85mm prime recommendation

[Hector1970]

I have the 70-200 2.8 II and the 85 1.2
In my opinion the 70-200 is much more flexible and gives great portraits .
The 85 1.2 is a specialised lens. Shooting at 1.2 is difficult. The depth of field is very thin.
It's a risky lens to use compared to a 70-200mm. The focusing is slowish and easily out of focus if either you or the subject budges an inch. It's easier to use stepped down but then you may as well buy the excellent 1.8.
My conclusion 70-200mm expensive but worth it
85mm 1.2 expensive not really worth it (but you do get some amazing shots with it.
(If scares people though', they see the shutter.

 

[wickidwombat]

the canon 85 L II is not 3 times better than the sigma 85

I closely evaluated the 2 on a 5Dmk2 when i made the purchase
AF on the 5D was significantly slower on the canon than the sigma
this went a long way to making me go with the siggy on a 1D body
the AF is said to be faster but I didn't bother to test mine.

wide open the canon is slightly sharper in the center at 1.2 than the siggy is at 1.4
however this is only noticable at 100% crop or more and you wont see anything in real life images other than the canon also has smoother creamier bokeh

the canon is much larger physically, it is very impressive... it looks super awesome but you also have to carry and pack it


both lenses have a little purple fringing wide open but nothing like the amounts seen on the canon 1.8
by f2 on both the L and the sigma the purple is basically gone
by f2 both lenses are equally sharp
at f2 either lens is noticably sharper than a 70-200 f2.8L II at f2.8
f2 is a real sweet spot for either lens

my sigma was heavily front focusing when i got it, i sent it back they calibrated it and i had it back 4 days later and its been pretty much spot on ever since tested on 7 bodies including rebels with no AFMA

I rule out the 85 1.8 because its old, has heaps of purple and is no where near as good as the sigma

while making your decision think about this you can get a sigma 85, sigma 35 and a canon 135L for the same price of the 85LII

oh I forgot to add that i feel sigma will give this lens an overhaul soon, so given the glass you currently have I would say wait and get none and see what awesomeness the new sigma brings, if its like the 35 i'm gonna be all over it

I also hardly use my 70-200 anymore since getting the 85 1.4 and especially now i have the 135L too

Still for runway fashion the 70-200 II from canon is king i have contemplated the sigma 120-300 for this use too.

 

[kirillica]

I'm really curious why people check sharpeners of 85 1.2 and compare it to any other 85 while bokeh of Canon's prime is something million times better than anything else?

 

[wickidwombat]

dont think its a million times better
its not even 3 times better to reflect the nutty price tag
it is a little better

but AF speed on a non 1D body is a big factor also physical size and coupled with the monster price difference....

 

[kirillica]

dont think its a million times better
its not even 3 times better to reflect the nutty price tag
it is a little better

but AF speed on a non 1D body is a big factor also physical size and coupled with the monster price difference....

from artistic point of view - it is significantly better. but, yes, art is a question of taste

 

[wickidwombat]

dont think its a million times better
its not even 3 times better to reflect the nutty price tag
it is a little better

but AF speed on a non 1D body is a big factor also physical size and coupled with the monster price difference....

from artistic point of view - it is significantly better. but, yes, art is a question of taste

its highly subjective

and bokeh is unquantifiable however if you look at brians comparisons there is not alot in it
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

the extra 1/3rd of a stop aperture probably plays a big part in the bokeh

but if you want bokeh over all else i think the 135L leave both 85s in its dust... and then there is the 200f2L IS...

anyway i have never said the sigma is better than the canon 1.2 in any way other than AF speed
BUT
the differences are pretty marginal and not worth the massive price gulf between the two

 

[kirillica]

its highly subjective

and bokeh is unquantifiable however if you look at brians comparisons there is not alot in it
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

the extra 1/3rd of a stop aperture probably plays a big part in the bokeh

but if you want bokeh over all else i think the 135L leave both 85s in its dust... and then there is the 200f2L IS...

anyway i have never said the sigma is better than the canon 1.2 in any way other than AF speed
BUT
the differences are pretty marginal and not worth the massive price gulf between the two

yes, it is subjective. and for me there is a huge difference in a place you (subjectively) don't see that

 

[Maven]

As I can see all 85mm primes are mostly equal in image quality.
I don't realy need AF. For action shots I have 100L and 70-200/4LIS. I am using 5D3.
I am considering Samyang, Sigma and Canon f/1.8. Canon f/1.2 and zeiss are out of price range.
I will be using it mostly 1.4-2.0 for shots from distance in dark conditions and low light video.
So my primary conserns are resolution (so I can crop image, if I only could afford 200 f/2) and manual operation.
As I can assume Samyang have better focusing ring? Are Sigma and Canon f/1.8 good for manual operation?

