85mm f1.2 II or 70-200mm f2.8L IS II
- Thread starter rahkshi007
- Start date
- Status
I would either go with: Sigma 85/1.4 or Canon 85/1.8--which is a WONDERFUL lens!! Razor freaking sharp and light on the budget and hand.
Then, I would get the 70-200/4.0 IS. You would have portrait needs met and telephoto lens to boot. The Sigma is supposed to be excellent, and they hold their value quite well. The 85/1.2 is amazing, but a little overpriced in my opinion. Of course, the Nikon 85/1.4G is around the same price also. I guess the amount people pay always dictates price of goods. Economics 101
Then, I would get the 70-200/4.0 IS. You would have portrait needs met and telephoto lens to boot. The Sigma is supposed to be excellent, and they hold their value quite well. The 85/1.2 is amazing, but a little overpriced in my opinion. Of course, the Nikon 85/1.4G is around the same price also. I guess the amount people pay always dictates price of goods. Economics 101
Upvote
0
Nobody can tell you what to do since only you know where your passion lies in terms of subject matter and how you render it (i.e., with paper thin DOF), but if this is your third lens . . . ?
For my part, the novelty of f/1.2 can only last so long. I use my 70-200 every single day I take pictures, but can completely get my fill of the 85mm f/1.2 with one or two rentals per year. When I think extreme shallow DOF will enhance the look of a certain job, I rent a 1.2 and try to come up with a few other "self-assignments" to explore its possibilities in other ways. By the time it's due back to the dealer, I'm never really that sorry to see it go.
For my part, the novelty of f/1.2 can only last so long. I use my 70-200 every single day I take pictures, but can completely get my fill of the 85mm f/1.2 with one or two rentals per year. When I think extreme shallow DOF will enhance the look of a certain job, I rent a 1.2 and try to come up with a few other "self-assignments" to explore its possibilities in other ways. By the time it's due back to the dealer, I'm never really that sorry to see it go.
Upvote
0
I have the first version of the 70-200/2.8IS and the 85/1.8. I would love to get the 85/1.2, but unless you use it at 1.2-1.4, you might as well save the money and get the 1.8 from what I can tell. I've seen some wonderful images from the 1.2, it's got a quality at that aperture that is unmatched by any other lens. As has been mentioned before, It's not just the amount of bokeh, but the quality is ethereal, almost dreamlike. I've heard the closest any other short tele lens comes to it might be the Leica 1.4, but even then the Canon is preferred by some. So if it's for portraits with a unique look you desire, that is the lens to get. If you require versatility, the 70-200 is the obvious choice, though I've heard the 2nd version has a harsher bokeh quality than the first version has, trading that for superior sharpness, IS effectiveness and maybe focus speed. I prefer the more creamy bokeh of the first version, and find it plenty sharp for my portrait work. If it's more for sports or other work, the 2nd version would probably be the better choice.
Upvote
0
Wow! i really like the shot of [email protected] compare to [email protected]vuilang said:If you don't have 70-200II, i would recommend it. But if you purely want the best portrait lens? Get the 85LII
70-200 is a sharp lens but doesnt give the look anywhere near the 85L. However the 85 @1.2 is nerve breaking to shoot at. be extreme careful. Thus, i mostly shoot it at F1.6-2.2..
Bokeh wise, someone mentioned the 85 1.2 and 70-200 @200 2.8 would give the same look.. NO. it's not. n I took couple shots to see how much differences (for my own references at well)
all shot handheld, lowlight, straight out from camera, used 1d2 (FF would give a better look, isnt it?)
85L @1.2
70-200 @ 85mm 2.8
70-200 @200 2.8
BONUS: 200mm F2.0 IS
Upvote
0
M
mkln
Guest
save for both
they're currently the only two lenses I own for my 5d2.
very happy with both. use 70-200 more often because it's more versatile.
but 85L still blows me away when I look at the pics.
also I find the 70-200 without BG to be too front-heavy
the 85L with BG is very balanced. without it it's still ok.
85L, no BG = the highest quality/size ratio I get with the 5d2. fits a small dedicated bag. small volume, heavy weight tho (85L is almost 1kg alone :-[ )
with the 70-200 you need a dedicated backpack or large bag (but a shoulder bag will hurt. your neck will hurt anyway).
they're currently the only two lenses I own for my 5d2.
very happy with both. use 70-200 more often because it's more versatile.
but 85L still blows me away when I look at the pics.
also I find the 70-200 without BG to be too front-heavy
the 85L with BG is very balanced. without it it's still ok.
