Hi all, I'm here again with a buy question: lots of online reviews state that the 85mm f1.8 is nearly identical to the f1.2 II in terms of image quality when stopped down to f2. It even focuses faster than the L version. All that the f1.2 version has going for it seems to be that it is very sharp wide open, and has slightly better sharpness and contract than the f1.8 version. Again, money is not an issue here. Is the f1.2 II worth my money with nearly identical visuals and even slower focus, to be offset with f1.2 for low light conditions? Let me know your real-world thoughts! Thanks!
buying advice: canon 85mm f1.2 II or f1.8?
- Thread starter dash2k8
- Start date
If you don't need the f1.2 - f2.0 area, you may as well go to f2.8 and get the 70-200 f2.8L IS II. The main reason for getting the 85 f1.2L II is to be able to get the shallow DOF at, or near, f1.2. The 85/1.8 is good value for money, but its IQ cannot be compared to the 1.2L II. Its subject isolation capability is unique and its bokeh is simply beautiful. I sold it when I got the 85 Otus, but it was difficult to part with.
The downside with the 1.2L II is the focus mechanism and CA. But for anything but action shooting, the AF speed is no problem. Take a look in the 85 f1.2L II thread and check out some of the portraits there (Gary Sample's are almost all at f1.2). No other lens (but the Otus) can do that.
The downside with the 1.2L II is the focus mechanism and CA. But for anything but action shooting, the AF speed is no problem. Take a look in the 85 f1.2L II thread and check out some of the portraits there (Gary Sample's are almost all at f1.2). No other lens (but the Otus) can do that.
Upvote
0
I can only echo Eldars statement. I have the 85 1.2ii and while it sounds silly, this lens is all about shooting at 1.2 if you want to stop down there are better options.
If you are considering the 85 1.2 ii I also think it is only worthwhile on FF, you won't appreciate the shallow dof otherwise.
While the 85 1.8 is a very good lens for the price I see it as just another lens. The 85 1.2 is something special
Best of luck on your choice
If you are considering the 85 1.2 ii I also think it is only worthwhile on FF, you won't appreciate the shallow dof otherwise.
While the 85 1.8 is a very good lens for the price I see it as just another lens. The 85 1.2 is something special
Best of luck on your choice
Upvote
0
I agree you'd only buy the 85mm 1.2 if you want to shoot at F1.2
It produces a pretty special photograph.
It's focussing is relatively slow and hunting for focus can be an issue.
It's very sharp stopped down. Bitingly sharp (not flattering at times , shows up every wrinkle, blemish and tooth decay ). It's given me a fright a few times.
It's very expensive for a limited use lens.
You ideally need you object stationary. f1.2 has such shallow depth of field that it's very easy to have nose in focus but eyes out of focus.
I've never used the F1.8 but my friend has it and really likes it. It's way cheaper and easier to manage .
So it's all about F1.2.
Is the creamy bokeh worth the price.
It's hard to live without once you first experience it.
It produces a pretty special photograph.
It's focussing is relatively slow and hunting for focus can be an issue.
It's very sharp stopped down. Bitingly sharp (not flattering at times , shows up every wrinkle, blemish and tooth decay ). It's given me a fright a few times.
It's very expensive for a limited use lens.
You ideally need you object stationary. f1.2 has such shallow depth of field that it's very easy to have nose in focus but eyes out of focus.
I've never used the F1.8 but my friend has it and really likes it. It's way cheaper and easier to manage .
So it's all about F1.2.
Is the creamy bokeh worth the price.
It's hard to live without once you first experience it.
Upvote
0
I would go with the nearly 2K priced lens ever time.
The 85mm f1.2 is also considered one of the sharpest lenses in the world at f4.
Plus, shooting at 1.2 isn't it's only purpose. It has image quality which makes it one of the best portrait lenses out there.
OP, your basically asking what the difference is between a ferrari and a ford fiesta.
The 85mm f1.2 is also considered one of the sharpest lenses in the world at f4.