 

[GMCPhotographics]

but if you want bokeh over all else i think the 135L leave both 85s in its dust... and then there is the 200f2L IS...

the differences are pretty marginal and not worth the massive price gulf between the two

The 135L isn't better or worse for creating out of focus backgrounds, it's is just different. It is a different angle of view, so a diferent amount of telephoto compression. If you want less, use a wide lens , which is why 85mm lenses are so popular these days for portraiture for adults, less compression which generally suits adults. Where as skinny models or teenagers tend to benefit from more compression.
The 85IIL offers slightly better background melting abilities, but offers simular effects as the 135L and 200mm f2.8 but at greatly reduced working distances.

Dimunishing returns is common place. My hi fi at home cost around £2.5K but to take it to the next marginal level will cost nearly double if no more. The 85IIL is better tahn the Sigma certainly in areas of colour fidelity, contrast, build (rack out an 85IIL and look though the rear element), engineering (the Canon uses automotive grade ball barings in it's AF system) and AF (slo but far more dependable than the Sigma AF system). My copy is over 6 years old and has endured a lot of hard wedding and landscape work...it still looks fresh as the day I bought it and is now worth more second hand than I paid for it...good luck with your Sigma in that regard.
Quality gear holds value and sometimes increases....look at Apple mac book pros, Rolex watches, Quad or Linn amplification, Canon L lenses are in the same bracket. There is a world of difference between a Sigma 85mm and a Canon 85IIL.

 

[kirillica]

As I can see all 85mm primes are mostly equal in image quality.
I don't realy need AF. For action shots I have 100L and 70-200/4LIS. I am using 5D3.
I am considering Samyang, Sigma and Canon f/1.8. Canon f/1.2 and zeiss are out of price range.
I will be using it mostly 1.4-2.0 for shots from distance in dark conditions and low light video.
So my primary conserns are resolution (so I can crop image, if I only could afford 200 f/2) and manual operation.
As I can assume Samyang have better focusing ring? Are Sigma and Canon f/1.8 good for manual operation?

You are using 100L for action shots? Really?
I mean, 100L is a great lens and I have one, but it has nothing to do with actions: micro-contrast and sharpness it has makes it good only for close-ups and macros.
Samyang... I haven't heard about any good product from them (regardless the fact they place red rings on their lenses)... are you?

Having good camera like 5D3 and investing in cheap and unreliable stuff like Samyang makes this camera useless.

 

[Maven]

100L is fine by me to track movement. Running people or bicycle, I don't shoot sport cars ar things like that.
I haven't heard about any bad product from samyang. I used 35mm T1.5 VDSL once for video recording and it is marvelous. 85mm is just older product, but it have same quality.
My other option is 135L, but it's only f/2.0 and I don't know how good is it for manual focusing, but it's an option if considering 85mm f/1.8 from canon.

 

[jdramirez]

As I can see all 85mm primes are mostly equal in image quality.
I don't realy need AF. For action shots I have 100L and 70-200/4LIS. I am using 5D3.
I am considering Samyang, Sigma and Canon f/1.8. Canon f/1.2 and zeiss are out of price range.
I will be using it mostly 1.4-2.0 for shots from distance in dark conditions and low light video.
So my primary conserns are resolution (so I can crop image, if I only could afford 200 f/2) and manual operation.
As I can assume Samyang have better focusing ring? Are Sigma and Canon f/1.8 good for manual operation?

You are using 100L for action shots? Really?
I mean, 100L is a great lens and I have one, but it has nothing to do with actions: micro-contrast and sharpness it has makes it good only for close-ups and macros.
Samyang... I haven't heard about any good product from them (regardless the fact they place red rings on their lenses)... are you?

