Canon 85 1.8 vs. ?

[Cory]

I know it's early, but if one has let's say the Canon 85 1.8 and shoots mostly at 2.8 would something like the Tamron 85 1.8 or the almost released Sigma 85 1.4 Art have any major advantage at 2.8 and above (smaller aperture/larger number)?
This hypothetical person does really well with the 85 1.8, but also strives to have the best possible lenses (within reason) with minimal gear (nothing that sits in the bag or on the shelf).
THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Viggo]

The only thing I don't like about the 85 is the AF. I bought it specifically because people liked the AF much better than the 85 L, but they're all wrong. It's faster, no doubt, but it's not nearly as accurate.

To answer your question, I think AF is the main issue with third party lenses so I wouldn't buy either of the three. Either manual focus or the 85 L for portraits. For anything else at 2.8, maybe a 70-200 or the 135 L.

 

[Alastair Norcross]

How accurate the AF is depends largely on the camera. I've used the 85 F1.8 with the 20D, 50D, 7D, 7DII, and EOS M (with adapter). The AF has been fast and accurate with all those cameras. To respond to the OP's question, if you shoot mostly at F2.8, I would say there is no advantage to any of those other lenses, or to the Canon 85 F1.2.

 

[JohnUSA]

Just to defend my Tamron 85mm f1.8 it's been stellar with auto-focusing. With both accuracy and consistency.

 

[NorbR]

The one thing that could make a significant difference, even if you never go below f/2.8, is the stabilization on the Tamron. Depends on what you shoot, of course, but in certain situations it will make a real difference, help you get sharper shots and lower ISO.

Otherwise the IQ differences will probably be unremarkable by f/2.8. I'd expect the Sigma to have the best IQ overall, but I'm not sure the difference would be anything major (I'm just guessing here obviously, I don't have the Sigma, nor the Tamron, I did use to have the Canon).

 

[drmikeinpdx]

I have both the Canon 1.8 and the new Tamron 1.8. there is no question that the Tamron is sharper corner to corner. The IS is nice in low light too.

Both lenses focus perfectly on my 5D3, but I've found that body makes just about all lenses focus perfectly. Neither one needed significant microfocus adjustment.

I haven't noticed any issues with autofocus speed on either lens, but I have to admit I didn't have an issue with the 85 1.2 either when I rented it. Fast focus isn't a big requirement for me, since I mostly do portrait work or at least have my subject stay in one place.

 

[Jopa]

If you don't care about < f/2.8, the Tamron has a real advantage if you don't shoot action - the VR (OS, IS, or call it whatever ). I had it for a week and on my 5dsr it was quite impressive.