Plus, shooting at 1.2 isn't it's only purpose. It has image quality which makes it one of the best portrait lenses out there.
OP, your basically asking what the difference is between a ferrari and a ford fiesta.
Upvote
0
ferrari or fiesta? i don't see it that way, esp when the 1.8 focuses so much faster and is lighter, to me that sounds more like a ferrari, but it certainly does price out more like your analogy. i've never used the 1.2 but have studied it pretty extensively. i have the 1.8, and while it focuses fast, i've never really been all that impressed. i wish i had my 100mm f2 back instead. i find the 1.8 to miss focus often, and it's got a large amount of purple fringing on some things. for me the 1.2 looks to focus to slowly and is too expensive, while the 1.8 just doesn't wow me either. I'm waiting to see a sigma 85mm 1.4 ART materialize.
Upvote
0
For me, I could shoot portraits all day with a 85/1.8 without using much effort.
Not sure I wanna do that with 85/1.2 as it is quite heavy. So if I had the 2, I would
probably use 85/1.8 80% of the time and 85/1.2 20% of the time.
Indeed, I would wait for the sigma 85mm 1.4 ART b4 I make a decision between the 2.
Actually I am waiting for a 85 <= f2.0 IS.
Not sure I wanna do that with 85/1.2 as it is quite heavy. So if I had the 2, I would
probably use 85/1.8 80% of the time and 85/1.2 20% of the time.
Indeed, I would wait for the sigma 85mm 1.4 ART b4 I make a decision between the 2.
Actually I am waiting for a 85 <= f2.0 IS.
Upvote
0
As others have said if you go with the 85 1.2 it's meant to shoot at 1.2. It's a great portriat lens. But if you get that lens you should probably be shooting a full frame camera to maximize the shallow depth of field that shooting 1.2 offers. Also this lens is not a beginers lens IMO. Shooting that shallow of depth of field you're going to have some shots that don't come out as sharp as you want. I'm talking like one eye in sharp focus and the other out of focus or the nose out of focus. If your going for that look great otherwise you really have to pay attention when you're focusing with a 1.2 aperture. It is a awsome portriat lens though. One more down side to the 85 1.2 is it focus SLOW!
The 85 1.8 is a great lens especially for the price. It focuses very fast and is sharp. Once you stop down to 2.8 give or take it really gets sharp and you wont tell a difference between it and the 1.2 version IMO.
So this really depends on what your shooting with it and your experience level. It's not a lens where it's i have the money so I'm going to get the best. If your experienced and are going to shoot portriats with it, shoot wide ope at 1.2 and don't need fast focus its a awsome lens. The shallow depth of field (bokeh) is beautiful. If your going to shoot portriats, the kids running around in the back yard, indoor sports, action or anything where you need a fast focusing lens I'd go with the 85 1.8.
Just be real with your needs and experience level. Hope that helps and your chosing between two awsome lenses! Enjoy
The 85 1.8 is a great lens especially for the price. It focuses very fast and is sharp. Once you stop down to 2.8 give or take it really gets sharp and you wont tell a difference between it and the 1.2 version IMO.
So this really depends on what your shooting with it and your experience level. It's not a lens where it's i have the money so I'm going to get the best. If your experienced and are going to shoot portriats with it, shoot wide ope at 1.2 and don't need fast focus its a awsome lens. The shallow depth of field (bokeh) is beautiful. If your going to shoot portriats, the kids running around in the back yard, indoor sports, action or anything where you need a fast focusing lens I'd go with the 85 1.8.
Just be real with your needs and experience level. Hope that helps and your chosing between two awsome lenses! Enjoy
Upvote
0
Depends on what other lenses you have. If you have the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, then that lens will handle all the action shots and most of those at f/2.8 and smaller. The 85L II would then be a specialist portrait lens, a role that it excels at. And if you have a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, is there really that big a difference between f/2 and f/2.8? Are you going to swap lenses for 1 stop when the 70-200 focuses faster and is more resistant to purple-fringing?
