Which Canon 85mm Lens is for You?

[aceflibble]

With the remark about bragging rights - I was really referring to other photographers not models or family members. Apparently some camera manufacturers don't have an 85mm F1.2 lens available at all, and it is always fun being able to claim that the extra 1/3 stop has made all the difference, allowing me to take a shot in almost complete darkness.

The Canon 85mm f/1.2L II is t/1.5-1.6 (copy variation), while, for example, the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 is t/1.6-1.7, and the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS appears to be about t/1.6 as well. (Further testing of the Canon 1.4 is required on my end, and I'd like someone else to test it too, for confirmation.) The Tamron 85mm is obviously slower since it's f/1.8, but as it's only t/1.9, it's actually the most accurate transmission of the bunch.

On top of that there are diminishing returns with digital sensors' light gathering beyond f/1.6, so even if you had a perfectly t/1.2 vs t/1.4 comparison, the t/1.2 lens still wouldn't be a full third stop brighter, but more like a fifth of a stop brighter, or a quarter for some extra-sensitive sensors.

So... yeah. That f/1.2 isn't really getting you a third of a stop more exposure. Compared to the f/1.4 options around, a quarter of a stop is the most you can expect to gain, and in many cases you'll be getting less. In fact it's very possible that, thanks to copy variation, a dodgy Canon f/1.2 delivers less light to the sensor than a good copy of any of the f/1.4 lenses.

As long as you get the frame you want, it's all fine. Just, yeah, those "bragging rights" really only fly with other photographers who are very specifically big enough gear-nuts to care about what lens you have but not big enough gear-nuts to know how these things actually work. (Which, actually, does appear to be 90% of commenters on these kinds of rumour & news sites, so....)

 

[slclick]

Once again, I'm in the market for an 85. I guess my search is not unlike ahsanford's quest. Perhaps the best analogy of what I want is the Tamron but made by Canon. I'm 99% sure I'm done with 3rd party glass although the Tammy 70-210 tomorrow has me interested. I've owned two copies of the Canon 1.8 and won't go back so that leaves me being patient...like my wait for the 135L incarnation which is always coming in whichever year you've been living.

 

[JoFT]

Once again, I'm in the market for an 85. I guess my search is not unlike ahsanford's quest. Perhaps the best analogy of what I want is the Tamron but made by Canon. I'm 99% sure I'm done with 3rd party glass although the Tammy 70-210 tomorrow has me interested. I've owned two copies of the Canon 1.8 and won't go back so that leaves me being patient...like my wait for the 135L incarnation which is always coming in whichever year you've been living.

Don't wait, take the 1.4L... It is an awesome lens.... http://bit.ly/2zKesGi
I do love mine....

 

[slclick]

Once again, I'm in the market for an 85. I guess my search is not unlike ahsanford's quest. Perhaps the best analogy of what I want is the Tamron but made by Canon. I'm 99% sure I'm done with 3rd party glass although the Tammy 70-210 tomorrow has me interested. I've owned two copies of the Canon 1.8 and won't go back so that leaves me being patient...like my wait for the 135L incarnation which is always coming in whichever year you've been living.

Don't wait, take the 1.4L... It is an awesome lens.... http://bit.ly/2zKesGi
I do love mine....

Would be nice however that is my budget for 2 lenses.

 

[aceflibble]

Once again, I'm in the market for an 85. I guess my search is not unlike ahsanford's quest. Perhaps the best analogy of what I want is the Tamron but made by Canon.

The Tamron is basically the best all-rounder 85 on the market right now. Third party be damned, it's built better than most Canon mid-range and the lower-L lenses, the manual focus is better than any other 85 on the market, autofocus is not particularly worse than any other 85 (it's a huge improvement over the Canon 1.2's and the Sigma's AF) and the VC works extremely well.

The most important thing for me, as I've gone through every 85-100mm option for Canon, is the Tamron has the most consistent rendering. There are lots of 85s which are super sharp in the centre but much weaker toward the edges, or really contrasty when the light's behind you but they go flat when you shoot into the light, etc. The Tamron gives you really predictable, totally even quality in all conditions and across the whole frame. That may not be exciting, but for me as a working pro who needs repeatable, reliable results, it's proven to be the best of the current options. The fact it's also one of the cheaper options is just a nice bonus.

