Canon RF 85mm f/2 IS STM in the pipeline [CR1]

[SecureGSM]

LOL! Just use Servo-AF or "EyeTracking / Continuous" or whatever it is called on your camera for handheld wide-open portraits. Model and/or photog can wobble around, focus will still be on cornea ... or on eyelash ... at worst ... grrr ;-)

Even a "cheap" Canon RF 85mm lens should be f/1.8, not f/2.0. Following your observations, the T-value should be even better compared to the old EF 85/1.8 with T/2.1.

I'd find a Canon RF 85/2.0 only worthwhile if it was as compact and light as the Pentax smc 77/1.8 Limited - L 48 x D 64 mm, filter 49mm (!), 270 grams - despite full metal construction and including built-in sliding metal lens shade.

Michael is right.

FYI, at 2 m to subject, 85/2.0 vs 85/1.8 DOF:

there.is.no.difference......
85/2 lens could be made small and light.... there is an obvious advantage for studio / controlled light. what the heck would you need a huge 85mm lens for when you shoot stopped down to at least F8 anyway?

 

[Michael Clark]

LOL! Just use Servo-AF or "EyeTracking / Continuous" or whatever it is called on your camera for handheld wide-open portraits. Model and/or photog can wobble around, focus will still be on cornea ... or on eyelash ... at worst ... grrr ;-)

Even a "cheap" Canon RF 85mm lens should be f/1.8, not f/2.0. Following your observations, the T-value should be even better compared to the old EF 85/1.8 with T/2.1.

I'd find a Canon RF 85/2.0 only worthwhile if it was as compact and light as the Pentax smc 77/1.8 Limited - L 48 x D 64 mm, filter 49mm (!), 270 grams - despite full metal construction and including built-in sliding metal lens shade.

If the 1/3 stop difference between 85mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/2 is that huge to you, then you can go ahead and take a "pass" on the upcoming RF 85mm f/2 at a fairly affordable price point and pay ever how much you need to for an RF mount 85mm lens that goes wider than f/2. In my opinion the distinction is only significant for spec sheet bragging rights competitions.

 

[picperfect]

no. i dont buy expensive primes (if its expensive its gotta be more universally useful to me = excellent zoom) and i will certainly not accept an 85/1.8 as a "high effort lens" justifying a high price tag.

especially with the optical advantages (presumably) offered by RF mount - should make it easier to construct decent iq lenses with moderately wide apertures.

f/2 would have been a fest in 1920. in 2020 it would be a totally uninspiring, boring, SLOW 85mm lens - even more so for "the world's leading imaging gesr maker" and its a brand new mount system with supposedly superior mount geometry. a poor (man's) joke!

at 85mm focal length f/1.8 has been STANDARD since 1987. f/1.4 is semi-fast. f/1.2 is fast. f/1.0 is very fast. less than f/1 is crazy.

if it is only f/2 it would need to have a really low price, excellent IQ and be as compact as the Pentax smc 77/1.8 (!) limited if Canon wants me to consider it. otherwise i got 85mm covered with my 70-200/2.8.

 

[Michael Clark]

no. i dont buy expensive primes (if its expensive its gotta be more universally useful to me = excellent zoom) and i will certainly not accept an 85/1.8 as a "high effort lens" justifying a high price tag.

especially with the optical advantages (presumably) offered by RF mount - should make it easier to construct decent iq lenses with moderately wide apertures.

f/2 would have been a fest in 1920. in 2020 it would be a totally uninspiring, boring, SLOW 85mm lens - even more so for "the world's leading imaging gesr maker" and its a brand new mount system with supposedly superior mount geometry. a poor (man's) joke!

at 85mm focal length f/1.8 has been STANDARD since 1987. f/1.4 is semi-fast. f/1.2 is fast. f/1.0 is very fast. less than f/1 is crazy.

if it is only f/2 it would need to have a really low price, excellent IQ and be as compact as the Pentax smc 77/1.8 (!) limited if Canon wants me to consider it. otherwise i got 85mm covered with my 70-200/2.8.

The lion's share of the optical advantage is with lenses having a focal length shorter than the 44mm registration distance of the EF mount plus a little room for the glass. By 85mm the advantage is much less.

It's 1/3 stop. You're pitching a tantrum like it is a three stop difference. No f/2 lens is slow.