Having good camera like 5D3 and investing in cheap and unreliable stuff like Samyang makes this camera useless.

I used the 100L for sports as well, tracking football players at all distances... and the lens is a champ when it comes to ai servo. I had significantly more keepers than not. I've since sold it... but indoor and our... works like a champ.

 

[kirillica]

I used the 100L for sports as well, tracking football players at all distances... and the lens is a champ when it comes to ai servo. I had significantly more keepers than not. I've since sold it... but indoor and our... works like a champ.

It's not I think 100L is not capable to do that, but it's not aimed to do that. IQ from 70-200F2.8IS m2 I love significantly more for this (again, except portraits and macros).

 

[surapon]

Dear Friends.
Sorry, I am not the Real PRO, Just Past time Hobby lover.
Here are the Sample of photos , by Canon 5D MK II, and Canon 85 mm. F/ 1.2 L MK II USM, at F = 1.2 ( for the maximum Shallow DOF ), ISO = 100. Day Light, But use 4 ND filter.
Enjoy.
Surapon

 

[surapon]

Dear Friends.
Sorry, I am not the Real PRO, Just Past time Hobby lover.
Here are the Sample of photos , by Canon 5D MK II, and Canon 85 mm. F/ 1.2 L MK II USM, at F = 1.2 ( for the maximum Shallow DOF ), ISO = 100. Day Light, But use 4 ND filter.
Enjoy.
Surapon

 

[mycanonphotos]

I was just able to snag a Canon 85 1.8 refurb on sale and am very impressed with it at 1.8... for $285...CANT go wrong..

 

[GuyF]

Sigma 85 comparing Canon 85 1.2 is crap. period.

Wow, with such a reasonable, coherent and well thought out argument such as that, I can't understand why I feel sorry for you.

Best not feed the trolls.

 

[bchernicoff]

I've owned the both the Canon 1.2 L II and the Sigma. I sold the Canon and kept the Sigma.

Sigma pros:
vastly faster AF
actual manual AF
vastly better dust protection (with a filter on, the lens is effectively sealed)
around half the cost

Canon cons:
SLOW AF
drive by wire manual AF
large gap between body and the barrel that moves in and out while focusing (dust entry point)
high price

Canon pros:
half stop faster

tie:
IQ

 

[bholliman]

I've owned the both the Canon 1.2 L II and the Sigma. I sold the Canon and kept the Sigma.

Sigma pros:
vastly faster AF
actual manual AF
vastly better dust protection (with a filter on, the lens is effectively sealed)
around half the cost

Canon cons:
SLOW AF
drive by wire manual AF
large gap between body and the barrel that moves in and out while focusing (dust entry point)
high price

Canon pros:
half stop faster

tie:
IQ

Did you experience any AF accuracy issues with the Sigma?

 

[wickidwombat]

There is alot of red ring snobbery around and especially so here.

sometimes it gets annoying fact is both sigma and tamron have vastly stepped up their game in recent years
I have been burnt by tamron in the past and so am still reluctant to go down that road again
sigma i am very cautious about because there is alot of hate out there for them so i carefully check out reviews and experiences and i test the lens before i buy and i only buy sigma lens from a store i trust that i can return it to if i have problems. I have the 35 the 50 and 85.

while the 50 has good iq its AF accuracy is terrible i've given up using 50mm lenses on canon there is nothing good out there IMO the nikkor 50 f1.4G runs rings around everything (im discounting MF lenses here, not interested in MF with DoF this shallow)

the sigma 35 and 85 however are stellar I definately cant complain about focus accuracy on either lens
although as i always state my 85 was heavily front focusing when new but sigma recalibrated it for me and it is now good as gold.

simple fact is when looking at an 85

if you want super cheap and AF = canon 85 f1.8
if you dont care what it costs and want absolute best IQ widest aperture and smoothest bokeh = canon 85 1.2L II not to be confused with the mk1 which the sigma blows away entirely. (but i'm sure someone will argue this is not the case )
if you want IQ so close to the L II its not significant at a good price and faster AF then the sigma 85 1.4 is the best choice

if you are only looking at video then the samyang cine 85 is probably going to be the best bang for buck