Purple fringing of 85 1.2ii

[mackguyver]

I'm sure I'd be impressed with the Mark II but I'm yet to find a way to resell equipment without losing 50% value. I see this purchase as a long-term marriage that I need to get right first time.

If you're losing that much on Canon lens sales, you're doing something wrong. If you take good care of the lens, put up nice photos of the lens, and have a decent selling reputation, you should be able to sell lenses for a minimal loss, even taking into account eBay's fees. I have either made a profit or lost less than 10% on all Canon lens sales on eBay. Camera bodies and third party lenses are another story, however. I've taken a 20-50% bath on them, but it's still far less than rental fees...

As for the purple fringing, yes, my 85L f.1.2 II, along with my 24L f/1.2 II, 50L f/1.2 and other fast lenses previously owned (50 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4L, and 135L f/2) all do it. Stopping down improves or even eliminates it, and certain subjects with specular highlights (like the police badge above) can be really affected by it. It's something that is pretty easy to correct and unless you go for an Otus, something you just have to live with. the key is keeping those specular highlights outside of the primary subject (usually the eyes) if you can.

 

[J.R.]

I'm sure I'd be impressed with the Mark II but I'm yet to find a way to resell equipment without losing 50% value. I see this purchase as a long-term marriage that I need to get right first time.

If you're losing that much on Canon lens sales, you're doing something wrong.

+1

I have always sold my gear for at least 80% of the price I bought it for (except for the 100-400 v1 which I sold it for $ 900, but could have got more if the Tamron 150-600 had not come about). However, I must admit, I've purchased used gear in mint condition for 40-50% of the price (For instance, I got the 50L for $700 and 17Tse for $1600, used and under warranty), so Machaon isn't alone here.

As for the purple fringing, yes, my 85L f.1.2 II, along with my 24L f/1.2 II, 50L f/1.2 and other fast lenses previously owned (50 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4L, and 135L f/2) all do it.

Nice lens and mark II, WOW. Now I want Canon to make one for me as well

 

[mackguyver]

As for the purple fringing, yes, my 85L f.1.2 II, along with my 24L f/1.2 II, 50L f/1.2 and other fast lenses previously owned (50 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4L, and 135L f/2) all do it.

Nice lens and mark II, WOW. Now I want Canon to make one for me as well

LOL - oops! I forgot to mention my 800mm f/2 as well

 

[J.R.]

As for the purple fringing, yes, my 85L f.1.2 II, along with my 24L f/1.2 II, 50L f/1.2 and other fast lenses previously owned (50 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4L, and 135L f/2) all do it.

Nice lens and mark II, WOW. Now I want Canon to make one for me as well

LOL - oops! I forgot to mention my 800mm f/2 as well

I'll pass this one, it'll be too heavy for me. Surprisingly Canon didn't make the DO version for you :-X

 

[Machaon]

If you're losing that much on Canon lens sales, you're doing something wrong. ...you should be able to sell lenses for a minimal loss, even taking into account eBay's fees.

Thanks for the advice. I haven't been using eBay as a seller, and perhaps I should. One's much more likely to get full value for used gear there. I've just been concerned about dodgy buyers, especially for high-value items such as lenses...

 

[mackguyver]

If you're losing that much on Canon lens sales, you're doing something wrong. ...you should be able to sell lenses for a minimal loss, even taking into account eBay's fees.

Thanks for the advice. I haven't been using eBay as a seller, and perhaps I should. One's much more likely to get full value for used gear there. I've just been concerned about dodgy buyers, especially for high-value items such as lenses...

It's not the greatest place in that regard as I've had a few who have tried to scam me or haven't paid, but having access to such a massive pool of potential buyers is a huge advantage over the local Craig's List or such. Also, the majority of my camera gear sales have gone well, you just have to be careful. And don't fall for the inevitable shutter count emails. Here are a couple threads about eBay sales I have contributed to, and I'm sure there's more out there if you search:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21136
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21526.0

 

[pdirestajr]

I've already said it: the 85L is a specialist lens. It was never designed with the intent to shoot action at night. It is a low-contrast, low light portraiture lens. If you can use it for other things, that's great. If camera bodies have become more sophisticated so as to facilitate using the 85L in other situations, that's great. But it doesn't change the original design intent of this lens, which is so plainly obvious to anyone who has ever used one--from the focus-by-wire AF system, the very heavy, dense, fat, nearly unit-focusing optical design, and the spherochromatism and axial chromatic aberration when shot wide open.

