sacrifice IS for the things mentioned.

The 85 L is big and heavy, and a newer better corrected version would be even bigger. So they go down on aperture to include both much better IQ and implement IS without charging double for a giant lens.

Also, IS is less important on a WA lens (35 1.4) than on a telephoto lens (85 1.4).

I am probably going for the 85 1.2 II now anyway since I can get it for approx. 1200€. The new version, if and when it shows up, will be most likely twice that amount! plus, I really like the pictures the Mark II produces.

 

[JRPhotos]

I see a lot of people disappointed that this lens isn't going to be f/1.2.

What I'm wondering is this:

1. Will the one stop matter at all since there will be IS?
2. Will the one stop cause bokeh to not be as nice?

I honestly don't know.

I don't think bokeh will suffer, but I don't know enough. Somebody here will know. The focal length is still nice for f/1.4.

I've dreamed of having the 85 f/1.2L. The only things that have kept me from it are the reputed slow focus and what looks like a very vulnerable rear element.

If the focus is much faster, the bokeh very nice, and the rear element not so exposed to damage I'm thinking this might really be a winner. Hope so anyway.

I haven't had a need for IS in the 85 1.2L; I don't know visually how much of a different 1.4 - 1.2 would be but for my cake smash sessions and these types of shots I like to shoot at 1.2.

 

[infared]

I love my 85mm f/1.2L lens...I know it suffers from CA, is slow to focus, etc. but it is just such a unique lens that I doubt that I will want to replace it....
Plus I love to look at how Canon attached the electrical contacts right to the glass to enable such a bokeh monster to function on the camera. ...It's pretty cool! ;D

+1. I agree with you. From what I have seen from never 85mm lenses, they lack something essential when compared to the 85L II. They might be a little sharper wide open, but they don't produce the better image.

I guess I will try this new 85L, but I will keep the old one if the new lens has a different overall rendering.

Oh..yes..I forgot the "II"..that is the lens that I own, too...
I agree with your outlook...It might be a case where it is worth owning one of the newer supersharp and fast-focusing f/1.4 (the Sigma or the Canon), and keep this f/1.2 because there is something so so special about it. It make magical images:
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5787/22164166955_14c9af78a9_o_d.jpg

 

[Etienne]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

 

[Viggo]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

You totally forgot us, the people that shoot people in the field in any location with light. Quite a few strobists that like to control both focal length and aperture to include or exclude background ..