Forget whatever you think about third party lenses, the Tamron primes are absolutely as-good-if-not-better-than their Canon equivalents, except the 35mm which is 'only' dead even with the Canon. (It's AF is a fraction slower and it is quarter of a stop behind in light transmission, but it's weather sealed and has a much greater magnification, so I call that a tie.)

 

[slclick]

Once again, I'm in the market for an 85. I guess my search is not unlike ahsanford's quest. Perhaps the best analogy of what I want is the Tamron but made by Canon.

The Tamron is basically the best all-rounder 85 on the market right now. Third party be damned, it's built better than most Canon mid-range and the lower-L lenses, the manual focus is better than any other 85 on the market, autofocus is not particularly worse than any other 85 (it's a huge improvement over the Canon 1.2's and the Sigma's AF) and the VC works extremely well.

The most important thing for me, as I've gone through every 85-100mm option for Canon, is the Tamron has the most consistent rendering. There are lots of 85s which are super sharp in the centre but much weaker toward the edges, or really contrasty when the light's behind you but they go flat when you shoot into the light, etc. The Tamron gives you really predictable, totally even quality in all conditions and across the whole frame. That may not be exciting, but for me as a working pro who needs repeatable, reliable results, it's proven to be the best of the current options. The fact it's also one of the cheaper options is just a nice bonus.

Forget whatever you think about third party lenses, the Tamron primes are absolutely as-good-if-not-better-than their Canon equivalents, except the 35mm which is 'only' dead even with the Canon. (It's AF is a fraction slower and it is quarter of a stop behind in light transmission, but it's weather sealed and has a much greater magnification, so I call that a tie.)

I have an opportunity to pick up a Tamron at a crazy good price, if I do I'll report back.

 

[jd7]

An earlier post referred to "bragging rights" with 1/3 stop larger aperture.

To be pedantic, the 85 1.2L II is a half stop larger aperture than the 85 1.4L, not a third of a stop (I believe the 1.2L II only has a slight advantage in T-stop though.)

Interesting to see some very positive comments about the Tamron ... and CR guy seems to be quite a fan of it too. If I decide to change from old Sigma 84 1.4 EX at some point, I will have to give it a close look.

 

[jd7]

https://neilvn.com/tangents/bokeh-canon-ef-85mm-f14l-is-lens/

From this comparison again I would agree the 1.2 is the nicest rendering and has the nicest bokeh, partly due to the fall off in focus, partly due to the lower contrast and partly due to the softer bokeh balls. But there you can see the 1.4 IS is very close, at times hard to distinguish. Indeed Canon appears to have made a conscious decision not to chase Sigma and Zeiss on sharpness (Dustin Abbott found the Canon softer than the Sigma 85Art and Zeiss 85) but to try to achieve a best of both, being sharper than the 1.2 while keeping most of the rendering and avoiding the harsh Sigma bokeh.

Thanks for the link! Interesting comparison, and to my eye the 1.2L has the best bokeh, followed by the Sigma Art and then the 1.4L. There isn't much between all three though.

 

[YuengLinger]

Now if only 50mm had so many fine options!

 

[slclick]

I didn't do it. The copy I had a chance with did not give me confidence like Dustin's review did. Anyone else feel as if Tamron has more copy to copy variance than the other major players?

 

[jd7]

Now if only 50mm had so many fine options!

Agreed! I like the Sigma a lot but it is pretty big and heavy for a 50mm prime. And the Canon options all have their flaws, although I'd give the 50L a go if it wasn't so expensive. Just don't want to pay that much for a 50mm prime.

 

[Larsskv]

I didn't do it. The copy I had a chance with did not give me confidence like Dustin's review did. Anyone else feel as if Tamron has more copy to copy variance than the other major players?

I had the Tamron 45mm f1.8. Really, really nice lens optically. However, I could not get it to focus accurately with the off center focusing points, even though the one in the middle was as reliable as any other lens I’ve had.

I would be tempted by the Tamron 85 if it wasn’t for this experience.