I find it absurd that people somehow expect lenses to do everything they personally believe (for whatever reason) it "should be able" to do, and if it doesn't, well, that simply "must" mean that an update is imminent or else Great Canon will lose a "loyal customer" forever!!!111one!!! Cue the dramatic drumroll!

Please. Get over yourself. Just because a lens is not designed to do everything you imagine it to do doesn't mean it's the designers' failing. It means that the photographer doesn't understand how to select the right tool for the job.

This.

 

[Machaon]

Here are a couple threads about eBay sales I have contributed to, and I'm sure there's more out there if you search:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21136
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21526.0

Great resources, thanks for that!

 

[AshtonNekolah]

..but I think that that is just life with most exotic wide-open lenses.

Unless you get the Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4...

I'm torn between the Otus' hyper-expensive perfection with manual focus, and the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 II's very-expensive but still-nice imperfection. It's the chromatic aberation that really turns me off the Canon.

My hope is that Canon will bring out a Mark III lens next year that will correct the colour fringing issue. I feel I can wait. In any case, I need to hoard gold to get either of them.

I'm sure I'd be impressed with the Mark II but I'm yet to find a way to resell equipment without losing 50% value. I see this purchase as a long-term marriage that I need to get right first time.

I think you need to get a grip on reality. On one hand you are happy to drop some serious cash on a luxury lens like a 85mm f1.2 II L and then it's not good enough for you, so you want to drop even more money on an uber niche 85mm Otus....and then you mention cost savings. Yeah right.
If you have the need and buying power for a Bentley then buy one....but don't bitch about the price or residual values. If you really want to be more conservative, go get an 85mm f1.8 USM. An awesome lens and really better value....but yes it has optical compromises like every other lens on the planet.

You said that right, I saw color fringing even on that Otus, from a review a guy tested, he said that it don't do justice on a the small file sizes, but I still say it, and that made me know that no matter how much a lens cost it does have some flaws. im sure its a high end product but not that perfect. Give and take a few more years from now, I bet this industry will be at it again, with another high price calming to be the best. I will own the 85mm II 1.2 one day im not in a hurry, it is a spectacular abstract monster.

 

[AshtonNekolah]

I've already said it: the 85L is a specialist lens. It was never designed with the intent to shoot action at night. It is a low-contrast, low light portraiture lens. If you can use it for other things, that's great. If camera bodies have become more sophisticated so as to facilitate using the 85L in other situations, that's great. But it doesn't change the original design intent of this lens, which is so plainly obvious to anyone who has ever used one--from the focus-by-wire AF system, the very heavy, dense, fat, nearly unit-focusing optical design, and the spherochromatism and axial chromatic aberration when shot wide open.

I find it absurd that people somehow expect lenses to do everything they personally believe (for whatever reason) it "should be able" to do, and if it doesn't, well, that simply "must" mean that an update is imminent or else Great Canon will lose a "loyal customer" forever!!!111one!!! Cue the dramatic drumroll!

Please. Get over yourself. Just because a lens is not designed to do everything you imagine it to do doesn't mean it's the designers' failing. It means that the photographer doesn't understand how to select the right tool for the job.

Man that's what I found out when i got my 50Lmm 1.2 and images were missed most of the time, until I understood how to use it, I began to understand that all lens also works this way. Maybe this is why canon is the Lens king with so many lenses on the market, they all have there own uses. I stick with my 50 until i got it right and yes I do agree on the 85Lmm 1.2 what it was designed for portraits not for action sports, however I will not take away from it, maybe there are that few 12% that can actually pull it off with a few frames. Using a lens what it made for is the key and not only understanding the rules of engagement but also understanding what it can and can not do.

 

[dash2k8]

Purple fringing can be avoided by not taking extremely shiny or glowing objects under the sun (white T-shirt, et al). I've never seen purple fringing on a red car.

 

[Ruined]

My GUESS is that the 85mm 1.2 L is the lens least likely to get an update within five years.

Not so sure. The 85L has two weak spots that Canon should act on; its one of the non-IS "L" primes that encounters most failures (electrical problems) and the sloooow focus (even if its better than the 85LI). Its esspecially sad becasue it limits the use of the lens for action shots at night.

There is also the reflection issue. Those who use the 85L at night will surely have seen occaisional "sparks" of green light from time to time. I expect this can be fixed with some of the new coating techniques Canon continues to develop.

I would expect a 85L III to see improvements on all three issues.

When Canon starts to release new bodies with better AF and software for focussing such as eye recognition the usefulness of the 85L will improve as we can begin to shoot more confidently @F/1.2.

