Samples of Canon 85mm f1.4 IS posted by DPreview
- Thread starter Chaitanya
- Start date
Numbers 2, 6, 18, 28 and 45 have me sold, they seem to have much smoother background transitions than the 1.2.
Number 45 looks very nice for wide open too.
Number 45 looks very nice for wide open too.
Upvote
0
I've been excited about this lens. I hope there will be more posts of portraits. From what I see right now I am not sure it is better than the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. Yes, the 85mm is a faster lens, but...
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
CanonFanBoy said:
Can we say "more wieldly," or is the proper expression "less unwieldly"?
You have made a good comparison at 85mm, but I also agree with PBD that it seems smoother than the 1.2 II.
The samples include a lot of f/5.6 and higher, which does show sharpness and range, but many of us would be most interested in more samples under f/2.8--especially with twinkly lights in the background.
Hoping reviews (especially Dustin's!) cover ergonomics and AF accuracy on outer points.
(Thanks, Chaitanya.)
PS NOW, CANON, PLEASE DO THIS FOR 50MM!
Upvote
0
If it’s one thing I’ve learned the last 15 years with Canon, it’s that only sample shots like these tell me nothing. And worst offender are Canon themselves. Even samples from the 1dx2 looks like a compact camera.
I’ll be buying this no matter what because of AF, IS and weathersealing. And I will get more out of it than these snapshots taken with no care hopefully it has no distortion and minimal CA and vignetting. Contrast, bokeh and flare looks great, but only shooting it myself will give the answers.
I’ll be buying this no matter what because of AF, IS and weathersealing. And I will get more out of it than these snapshots taken with no care
hopefully it has no distortion and minimal CA and vignetting. Contrast, bokeh and flare looks great, but only shooting it myself will give the answers.
Upvote
0
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
I'm with you. Lots of the portrait shots didn't seem very sharp either, to me. Interested in seeing your's and others' reviews.
Upvote
0
It’s a little hard to believe that there are no lens corrections applied to any of the shots as i’m Not seeing any vignetting in the wide open shots. This is nigh impossible. But, the background bokeh looks pretty good.
Upvote
0
sleepnever said:
Apart from the much better flare resistance and better CA control, I dont see image quality advantages over the 85 f1.2. I mean, bokeh and sharpness seems fine and "technically" good (although sharpness was a little disappointing at 100%), but I dont think those pictures illustrate or prove that the 85 L IS can provide the beautiful depth/3D rendering that I love from the 85 L f1.2. Im looking forward to more sample images and Dustins tests.
Upvote
0
Somehow I missed the official announcement of this lens - I did not realize it is already released. Anyway it is shocking (in a good way) that Canon has released a new version of an L lens that is actually cheaper than its predecessor. I wonder if they will continue to make both or discontinue the 1.2ii? Clearly image stabilization is hugely useful, especially since this will likely be a mainstay for wedding photographers shooting handheld.
The sample photos, however, are not helpful. This is a lens made for indoors and low light and portraits, but the sample photos are daylight scenic shots? (Yes I know there are a few portraits thrown in). If I did not have a Sigma EX 1.4 that I am happy with, I might consider this.
The sample photos, however, are not helpful. This is a lens made for indoors and low light and portraits, but the sample photos are daylight scenic shots? (Yes I know there are a few portraits thrown in). If I did not have a Sigma EX 1.4 that I am happy with, I might consider this.
Upvote
0
MrFotoFool said:
This new one is not a predecessor -- it's just another option. The 85mm f/1.2L II will continue to be sold alongside this lens. I'm actually curious to how they position these lenses w.r.t. each other. One would presume the f/1.2L II will win the isolation/bokeh contests but the f/1.4L IS will be so much better on other fronts (sharpness, IS, much faster AF, no more focus by wire nonsense, etc.).
But your "made for indoors and low light and portraits" is a matter of opinion. It's a prime -- this could be an events, sports, street reportage or even a landscape lens if you wanted it to be. But yes, portraiture & wedding work surely will get a lot of use.
- A
Upvote
0
And music fans complain that music critics and journalists can't play instruments well, and video game players complain that games journalists can't play games well enough.sebasan said:
Writing about something is an entirely separate skill to being proficient with that thing, and by the same token, being proficient at something does not necessarily mean you will be good at writing about it.
Yes, lots of professionals could take better photos than these, if given the opportunity to use the lens in their regular use. A very small percentage may be able to make better photos when shooting under the time- and location-restricted conditions that most lenses are reviewed under. Only an absolutely tiny minority can take better photos under those conditions and proficiently write about their use in a way which informs both the technically-minded consumer and the artistically-minded one.
Upvote
0
aceflibble said:
Music critics and jounalists aren't doing reviews of the guitars, pianos, etc. They re reviewing the
Ya' gotta be proficient with the instrument to properly review it. DPR is not proficient.
Upvote
0
Hi Dustin,
I am with you.. image #26 in DPR gallery is an interested one to look at. I have noticed a generous amount of LoCA in the image that I had some hard time to correct in post.
there is another image that I found a reference to being a interesting in that regard:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60320644
original size:
https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/60320644/0400a24d9fde4917af14b5fc15b1d6ca
I am with you.. image #26 in DPR gallery is an interested one to look at. I have noticed a generous amount of LoCA in the image that I had some hard time to correct in post.
there is another image that I found a reference to being a interesting in that regard:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60320644
original size:
https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/60320644/0400a24d9fde4917af14b5fc15b1d6ca
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Upvote
0
I love my 85mm F/1.2L II ...it's old and slow like me.
I am sure that this new one is a great lens, too. DPR shoots are never a good one-source decision maker.
Lots of people will be reviewing the lens and comparing it to the Sigma and mine...
It should all be quite interesting. I am actually surprised at Canon's intro price...
I am thinking that Sigma has a LOT to do with that!!!! 8) :
The new release inspired me to use my 85mm F/1.2L II this weekend.
I found a willing balloon/dart hawker at a booth on the Seaside Boardwalk in NJ. He was quite a character:
https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipOHYsQ2rUbdNTYKkpaxwqfX1suS5gI1vdXuBzHN
He was effective, too. He got $5 out of my buddy's pocket for a 3-dart throw. Of course, much to my delight.... he came up empty! LOL!
I am sure that this new one is a great lens, too. DPR shoots are never a good one-source decision maker.
Lots of people will be reviewing the lens and comparing it to the Sigma and mine...
It should all be quite interesting. I am actually surprised at Canon's intro price...
I am thinking that Sigma has a LOT to do with that!!!!
8) :The new release inspired me to use my 85mm F/1.2L II this weekend.
I found a willing balloon/dart hawker at a booth on the Seaside Boardwalk in NJ. He was quite a character:
https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipOHYsQ2rUbdNTYKkpaxwqfX1suS5gI1vdXuBzHN
He was effective, too. He got $5 out of my buddy's pocket for a 3-dart throw. Of course, much to my delight.... he came up empty! LOL!
Upvote
0
Similar threads