 

[ykn123]

i own the 1.2II and while i think i use it not often enough, i just can't sell it because the images it gets me are special and i love them.
I think about adding the 1.4 IS for the IS and faster AF - maybe if the price has dropped a bit.
One note one the Tamron - i thought a while about adding Tamron glass and i started with the 45 1.8. It had so good reviews and looks and feels great but i have the same issues with the AF as described above. I had it on my 5DSr and 5DM4 with the best results , i purchased the tap-in console and entered the focal and field AFMA test results into the lens - still don't get images that i find overwhelming. I did some high contrast shooting (my dog on snow, fast moving, IS off) - I got a lot of CAs (purple) and had not many keepers at all. I did the test with my 135 2.0 in the same setting and the images where sharp and clear, no CAs .... so i really think about selling the Tamron 45 1.8 based on the last week testings and based on that i am less interested in the other Tamron options :-(

 

[jaell]

Just got my 1.4 dropped off tonight. Wish UPS would have actually hit their delivery window so I could do a little more testing before the kids hit the sack, but tomorrow is another day.

It's heavy, but not in a ponderous way. Feels substantial.

Just took a few test shots. Low light AF was fast and accurate: better than I had hoped. The bokeh was very nice, made the box of tissues I was photographing look very special, rendered sharp against a pleasingly out-of-focus bookshelf behind it.

In a dark room with one desk lamp (with what amounts to a 25W incandescent bulb in it), I was shooting at ISO 200 at 1/20th at f/1.4. Not a problem with acquiring/nailing focus, and the images turned out bright and sharp.

I'm normally an outdoor/travel/landscaper who dabbles in macro. But my kids are cute enough that I want to expand to portraiture, so this is by far my most appropriate (and fastest) lens for that. I think my next purchase will be a new hard drive to store all the pictures I'm going to be taking with this lens.

 

[stevelee]

That shot alone makes the lens worth buying.

 

[YuengLinger]

That shot alone makes the lens worth buying.

Thanks!

 

[cayenne]

Is there some sort of problem with the Canon 85mm f/1.2 lenses?

I've been reading this thread, and multiple people have been talking about trading theirs in before "costly" repairs are needed.

I'd not heard these lenses had any particular problems or short shelf lives.....?

Can someone fill me in on this?

I got the 85mm 1.8 as one of my first lenses, bang for the buck type thing.

But have been eyeballing a 85mm 1.2 in the relatively near future.

I was thinking of picking one up off Canon Refurbs for the 85mm 1.2, but if there's some sort of inherit problem with them, I may re-think this.

Thanks in advance!!

cayenne

 

[YuengLinger]

Is there some sort of problem with the Canon 85mm f/1.2 lenses?

I've been reading this thread, and multiple people have been talking about trading theirs in before "costly" repairs are needed.

I'd not heard these lenses had any particular problems or short shelf lives.....?

Can someone fill me in on this?

I got the 85mm 1.8 as one of my first lenses, bang for the buck type thing.

But have been eyeballing a 85mm 1.2 in the relatively near future.

I was thinking of picking one up off Canon Refurbs for the 85mm 1.2, but if there's some sort of inherit problem with them, I may re-think this.

Thanks in advance!!

cayenne

After deciding to keep my 1.4L IS, I made the decision to sell the 1.2L II for two reasons. Firstly, I believed that the resale value of the 1.2L II was good and might not get better. Secondly, I did not want to keep a lens that added very little in IQ or "character," yet exposed me to a fairly high potential repair bill. I don't have any reason to believe the 1.2L II is more prone to problems than other L lenses, but it is unique in its implementation of AF, and its rear element is flush against the back of the assembly. And it's a whole lot of glass crammed into a tight space!

If I remember correctly, lensrentals actually posted a typical cost-of-repair in this forum, but I could not find that post to share with you. You might contact them for the information, or another member here might find the post. As a CPS member, I'm well aware of repair costs generally, but fortunately never needed to send in my 1.2L.

My decision to replace the 1.2L II with a lens that has, say, 95% of its IQ "magic" plus IS and much quicker AF doesn't need a whole lot of further explanation.