50mm 1.2 / 85mm 1.2 VS Zeiss 50mm1.4 / Zeiss 85mm 1.4? Which should I buy...
- Thread starter djgunter
- Start date
- Status
50mm F/1.2 is a gorgeous lens. I spent 6 weeks in Thailand with just that one lens.
More can be seen here: http://alipaul.com/travel/thailand-two/.
More can be seen here: http://alipaul.com/travel/thailand-two/.
Upvote
0
The 85L is the bokeh king, but the 50L is great too. I ditched my 50L (once my favorite lens) for the Zeiss ZE 50mm f/2 Makro and have zero regrets. Then again I shoot video primarily so I have very little need for autofocus. ZE is worlds sharper though, especially on the edges. The ZE 50mm f/1.4 is pretty solid too, but not that great below f/2.8.
Upvote
0
I have experience with these lenses. In my view, the Canon 85 f/1.2L is a phenomenal portrait lens - the best for this purpose Canon makes (unless you include the 200 f/2.0 - but that is a different discussion and not suited to street photography as mentioned by the OP). At night, the 85 f/1.2 AF will hunt, but the lens is worth that frustration. The 50 f/1.2L is also a very good lens, but in my view I would choose the Zeiss over it for street photography, especially at night when you will want to shoot wide open. Good luck. (+1 AliPaul - great shots.)
Upvote
0
djgunter said:
Yes it does make a difference. The 5D3 will greatly improve your chances with fast manuals and also with "super" fast auto such as 1.2's without needing to use LV all the time simply because the viewfinder's green dot focus confirmation is that much reliable in that camera.
I pondered more or less around the same question as you and decided the following for myself:
-50mm: discarded the 50l and Zeiss 1.4 went for the Zeiss Makro Planar F/2 because it is outstanding at any aperture and a joy to hold and use. Top build and frankly a stellar performer wide open at f/2 with macro capability (well, 1:2 but macro anyway). The 50L has only going for it the 1.2 aperture and from what I read it is not very sharp there. Look on the forums for examples of the Zeiss 50MP's bokeh and even at f2 it can compete handsomely with the 50L at 1.2. And the famous/infameous 3D effect: oh boy does the Zeiss 50MP render in 3D
-85mm: went for the 85L: besides being very very sharp at 1.2, my experience with the Zeiss 100 (which I also own) is that it is very very difficult to nail focus in manual at those king of apertures with medium teles such as those. The the autofocus becomes a necessity. I still use the 100 MP but for those occasions I KNOW i'll have the time to take n-pictures until hopefully one is critically focused. If you wonder why did I chose a fast manual 50mm such as the Zeiss 50MP, I can tell you that manually focusing at f2 at 50mm is much much easier than doing it at 85 (exit the Zeiss 85 1.4 then).
Here some examples of the "pop" effect, bokeh, shaprness and particular contrasty colors of the Zeiss 50MP (Heck I've even had to desaturate some). You'll finder bigger on the flicker page where I put them.
untitled-3 par Fegarix, sur Flickr
untitled-10 par Fegarix, sur Flickr
untitled-4 par Fegarix, sur Flickr
And a couple of "3d" examples (though need to be appreciatted better in a bigger pic:
untitled-1 par Fegarix, sur Flickr
untitled-6 par Fegarix, sur Flickr
untitled-8 par Fegarix, sur Flickr
Upvote
0
I have and use both. I would say that the 50mm f/1.2L is going to be your more walk-around everyday prime. The 85mm f/1.2L is a heavy beast and slower to AF. The 85mm shines for portraits really. Here are some samples taken with my 50mm f/1.2L:
@ f/1.2:
@ f/1.8:
@ f/2.8:
@ f/1.2:
@ f/1.8:
@ f/2.8:
Upvote
0
I have both the 50mm 1.2 and the Zeiss 85mm 1.4. I view them as complimentary rather than substitutes for each other; they excel at different things.
