Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM on the Way [CR3]

[grainier]

Why would the not go with 1.2? Is this not a replacement for that lens?

Probably they discovered that the elements that need to be stabilized are too heavy in 1.2.

 

[grainier]

Hopefully it
(2) doesn*t cost above 1200 EUR

I would worry about it not costing 2000+

 

[Ryananthony]

Hopefully it
(2) doesn*t cost above 1200 EUR

I would worry about it not costing 2000+

I'm pretty positive we will see it for more then 1900 eur. Closer to 2100 eur wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Etienne]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

You totally forgot us, the people that shoot people in the field in any location with light. Quite a few strobists that like to control both focal length and aperture to include or exclude background ..

How does f/1.4 with IS not serve you?

 

[mb66energy]

Hopefully it
(2) doesn*t cost above 1200 EUR

I would worry about it not costing 2000+

My first calculation was 400EUR (1.8/85) + 300EUR for IS + 300 EUR for 1.8 -> 1.4 upgrade + 200 EUR for some optical refinements. Compared to a 1.4 35 II (1870 EUR here in Germany) it is much easier to construct because you do not rely on heavy retrofocus constructions.
But maybe I have to correct it to 1600 EUR (settled price after 6 months) / introduced at 2kEUR.

The largest concern I have is that this lens is a beast in terms of size and mediocre close focus distance. I would pay 500 EUR for compactness and 1:4 max reproduction ratio.

 

[mb66energy]

Why would the not go with 1.2? Is this not a replacement for that lens?

Probably they discovered that the elements that need to be stabilized are too heavy in 1.2.

I think it is the thickness of lens groups if you go to larger apertures. Increased diameter means thicker lenses because you need the curvature radii. If there is no space left between lenses you have to redesign the whole bunch of lenses maybe do some tricks with retrofocus designs.
But mass is a concern in terms of actor size and POWER CONSUMPTION. So maybe both parameters lead to the decision to do a moderate f/1.4.

 

[Berowne]

Hopefully it
(2) doesn*t cost above 1200 EUR

I would worry about it not costing 2000+

My first calculation was 400EUR (1.8/85) + 300EUR for IS + 300 EUR for 1.8 -> 1.4 upgrade + 200 EUR for some optical refinements. Compared to a 1.4 35 II (1870 EUR here in Germany) it is much easier to construct because you do not rely on heavy retrofocus constructions.
But maybe I have to correct it to 1600 EUR (settled price after 6 months) / introduced at 2kEUR.

The largest concern I have is that this lens is a beast in terms of size and mediocre close focus distance. I would pay 500 EUR for compactness and 1:4 max reproduction ratio.

Nikon 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 are similar expensive. This will also be true for Canon. So one should expect a new Canon EF 85/1.4L USM in a similar Price-range as the Canon EF 35/1.4L II USM. A Canon EF 85/1.4L IS USM should be more expensive as the new 35L.

I expect ca. 2500€.

 

[jdavidse]

The new Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art is shipping (mine arrives Monday) and then Canon Rumors makes this post...great. LOL

I'm looking forward to the Art lens, but if I have any issues with AF, the Canon may end up replacing it.

For those about to buy an 85, this might be the way to do it. For a few hundred bucks in lost value, you can evaluate the Sigma for about a year or so (I am guessing it will take some time to for the Canon to both come to market and fall in price). Sell the Sigma at a loss when you see the reviews on the new Canon, assuming its that much better. This way you can put to rest any doubts that may linger about a comparison between the two.

One of the big issues I have with the sigma is the size. I have faith that Canon can come in at or under the size of the 85 1.2. If they can do that, and match the quality of the 35 1.4LII, then I will pay up. My dream would be dual 5DIVs with these two lenses!

 

[Joe M]

I see a lot of people disappointed that this lens isn't going to be f/1.2.

What I'm wondering is this:

1. Will the one stop matter at all since there will be IS?
2. Will the one stop cause bokeh to not be as nice?

I honestly don't know.

I don't think bokeh will suffer, but I don't know enough. Somebody here will know. The focal length is still nice for f/1.4.

I've dreamed of having the 85 f/1.2L. The only things that have kept me from it are the reputed slow focus and what looks like a very vulnerable rear element.

If the focus is much faster, the bokeh very nice, and the rear element not so exposed to damage I'm thinking this might really be a winner. Hope so anyway.

I haven't had a need for IS in the 85 1.2L; I don't know visually how much of a different 1.4 - 1.2 would be but for my cake smash sessions and these types of shots I like to shoot at 1.2.

