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

[sdsr]

My thoughts are:

1. Tamron has an 85mm f/1.8 VC, I see no reason for Canon to go f/2.

2. With Yongnuo selling copies of the EF 85mm f/1.8, I don't see Canon waiting much longer with the upgrade.

3. My impression is the 85mm f/1.8 isn't up to today's high res sensors.

So I'd expect a new EF 85mm f/1.8 IS USM coming soon.

Re 2 - is that lens anywhere near as good as the Canon 85 1.8?

Re 3 - Your standard of "up to" may be higher than mine, but I'm impressed by the performance of the Canon 85 1.8 when I attach it to my Sony a7r (36 MP) & a7rII (43 MP), for all that I prefer to attach my Canon FD 85L and several other old MF 85mm lenses to them (the latter's IBIS is handy); I guess the 85 1.8could be a bit sharper wide open, but the only flaw I notice is the well-known purple fringing issue that plagues the EF 85L too.

 

[Antono Refa]

My thoughts are:

1. Tamron has an 85mm f/1.8 VC, I see no reason for Canon to go f/2.

2. With Yongnuo selling copies of the EF 85mm f/1.8, I don't see Canon waiting much longer with the upgrade.

3. My impression is the 85mm f/1.8 isn't up to today's high res sensors.

So I'd expect a new EF 85mm f/1.8 IS USM coming soon.

Re 2 - is that lens anywhere near as good as the Canon 85 1.8?

The Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 is about as good, I'd say its safe to say the 85mm f/1.8 would be as well.

Re 3 - Your standard of "up to" may be higher than mine

The photozone review of the 85mm f/1.8 shows the center resolution peaking at ~3,400 LW/PH, while the 11-24mm f/4L review shows the center resolution (and I am looking at the 21MP section) peaking at ~3,700 LW/PH.

So my impression is Canon could improve the the 85mm f/1.8's resolution.

 

[AJ]

I was expecting the 85/1.8 to be replaced by an affordable 85/2 IS, and I thought they'd leave their 85/1.2 mk 2 alone. Just like 35/2 IS and 35/1.4 mk 2.

My thoughts are:

1. Tamron has an 85mm f/1.8 VC, I see no reason for Canon to go f/2.

2. With Yongnuo selling copies of the EF 85mm f/1.8, I don't see Canon waiting much longer with the upgrade.

3. My impression is the 85mm f/1.8 isn't up to today's high res sensors.

So I'd expect a new EF 85mm f/1.8 IS USM coming soon.

Maybe it'll be f/1.8 rather than f/2.
Mind, you, the Tamron comes in at 750 USD. A Canon variant would likely be around 1000 USD.
The current Canon 85/1.8 costs around 420 USD (Currently on sale at 350 USD; I paid about 350 CAD for mine back in the day).
So if they keep the aperture at f/1.8 and they add IS, then the price of the lens should be about double to triple that of the current lens.

 

[Antono Refa]

I was expecting the 85/1.8 to be replaced by an affordable 85/2 IS, and I thought they'd leave their 85/1.2 mk 2 alone. Just like 35/2 IS and 35/1.4 mk 2.

My thoughts are:

1. Tamron has an 85mm f/1.8 VC, I see no reason for Canon to go f/2.

2. With Yongnuo selling copies of the EF 85mm f/1.8, I don't see Canon waiting much longer with the upgrade.

3. My impression is the 85mm f/1.8 isn't up to today's high res sensors.

So I'd expect a new EF 85mm f/1.8 IS USM coming soon.

Maybe it'll be f/1.8 rather than f/2.
Mind, you, the Tamron comes in at 750 USD. A Canon variant would likely be around 1000 USD.
The current Canon 85/1.8 costs around 420 USD (Currently on sale at 350 USD; I paid about 350 CAD for mine back in the day).
So if they keep the aperture at f/1.8 and they add IS, then the price of the lens should be about double to triple that of the current lens.

That wouldn't surprise me.

For starters, it is in Canon's interest to sell new & improved lenses for a much higher price, as long as the market bears the new price. All the more so if can keep on selling the current 85mm f/1.8, just like it does the previous 24mm-28mm-35mm & 75-300mm lenses.