85L, no BG = the highest quality/size ratio I get with the 5d2. fits a small dedicated bag. small volume, heavy weight tho (85L is almost 1kg alone :-[ )
with the 70-200 you need a dedicated backpack or large bag (but a shoulder bag will hurt. your neck will hurt anyway).
Upvote
0
In a nutshell - The 85mm is more of a specialized lens with amazing IQ even wide-open and the ability to get to f/1.2. The 70-200 the versatile, practical choice for everyday use (that would I get before the 85L). Plus you have the new world of possibilities with the TC 1.4x and the 2x.
Upvote
0
If one continues to shoot over the years, one will eventually want both. 70-200 II is indeed as good as a f/2.8 zoom can probably ever be, but shooting at 85mm focal length at f/1.2 and still getting sharp subject with induplicable bokeh is priceless, a feat still unmatched by any other company.
Upvote
0
Sigma 85 1.4 is amazing. I have it and love it. My go-to lens for portraits. Half the price of the canon too!
Upvote
0
Need a little help...I'm new to canon and I just bought a canon 5d3 with a 70-200 2.8 ii. I've only had it a week, but I'm worried about the way the lens connects to the camera. It screws on just fine, but when the 70-200 is on the body and I'm walking around carrying it, it will slightly...very slightly...feel like it's a bit loosely connected to the body because it will "jiggle" ever so slightly with each step if I carry it in a verticle position(lens pointing down) and I'm holding onto the body in my right hand by the grip. And if i hold it the same way and just gently shake it up and down(repeat, gently) i can feel this slight "jiggle" sensation in the connection. I went back to the camera shop I bought it at and tried their demo lens on their demo 5d3 and i could feel the same sensation, so that made me feel better but the problem is that a i've never felt any of my other lenses do this...the guy at the camera shop says its normal for long heavy lenses to do this versus smaller lighter lenses
Help please..any thoughts
Help please..any thoughts
Upvote
0
Northstar said:
Yes, start a new thread.
To the OP, the 85/1.8 is 85.3%'ish of the 1.2L for less money.
Upvote
0
This might be relevant to the discussion - http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/F-stop-blues
Has anyone experienced this problem in the field?
Has anyone experienced this problem in the field?
Upvote
0
I have this lens on a 5DII, and haven't noticed it. I also have a 300 f4L is, and a 4005.6L.
These are all long heavy lenses with a lot of torque on the mount. You should be supporting the lens and not really only holding the body.
If the camera guy says it is fine, it likely is.
These are all long heavy lenses with a lot of torque on the mount. You should be supporting the lens and not really only holding the body.
If the camera guy says it is fine, it likely is.
Northstar said:
Upvote
0
Northstar said:
I have the 5d3 and 70-200 II also, and I really haven't noticed any significant jiggle. But as others have mentioned, it's a good idea to support heavy lenses like this with something more than the lens mount, and I usually have my left hand holding the lens.
I say don't worry about it and go out and enjoy this amazing combo. It's just a silly good combo with crazy contrast, color, detail, and AF speed.
Upvote
0
rahkshi007 said:
I have the 85LII and, I must say, when you nail the shot with it the 85 does deliver beautiful results. I use the lens a great deal, but my hit rate is still 50-50, and that's using a 1Ds3. With my 5D2, the 85L does not focus as well or as fast, so my hit rate is much lower. If it is bokeh you're after, you may want to consider the 135L which gives gorgeous results, has fast AF and is half the price. I have alway resisted the 70-200 2.8 because of its size. I couldn't imagine doing long shoots with it.
Here's a shot I recently took in the market with the 135. It was pretty dark, but I was able to snap this off pretty quickly:
Attachments
Upvote
0
T
TylerV85
Guest
I've had the pleasure of having both of these lenses. I think the 85 f/1.2L II is the highest quality lens I've ever owned. And it's not just the bokeh-It's the amazing color and contrast at ultra wide apertures. Nothing else is like it. With all that being said, I think just the size and color of the lens makes the biggest difference in how you shoot. It's a heavy lens, but still WAY lighter than the 70-200 and it handles very easy. Also, it is shorter and dark in color so those around you don't notice you as quickly, making candids easier for event photography.
Tyler
Tyler
Upvote
0
- Status