The 50mmL is a great lens - the shallow DOF is a great asset for certain images. I looked at the Canon 85mmL and thought it was very nice; however, I love the Zeiss 85mm. Somehow, my favorite images - (portraits, intimate landscapes) always seem to be taken with this lens. It is small and easy to carry (especially compared to the Canon 85mm). At 1.4 it exhibits some field curvature - however that is normal for this lens design. At smaller apertures, it is bitingly sharp with terrific tonality.
I use a 5D3 and have micro-adjusted it. hand-held, I get great focus accuracy; of course, live-view on the tripod eliminates focusing problems. Highly recommended.
For the OP; it really depends on your objectives and how important AF is to you.
The 50mmL is a great lens - the shallow DOF is a great asset for certain images. I looked at the Canon 85mmL and thought it was very nice; however, I love the Zeiss 85mm. Somehow, my favorite images - (portraits, intimate landscapes) always seem to be taken with this lens. It is small and easy to carry (especially compared to the Canon 85mm). At 1.4 it exhibits some field curvature - however that is normal for this lens design. At smaller apertures, it is bitingly sharp with terrific tonality.
I use a 5D3 and have micro-adjusted it. hand-held, I get great focus accuracy; of course, live-view on the tripod eliminates focusing problems. Highly recommended.
For the OP; it really depends on your objectives and how important AF is to you.
Upvote
0
dickgrafixstop said:
I know what you're trying to say, but that's a pretty exclusive viewpoint. Few will dispute Ziess glass has extraordinary qualities, but it's time to roll out that old chestnut again...Content is King.
Just to keep things in perspective, the best photograph you see this year may be taken with an iPhone!
-PW
Upvote
0
djgunter said:
I have the 5D3, and the Zeiss 50 f1.4 is my favorite lens.
That being said, it is not the lens I use the most. For much of my photography, I need the AF; there isn't time for the critical focusing that a MF lens calls for. But when there is time (landscapes etc), the images I get from the Zeiss are just beautiful. They remind me of the results I get from my Rollei TLR.
FYI, I had a Sigma 50 f1.4, and the Canon as well. I didn't like them as much. Which is why I sold them in favor of the Zeiss.
I am thinking of getting a replacement screen for the 5D3 (I do wish Canon had made them available rather than having to do something aftermarket) to make MF easier. Wish I could afford a 1Dx, but that's outside the budget.
Upvote
0
djgunter said:
Rent all of the lenses and try them doing real world photography before buying. Also read the reviews, or even the rental place's own short summary of each one.
There are a lot of variables regarding sharpness and bokeh. The only way to have a lot of sharpness wide open, along with the best bokeh, is to go longer in focal length to the 135 f/2, in my opinion. But that narrower angle of view may not work for your purposes.
Also, you will definitely have to learn how to focus manually, if you are shooting people at f/1.4.
Many high end fashion photographers seem to use either a 24-70 f/2.8 zoom, or else the 50mm f/1.2 (besides the ubiquitous 70-200). The 85mm f/1.2 is a more specialized lens, is very slow to focus, and is really meant for slow paced studio work. I have rented it. However I do mostly landscape and wildlife photography. I doubt its bokeh will be quite as extreme when photographing a person, as the 50mm f/1.2...due to the fact that you are closer to the subject with the 50mm. For just head and shoulders portraits, this may be reversed...I can't really say. I'm not a portrait expert. I'm sure there are "maths" that can calculate it.
However, the 50mm f/1.2 is far from the sharpest lens, at least when at the wider apertures. If you favor sharpness over bokeh, I would say choose the new version ii 24-70 zoom, or else a manual focus 50mm f/1.4 or f/2, such as Zeiss. If you favor bokeh, the 50mm f/1.2 seems to be king. I personally own the Cosina Voigtlander 58mm. The price is low, the sharpness high, the bokeh less than perfect, but very usable. The build quality and ergonomics are practically a clone of Zeiss. It is a full manual lens though, you have to adjust aperture on the lens's ring. It's fun though. What's less fun, is the inaccurate light metering if you close the aperture down...I live with that because I don't do much fast paced portraiture with it.