Then the 85mm f/1.8 was made in 1992 (and possibly recycling some of the FD 85mm f/1.8's design and manufacturing facilities), so Canon had plenty of time to return the investment and lower the lens' price.

 

[jolyonralph]

This is somewhat of an aside, but I tried both the Yongnuo 50mm and the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II on the Sony A7RII with the Metabones adaptor and the Yongnuo would not focus properly, constantly seeking and failing to lock, while the noisy but reliable Canon worked fine.

Full marks to Yongnuo for knocking out cheap lenses with reasonable optics, but there are differences.

 

[MintChocs]

Crap, I ordered the new Sigma 85mm Art yesterday.

I'm probably going to cancel my order and wait for this one.

You might want to consider the "look" of the lens rather than just because it has IS. With a lot of portraits the colour rendition, bokeh, micro contrast play an important part in choosing a lens. Canon may have included IS only to help sell more lenses so it might be wise to wait and see.

 

[ExodistPhotography]

[

So my impression is Canon could improve the the 85mm f/1.8's resolution.

I agree....

It can be improved, it is a old lens released back in 1992 and it shows. I own this lens and while it does hold up very good on say the 6D and 5D3, it start showing its age on the 5DSr, IV and all the current APS-C bodies with high density pixel pitches.. That and Chroma is a huge issue plus it needs stopped down to f/2.8 to become sharp. This is the lens that I am thinking they will update next IMHO.. Followed by the non-L 50 and 100mm lenses.. I do hope for IS though like on the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM lens that was released late 2012..

 

[Antono Refa]

Crap, I ordered the new Sigma 85mm Art yesterday.

I'm probably going to cancel my order and wait for this one.

You might want to consider the "look" of the lens rather than just because it has IS. With a lot of portraits the colour rendition, bokeh, micro contrast play an important part in choosing a lens. Canon may have included IS only to help sell more lenses so it might be wise to wait and see.

Good point, but time table has to be considered as well.

This is a rumor.

As stated, the spec might be wrong, so when the lens comes out, it might not be a lens he would like to buy.

Then it would take a while until the lens is announced, then it might be a few months until the lens hits the shelves.

So it might be smarter to buy the Sigma now, wait till the reviews are out, wait for the price drop, then trade in.

 

[ExodistPhotography]

Finally they came up with something that can beat my beloved lens.
I clearly see 3 scenarios where no lens can beat this one, provided good sharpness.

Another thing everyone is missing here is that becuase higher MP cameras have smaller pixels, at the pixel level lenses without IS start to show softness and blur. The whole rule of thumb about just shoot faster then 1 over your focal range falls a part the more dense the pixel pitch. So while many may want f/1.2 from a bokeh point of view a f/1.4 with 4 stops of IS becomes a more logical choice for high MP cameras. That and seriously the current 85mm f/1.2 is F'n huge.. Putting IS in that thing would make it almost as large as the 200 f/1.8L LOL.. No portrait photographer would want to ever hand hold that thing more then a few minutes at a time..

So that said, its very likely Canon will go to f/1.4L with IS and also go to f/2 & IS on the non-L 85mm Lenses..

 

[Loswr]

optics and physics may have a play here?

the back element of an 85 1.2 "just" fits inside the EF mount throat.

however if there's a middle IS element, wouldn't it have to be larger to compensate for the shift of the elements?

No, the last element/group is fixed in place. All of the shifting takes place before that.

I think he meant the rear element would need to be larger in diameter to accommodate the shifting elements within the lens.

 

[Luds34]

[

So my impression is Canon could improve the the 85mm f/1.8's resolution.

I agree....

It can be improved, it is a old lens released back in 1992 and it shows. I own this lens and while it does hold up very good on say the 6D and 5D3, it start showing its age on the 5DSr, IV and all the current APS-C bodies with high density pixel pitches.. That and Chroma is a huge issue plus it needs stopped down to f/2.8 to become sharp. This is the lens that I am thinking they will update next IMHO.. Followed by the non-L 50 and 100mm lenses.. I do hope for IS though like on the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM lens that was released late 2012..

I too tend to agree, it could be a bit sharper.