If you think f/2 is "slow", then your 70-200/2.8 is "glacial". And the out of focus areas are way too busy compared to even the cheapest 85 primes.

 

[picperfect]

The lion's share of the optical advantage is with lenses having a focal length shorter than the 44mm registration distance of the EF mount plus a little room for the glass. By 85mm the advantage is much less.

It's 1/3 stop. You're pitching a tantrum like it is a three stop difference. No f/2 lens is slow.

If you think f/2 is "slow", then your 70-200/2.8 is "glacial". And the out of focus areas are way too busy compared to even the cheapest 85 primes.

tantrum? nope. just personal experience. i had the ef 100/2.0 for some time, and sold it. bokeh fringing/loCA was unbearable, all the purple borders along every contrast edge ruined the out of focus areas. 5 pixels wide, not fixable in post, because it would only change purple fringes to grey fringes.

70-200 2.8 ii so much better, in every way.

also, and since it is only 1/3 of a stop difference, there should be no difficulty for Canon to make an 85 f/1.8 instead of a f/2.0.

prime lenses sure will need every bit if advantage over much more versatile zooms.

 

[SteveC]

tantrum? nope. just personal experience. i had the ef 100/2.0 for some time, and sold it. bokeh fringing/loCA was unbearable, all the purple borders along every contrast edge ruined the out of focus areas. 5 pixels wide, not fixable in post, because it would only change purple fringes to grey fringes.

70-200 2.8 ii so much better, in every way.

also, and since it is only 1/3 of a stop difference, there should be no difficulty for Canon to make an 85 f/1.8 instead of a f/2.0.

prime lenses sure will need every bit if advantage over much more versatile zooms.

Someone implied an 85mm f/1.8 would be huge, but the thread diameter is still only 58mm, pretty much the "normal" diameter for things like kit lenses, at least when it's Rebels we're talking about. Not at all huge.

 

[BillB]

no. i dont buy expensive primes (if its expensive its gotta be more universally useful to me = excellent zoom) and i will certainly not accept an 85/1.8 as a "high effort lens" justifying a high price tag.

especially with the optical advantages (presumably) offered by RF mount - should make it easier to construct decent iq lenses with moderately wide apertures.

f/2 would have been a fest in 1920. in 2020 it would be a totally uninspiring, boring, SLOW 85mm lens - even more so for "the world's leading imaging gesr maker" and its a brand new mount system with supposedly superior mount geometry. a poor (man's) joke!

at 85mm focal length f/1.8 has been STANDARD since 1987. f/1.4 is semi-fast. f/1.2 is fast. f/1.0 is very fast. less than f/1 is crazy.

if it is only f/2 it would need to have a really low price, excellent IQ and be as compact as the Pentax smc 77/1.8 (!) limited if Canon wants me to consider it. otherwise i got 85mm covered with my 70-200/2.8.

Well, f2.0 is only a CR1 rumor.

 

[Michael Clark]

tantrum? nope. just personal experience. i had the ef 100/2.0 for some time, and sold it. bokeh fringing/loCA was unbearable, all the purple borders along every contrast edge ruined the out of focus areas. 5 pixels wide, not fixable in post, because it would only change purple fringes to grey fringes.

70-200 2.8 ii so much better, in every way.

also, and since it is only 1/3 of a stop difference, there should be no difficulty for Canon to make an 85 f/1.8 instead of a f/2.0.

prime lenses sure will need every bit if advantage over much more versatile zooms.

I've also seen a lot of purple fringing with EF 100mm f/2 lenses when used outdoors in bright light. Not so much with EF 85mm f/1.8 lenses.

 

[BillB]

I've also seen a lot of purple fringing with EF 100mm f/2 lenses when used outdoors in bright light. Not so much with EF 85mm f/1.8 lenses.

The purple fringing is really bad if you are photographing chrome motorcycle handlebars in bright sunlight, especially with the lens wide open.

 

[Michael Clark]

The purple fringing is really bad if you are photographing chrome motorcycle handlebars in bright sunlight, especially with the lens wide open.

In a situation like that, the purple fringing is bad with an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II also. I shoot a lot of high school marching bands performing. Those silver instruments (Flutes and low brass with larger diameter tubing, in particular) are not a lot different than handlebars in terms of the way they reflect sunlight or even artificial stadium lighting at night..