Here it is on a 1D Mark IV.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Since you're planning on upgrading to a 5d3, I want to mention something you might already know. The 5d3 doesn't allow you to change focusing screens. While I'm sure that some 3rd party people are more than willing to open up your camera and change it for you, I'm sure that's a "void the warranty" type of customization. I've used the 85 1.2 a lot with my 5d3, and I love it.
I played around with a Zeiss 35 1.4 the other day, and while I enjoyed the manual focus to some extent, and they looked good on the back of the screen, the number of "keepers" I was getting when I put them into my computer was less than I thought just from looking at the back of the camera. Maybe I was "doing it wrong", but I just held down back-button focus and slowly focused until I got the "focus confirmation" then shot. It was something I could probably get used to and focus relatively quickly, but definitely not near the focus speed of even the 85 1.2 (which is sloow). That, and the frustration of thinking that certain shots were 'dead-on' focus when they were slightly off was frustrating to me. My guess is that I was slightly passing the area of dead-on focus while I was turning it, and without a focusing screen, I was having trouble getting it dead-on.
I played around with a Zeiss 35 1.4 the other day, and while I enjoyed the manual focus to some extent, and they looked good on the back of the screen, the number of "keepers" I was getting when I put them into my computer was less than I thought just from looking at the back of the camera. Maybe I was "doing it wrong", but I just held down back-button focus and slowly focused until I got the "focus confirmation" then shot. It was something I could probably get used to and focus relatively quickly, but definitely not near the focus speed of even the 85 1.2 (which is sloow). That, and the frustration of thinking that certain shots were 'dead-on' focus when they were slightly off was frustrating to me. My guess is that I was slightly passing the area of dead-on focus while I was turning it, and without a focusing screen, I was having trouble getting it dead-on.
Upvote
0
djgunter, Congratulations! Please post some shots done with your fisheye lens.
I have read and seen pics online, showing the Zeiss 85mm to have great color and extremely smooth bokeh, but it's not as sharp as either the Nikon f/1.4 or the Canon f/1.2. My Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 is extremely sharp (based on an old Nikon design), but lacks the contrast and color of the other lenses. I mostly am tired of the manual focus, and am beginning to think I prefer closer to 100mm focal length for its angle of view, on a full frame camera. 85mm seems to fall into that range that seems less necessary than 50 or 100mm, on a full frame. Maybe it's just me!
I've rented the Zeiss 100 f/2 Makro Planar in the past, and wish I owned one. Its color, bokeh, and sharpness were stellar. Its contrast was kind of weird (the darks didn't go "black" very easily). Ah well, I want something with autofocus...
What we need, is a big white 95mm f/0.9, with IS...I wish I could design and have one built...I think it would sell, assuming it was built right! I guess it wouldn't sell if I designed it!
I have read and seen pics online, showing the Zeiss 85mm to have great color and extremely smooth bokeh, but it's not as sharp as either the Nikon f/1.4 or the Canon f/1.2. My Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 is extremely sharp (based on an old Nikon design), but lacks the contrast and color of the other lenses. I mostly am tired of the manual focus, and am beginning to think I prefer closer to 100mm focal length for its angle of view, on a full frame camera. 85mm seems to fall into that range that seems less necessary than 50 or 100mm, on a full frame. Maybe it's just me!
I've rented the Zeiss 100 f/2 Makro Planar in the past, and wish I owned one. Its color, bokeh, and sharpness were stellar. Its contrast was kind of weird (the darks didn't go "black" very easily). Ah well, I want something with autofocus...
What we need, is a big white 95mm f/0.9, with IS...I wish I could design and have one built...I think it would sell, assuming it was built right! I guess it wouldn't sell if I designed it!
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