Although I want to point out that this is a lens that sharpens up quite a bit by just stopping down a little. There is probably decent copy variation out there as well so I'll consider myself lucky. I never shoot the lens wide open as I've never been happy with the look. However, just stopping down to f/2 makes a world of difference in my experience and that is where I use the lens the most.

The biggest flaw with this lens is the CA, purple fringing in my opinion.

This is a tough one for me. I'd like to eventually upgrade to the latest/greatest tech in a new 85mm of some sort but I have a feeling it won't ultimately result in me creating better images and I'll end up disappointed with a bit of buyers remorse.

 

[rrcphoto]

optics and physics may have a play here?

the back element of an 85 1.2 "just" fits inside the EF mount throat.

however if there's a middle IS element, wouldn't it have to be larger to compensate for the shift of the elements?

No, the last element/group is fixed in place. All of the shifting takes place before that.

I think he meant the rear element would need to be larger in diameter to accommodate the shifting elements within the lens.

correct the rear element would have to be bigger to handle the fact that the elements in front of it are shifting.

 

[Machaon]

We don’t know if the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS will be a replacement for the EF 85mm f/1.2L II or an addition to the lineup.

Canon's new blue-refraction technology produces magnificent optical improvements to the old lens designs.
I hope the new 85mm f/1.4L is built as a replacement for the f/1.2L II.
The current lens shows really dramatic chromatic aberration wide open, more than many of its high-end competitors, and would really benefit from the new coatings.
That might once again justify its price point in the current market.
The Sigma 85mm Art lens has probably forced Canon's hand here. In competition with the current Canon lens, the Sigma would no doubt own the market.
But if Canon offered an optically equivalent lens, I would accept their price premium if only for the fact that one could rely on the native EOS autofocus at wide-open apertures.
As for the addition of IS, I am currently ambivalent. On the one hand, it increases cost and can degrade image quality. On the other hand, the shooting envelope available for - say - 5D Mark IV with 85 mm wide open at f/1.4 and 4-stop IS creates interesting creative opportunities in low light. Maybe that is enough to sway my thinking.
I wait with interest...

 

[Machaon]

With digital cameras that produce high quality low noise images at 3200 ISO, it simply makes no sense to design these monsters.

Unless, of course, you are after the unique creative control over depth of field that wide apertures provide.
There is absolutely still a place for f/1.2.

 

[AvTvM]

EF 85/1.4 L IS with stellar performance makes sense. ever higher rez sensors (5DS/R) and increased competition by Sigma. it will be successor to 85/1.2 L, with a drawn-out "soft fade-out" of the f/1.2. At 85mm focal length, f/1.4 provides ample potential for DOF magic.

Other than this, updates for aging 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 100/2.0 have become urgent. canon will likely follow the path they took with 24/28/35 IS. so, a EF 50/1.4 L IS as "flagship 50" to (soft) replace 50/1.2 may be next.

3 EF prime lens collections:
• L "Luxurious": 14/2.8 III, 24/1.4 II, 35/1.4 II, 50/1.4 IS, 85/1.4 IS, 135/2.0 IS, 200/2.0 IS II
• P "performance": 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.0 IS, 50/1.8 IS, 85/1.8 IS, 100/2.0 IS
• U "ultra compact": 24/2.8 STM pancake, 40/2.8 STM pancake, 50/1.8 STM, 85/2.4 STM

sounds logical, right? Well, expect Canon to do something completely different, not so logical.


plus of course an ultra compact EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS.

 

[Besisika]

Another thing everyone is missing here is that becuase higher MP cameras have smaller pixels, at the pixel level lenses without IS start to show softness and blur. The whole rule of thumb about just shoot faster then 1 over your focal range falls a part the more dense the pixel pitch. So while many may want f/1.2 from a bokeh point of view a f/1.4 with 4 stops of IS becomes a more logical choice for high MP cameras.

Good to know!

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Another thing everyone is missing here is that becuase higher MP cameras have smaller pixels, at the pixel level lenses without IS start to show softness and blur. The whole rule of thumb about just shoot faster then 1 over your focal range falls a part the more dense the pixel pitch. So while many may want f/1.2 from a bokeh point of view a f/1.4 with 4 stops of IS becomes a more logical choice for high MP cameras.

Good to know!