If you do a lot of or want to get into portrait photography, then the 85L II is a great choice. If you want a general purpose 85mm prime, then there are better options.
If you do a lot of or want to get into portrait photography, then the 85L II is a great choice. If you want a general purpose 85mm prime, then there are better options.
Upvote
0
I'm looking to get the f/1.2L, but I thought I heard that an update might be coming soon since it's been out for 8 years.
Upvote
0
Before buying any lens, rent one first.dash2k8 said:
Unless it is difficult to do so where you are, I see no reason to buy one before renting (unless you have the current version or very similar one).
You didn't specify what you need the lens for.
The good news is that you did already the good first step, by reading the internet. Now, go and rent each one of the three in order to see for yourself (including the 70-200), then ask questions. You will be able to determine the right answer from wrong, based on your personality and need.
Don't forget, specialized lenses dictate a lot on your photography style.
The 1.2 is not for everybody. It is my go to lens and I see no other lens that can replace it in my bag for now.
I never had it alone, though. I always have a general purpose lens with it.
Upvote
0
I dealt with a similar delima... I eventually opted for the 1.8... it's not as sexy as the 1.2, but very sharp, fast focus, and for professional portrait work, it works like a charm. There have been some people who say that the 1.8 has some CA wide open... i typically shoot around the 2.0-2.2 range and if there is CA, it really isn't obvious or ugly... Just did a jewelry catalog shoot with that lens only and images came out great! Now if they can issue a mark II of that lens to have IS, that would be perfect... until then, this is a great bang for your buck.
Upvote
0
I tried them both, as well as the Sigma 85/1.4.
My impressions:
Canon 85/1.2 is capable of beautiful images, but it's a pain in the butt to focus, even in good light. In dim light it can be infuriating. It's also heavy and its price makes it a major investment decision.
Canon 85/1.8 is a fine lens. Nice contrast. Very easy to work with. Lighweight and fast.
Sigma 85/1.4 seems like the best compromise to me. It's not quite as spritely as the Canon 1.8, but it's a dream to use compared to the 85/1.2. I consider the image quality to be somewhat more appealing than the Canon 1.8, and somewhat less appealing than the Canon 1.2 at it's best.
In the end, I somehow managed to buy BOTH the Canon 1.8 (initially) and the Sigma 1.4 (later), but the Canon stays on my shelf until I get around to sending it off to eBay. The Sigma is my preferred choice for low light work and creamy short d.o.f.
My impressions:
Canon 85/1.2 is capable of beautiful images, but it's a pain in the butt to focus, even in good light. In dim light it can be infuriating. It's also heavy and its price makes it a major investment decision.
Canon 85/1.8 is a fine lens. Nice contrast. Very easy to work with. Lighweight and fast.
Sigma 85/1.4 seems like the best compromise to me. It's not quite as spritely as the Canon 1.8, but it's a dream to use compared to the 85/1.2. I consider the image quality to be somewhat more appealing than the Canon 1.8, and somewhat less appealing than the Canon 1.2 at it's best.
In the end, I somehow managed to buy BOTH the Canon 1.8 (initially) and the Sigma 1.4 (later), but the Canon stays on my shelf until I get around to sending it off to eBay. The Sigma is my preferred choice for low light work and creamy short d.o.f.
Upvote
0
Excellent all-around responses! Thanks all! It looks like one of my main concerns wasn't made clear the first time, so allow me to add this wrinkle to my question: is the focus fast enough at for me to shoot reliably at f1.2 during a wedding event? Not at the altar where everybody is basically stationary, but when the bride is coming down the aisle or when she's tossing the bouquet or everyone is dancing at the reception... you know the drill. I'm all for big aperture and sweet bokeh, but is my subject going to be in focus? An all-bokeh pic of the bride's face (exaggerated) isn't going to sell money.
Thanks again!
Thanks again!
Upvote
0