I agree, I would not be surprised if the 85L III is f/1.4, either. Basically, make some changes like they did from the 50mm f/1.0 > 50mm f/1.2

 

[Maiaibing]

I've already said it: the 85L is a specialist lens. It was never designed with the intent to shoot action at night. It is a low-contrast, low light portraiture lens. If you can use it for other things, that's great.

Yeah. You're the man. Clearly Canon is clueless about its own lenses when they say about the 85L: "it really excels as a sports photography lens".

I suggest you write to Canon to correct their inept understanding of how to use their lenses...

I find it absurd that people somehow expect lenses to do everything they personally believe (for whatever reason) it "should be able" to do, and if it doesn't, well, that simply "must" mean that an update is imminent or else Great Canon will lose a "loyal customer" forever!!!111one!!! Cue the dramatic drumroll!

Please. Get over yourself. Just because a lens is not designed to do everything you imagine it to do doesn't mean it's the designers' failing. It means that the photographer doesn't understand how to select the right tool for the job.

"Get over yourself." Just stands out - dosn't it?

 

[scyrene]

I'll just point out a couple of things that I don't think have been mentioned thus far.

I dunno if it's obvious to everyone else, but the fringing is purple and green. Purple one side of the focal plane, green on the other.

As for Lightroom corrections, they work well but for two cases - where the fringing is very out of focus and on subjects that are purple and/or green to begin with. The intensity of the false colour diminishes the further from the plane of focus it is, but it's still noticeable sometimes, which requires a lower threshold for the defringing, which can lead to grey edges elsewhere. Grey edges are also a problem where there are parts of the image that are purple or green, as I say - so leaves can be particularly tricky.

As people have said, this lens excels for some uses. On portraits it's undoubtedly wonderful, and in low light it can do amazing things. But I wouldn't use it for e.g. flower photography - indeed I sold the 200mm f/2.8L because I found the fringing too problematic for this use (I suppose I should have gone for the 180L macro). The 85L is a bit of a prima donna - treat it well and it'll impress. But it's not for every situation.

Incidentally, one use I find this lens excellent for that might not be obvious is food photography. With a 12mm extension tube, it can work wonders (although the 100L macro is similarly good for this).

 

[Machaon]

I'll just point out a couple of things that I don't think have been mentioned thus far...

Very useful observations, thanks.

 

[Roo]

Damn this thread!! I watched Citizen Kane on DVD tonight and for the first time I was distracted by the purple fringing in a lot of scenes! How the hell you get purple fringing in a black and white movie I don't know but I do know it wasn't shot with a Canon 85 1.2 ;D

 

[privatebydesign]

Damn this thread!! I watched Citizen Kane on DVD tonight and for the first time I was distracted by the purple fringing in a lot of scenes! How the hell you get purple fringing in a black and white movie I don't know but I do know it wasn't shot with a Canon 85 1.2 ;D

The copy of the film that they digitised would have been one that was duplicated onto colour film stock, what they should have done is re B&W'ed the digital copy.

 

[scyrene]

Damn this thread!! I watched Citizen Kane on DVD tonight and for the first time I was distracted by the purple fringing in a lot of scenes! How the hell you get purple fringing in a black and white movie I don't know but I do know it wasn't shot with a Canon 85 1.2 ;D

Haha I notice it a lot on television. Ignorance is bliss!

 

[Tugela]

Hi guys! I've recently purchased 85 1.2ii and I was hoping I wouldn't see purple fringing, but it's there. For those who have 85 1.2ii, does any of you have no purple fringing? Or it's a hallmark of all copies of the lens? What's the best way to get rid of it in post-processing? Thank you

It is caused by light scattering on the sensors. How obvious it is depends on how intense the light is, the angle the light comes in at and the size/pixel density of the sensor.

 

[Tugela]

Damn this thread!! I watched Citizen Kane on DVD tonight and for the first time I was distracted by the purple fringing in a lot of scenes! How the hell you get purple fringing in a black and white movie I don't know but I do know it wasn't shot with a Canon 85 1.2 ;D

The copy of the film that they digitised would have been one that was duplicated onto colour film stock, what they should have done is re B&W'ed the digital copy.

No, when they produced the digital version, the original film was projected onto a sensor using glass optics. The sensor was recording in color and consequently recorded the artifacts inherent with using glass lenses and digital sensors. Even if it had been recorded as grey scale only, the digital version would still have the scattering highlights, so it would not be identical to the original.