@5', approx. .85" vs. 1".....@10', approx. 3.5" vs. 5",..... @20', approx. 14" vs. 17" All in all, pretty darn small differences depending of course upon your needs. The current lens is amazing in terms of course it's ability to use f1.2 but probably more for it's silky bokeh, as shown in your excellent example. I would expect Canon to do nothing less with the new lens than to match the current silky smoothness.

 

[Viggo]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

You totally forgot us, the people that shoot people in the field in any location with light. Quite a few strobists that like to control both focal length and aperture to include or exclude background ..

How does f/1.4 with IS not serve you?

It adds weight I really don't need, I'm NEVER shooting speeds where I need IS, I would rather have the 1.2.

 

[wockawocka]

The 85L is gorgeous as is, just needs faster focusing and a more narrow lens hood.

I can understand the 1.4 and IS in that it'll end up being the same size and weight as the 1.2L but a 1.4L would do me without IS. Weight is a premium when you're shooting 12-14 hours at a wedding.

Hopefully the 1.8 USM will be a big enough improvement not to bother.

 

[ScottyP]

I have never had an f/1.2 lens, but I have had f/1.4 and f/1.8 lenses. I am sure there is a difference but honestly I find I stop the lenses I have down a bit sometimes just because the DOF gets too shallow. There are really only very few shots I find more appealing with someone's eye(s) in focus but their ears blurred away. Certainly there are shots where it works, and people into photography appreciate the technical aspect of it, but for the most part I think it can look a little distracting and unnatural sometimes if overused. Can make you want to rub your eyes. My family and friends who are not into photography see the more extreme examples of shots like that and wonder if focus was somehow off or something.

I would be very happy to have an image stabilized prime from Canon at 85mm, and I can't imagine being disappointed that it may be f/1.4 v. f/1.2.

 

[syder]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

You totally forgot us, the people that shoot people in the field in any location with light. Quite a few strobists that like to control both focal length and aperture to include or exclude background ..

How does f/1.4 with IS not serve you?

It adds weight I really don't need, I'm NEVER shooting speeds where I need IS, I would rather have the 1.2.

But anyone shooting video is probably at 1/50 or 1/60 (depending on region). At those speeds IS absolutely does make a difference if you aren't on a tripod.

The current options are the Canon 85 1.2 that doesn't have IS, the Zeiss 85 1.4s (Milvus/Otus) neither of which have IS or AF, the Samyang 84 1.4 which doesnt have IS and is manual focus, the Sigma 85 1.4 which doesn't have IS, and the tamron 85 1.8 IS which does have IS, but is 2/3 of a stop slower and lacks the magic bokeh of other options. So unless I'm missing something this would be the fastest stabilised 85mm lens in an EF mount.

For video this lens could absolutely hit it out of the park, particularly when paired with DPAF.

 

[Etienne]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

You totally forgot us, the people that shoot people in the field in any location with light. Quite a few strobists that like to control both focal length and aperture to include or exclude background ..

How does f/1.4 with IS not serve you?

It adds weight I really don't need, I'm NEVER shooting speeds where I need IS, I would rather have the 1.2.

But anyone shooting video is probably at 1/50 or 1/60 (depending on region). At those speeds IS absolutely does make a difference if you aren't on a tripod.

The current options are the Canon 85 1.2 that doesn't have IS, the Zeiss 85 1.4s (Milvus/Otus) neither of which have IS or AF, the Samyang 84 1.4 which doesnt have IS and is manual focus, the Sigma 85 1.4 which doesn't have IS, and the tamron 85 1.8 IS which does have IS, but is 2/3 of a stop slower and lacks the magic bokeh of other options. So unless I'm missing something this would be the fastest stabilised 85mm lens in an EF mount.

For video this lens could absolutely hit it out of the park, particularly when paired with DPAF.

IS is very important for handheld video but it has nothing to do with shutter speed. Even if you shoot your video at 1/4000 shutter speed, you still need IS to smooth out the video.

 

[Viggo]

f/1.4, at 85mm, is more than enough for pretty much any use. In fact I think 1.8 is plenty.
Personally I'm tired of seeing head shots where only the eyes are in focus. It's getting dreary.

Most studio portraits are shot between f/4 and f/8 ... the backdrop does plenty of subject isolation.
Subject isolation by large aperture is more relevant in the field where you often cant use a tripod, and things move fast ... hence IS (no tripod), and large aperture (to isolate the subject). This new lens will be great for that.
Whole body subject isolation is another good use of the f/1.4

You totally forgot us, the people that shoot people in the field in any location with light. Quite a few strobists that like to control both focal length and aperture to include or exclude background ..

How does f/1.4 with IS not serve you?

It adds weight I really don't need, I'm NEVER shooting speeds where I need IS, I would rather have the 1.2.