Just to split hairs...the pixels aren't actually smaller...they are just more tightly packed together and more of them. The actual dimensions of the pixels are the same and have been for a long while. The lenses over those pixels are smaller though. In the early days of CMOS sensors, the micro lenses had spaces between them, but since the 5DII, Canon micro lenses have been gapless.

Human hands can only hand hold to a certain resolution (60 lines pre m/m) so go beyond that figure and it's just not possible to hand hold it any more. The upper shutter speeds aren't really that helpful because they are simulated speeds using a slower shutter movement but a narrower slit between the shutter blades. So there is an upper limit on usable shutter speed too. An IS unit can help, but there comes a point where a sturdy tripod is needed for absolute sharpness. Ideally...one without a central column. This is why you will see any half descent landscape photographer using a tripod in 99% of their work.

 

[AvTvM]

cannot follow. pixel pitch is smaller when 50 million rather than 18 million are crammed onto the same physical sensor space. "gapless" has been the norm for microlenses for many years now. ever smaller pixel pitch is taking its toll in visible diffraction losses on IQ at apertures as low as f/8 on FF sensors and lower on smaller sensors.

shutter times are not "similated" but real. no matter how exactly they are achieved. shutter and mirror shock vibrations however are real and have more impact on small pixel pitch hi-rez sensors. tripod alone is not enough. delayed exposure / silent mode / electronic first curtain are also needed.

hopefully solid state mirrorles cameras with global electronic shutter and absolutely no moving parts inside will soon put an end to all vibration-induced problems. mirrorslappers wont ever get there.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

cannot follow. pixel pitch is smaller when 50 million rather than 18 million are crammed onto the same physical sensor space. "gapless" has been the norm for microlenses for many years now. ever smaller pixel pitch is taking its toll in visible diffraction losses on IQ at apertures as low as f/8 on FF sensors and lower on smaller sensors.

shutter times are not "similated" but real. no matter how exactly they are achieved. shutter and mirror shock vibrations however are real and have more impact on small pixel pitch hi-rez sensors. tripod alone is not enough. delayed exposure / silent mode / electronic first curtain are also needed.

hopefully solid state mirrorles cameras with global electronic shutter and absolutely no moving parts inside will soon put an end to all vibration-induced problems. mirrorslappers wont ever get there.

I assume that by similated you mean Simulated and not some kind of Borg assimilation thing.

The max real shutter speed of canon's old cloth shutters was 1/60th sec. This was the fastest that the shutter rolls could actually move. The fast speeds were made up with the phasing between the two cloth blinds...simulating a faster shutter. The newer twin vertical blades operate in the same way. I don't know what the actual fastest native shutter speed is, but it isn't going to much different due to the mechanics. The twin vertical blade shutter calculates it's shutter speed by the time between the two vertical curtains falling...but the blades themselves don't actually move any faster past a certain shutter speed.

Global shutters also work in a similar way, the don't turn on the whole shutter at 1/2000th of a second. An active pulse is run through the shutter making a "pretend shutter blind". Some video guys say that they get weird registration artifacts when using a global shutter. Parts of the frame move before the sensor pass has completed making weird and odd movements between frames.

Pixel pitch and pixel size are two completely different metrics. Pixel pitch is the distance between the center of one pixel and the center of the next. This is why this metric reduces as more pixels are crammed on to a sensor surface area. Each time that more pixels are etched onto a sensor, the lenses that covers them get smaller and more bunched up. It's the size of these micro lenses that cause more or less photons to hit the pixel, so smaller micro lenses creates more iso noise than larger ones, not the pixels. The pixels underneath the micro lenses are a lot smaller than most people realize. There is little benefit in making them bigger because it's the micro lenses that are doing most of the light gathering work here. The pixel size on Canon CMOS DSLR cameras hasn't changed much over the years.

 

[AvTvM]

even with a kickstarter project global shutters can do 1/500.000s ... real. not simulated. 100% mechanics-free. solid state.

https://m.dpreview.com/news/3183042217/chronos-high-speed-camera-hits-crowdfunding-goal-in-record-time

i want a solid state ff mirrorless camera with global shutter from canon. 1/8000s or even 1/4000s would be fine alteady with me. i am easy to please.