But anyone shooting video is probably at 1/50 or 1/60 (depending on region). At those speeds IS absolutely does make a difference if you aren't on a tripod.

The current options are the Canon 85 1.2 that doesn't have IS, the Zeiss 85 1.4s (Milvus/Otus) neither of which have IS or AF, the Samyang 84 1.4 which doesnt have IS and is manual focus, the Sigma 85 1.4 which doesn't have IS, and the tamron 85 1.8 IS which does have IS, but is 2/3 of a stop slower and lacks the magic bokeh of other options. So unless I'm missing something this would be the fastest stabilised 85mm lens in an EF mount.

For video this lens could absolutely hit it out of the park, particularly when paired with DPAF.

IS is very important for handheld video but it has nothing to do with shutter speed. Even if you shoot your video at 1/4000 shutter speed, you still need IS to smooth out the video.

Of course, but not sure why video shooting has anything to do with my post. The only lens I use IS on ever is the 200 when shooting with a strobe and the ambient is low enough for syncspeed.

 

[-1]

I was wrong. Thanks! Wouldn't one full stop slower than f/1.2 be f/2.8? I might not know what I am doing reading the scale. Nope, I'm wrong again. Thanks again! I see now how f/1.8 is correct.

Sure you was wrong. That's a constant... ;-) F stops ain't that hard though since it simple as double of the relative area of the aperture and that is a factor of the squarerot of 2 witch is 1.41. Hence the standard aperture series of 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8...

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The 85L is gorgeous as is, just needs faster focusing and a more narrow lens hood.

I can understand the 1.4 and IS in that it'll end up being the same size and weight as the 1.2L but a 1.4L would do me without IS. Weight is a premium when you're shooting 12-14 hours at a wedding.

Hopefully the 1.8 USM will be a big enough improvement not to bother.

I've not found my 85mm f1.2 II L particularly slow to focus, it's faster than the 50mm f1.2 L in both it's lock on and focus. But due to it's fly by wire design, there is a no mechanical link in the AF system so there is a slightly odd feeling to it's AF and sometimes a very slight latency. I love my 85mm f1.2 II L...it's an astonishing lens and in the right hands...produces some breath taking results. But it's not an easy lens to master.

I have never felt the need for an IS unit in this lens and I've been shooting professionally with it for well over 10 years. Its out of focus rendering is exceptional and the angle of view is perfect for head and shoulders portraits in available light. I did a wedding in Canterbury Cathedral's crypt by candle light and flash photography was banned. My metering was 1/80th @ f1.2 @ iso 1600. The files were very clean and looked amazing.
My blog for this wedding is available here:
http://www.gmcphotographics.co.uk/blog/?p=754

I use the hood from the TSe 45mm instead of the stock hood. It fits perfectly and it's half the length.

 

[tron]

Hopefully it
(1) isn*t above 1kg
(2) doesn*t cost above 1200 EUR
(3) doesn't have a 86mm filter thread
(4) doesn*t have a meager max reproduction ratio of 1:8

Still waiting for sth. similar in the 50mm region!

My guess is you will be only partially satisfied.
(1) Most probable. Is would add some weight but the reduction to 1.4 will counteract it.
(2) Now way. You cannot possible believe that. Just compare 35mm 1.4 L vs 35mm 1.4 L II. The 85 1.2 is close to 2K. 1.4 would be c heaper but adding IS and modern design would negatea this. Expect similar price tag. You can also compare 28 2.8 vs 28 2.8 IS and 35mm 2.0 vs 35 2.0 IS.
(3) 86mm???? I didn't even know there were 86mm filters. How did you come with this number? 85 1.2L has a 72mm filter. I cannot see how a 85mm 1.4L IS would move over this or at least over 77mm...
(4) Not sure but probably. A 1:5 seems reasonable but that's a GUESS!

 

[ExodistPhotography]

If true, this would be the fastest IS lens they've put out.

Sigh, if only it were 50mm...

50mm f/1.4 IS is likely to come soon too.. Until then the 50mm f/1.8 STM is amazingly sharp for $125 bucks..

But this is likely a non L USM lens as the current EF 85mm f/1.8 USM was released back around 1992.

Its very likely the 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8 and 100mm f/2 will all be updated to have IS much like the 24, 28 and 35mm (non-L) USM lenses were updated to IS and modern body style back in 2012. Why they have been taking so long to update them is a bigger question..

 

[NorbR]

(3) 86mm???? I didn't even know there were 86mm filters. How did you come with this number? 85 1.2L has a 72mm filter. I cannot see how a 85mm 1.4L IS would move over this or at least over 77mm...

Both the Sigma Art and the Zeiss Otus have 86mm filter size. So his worries on that issue are not unfounded ...