Review - Canon EF 85 f/1.2L II

[JVLphoto]

I think the Canon 85mm 1.2 L II is a magical lense. It just gives you the colours and the bokeh with sharpness, even wide open (in the centre). I luckily shot one for about half the price listed, otherwise I probably would never bought one for 2k€. Now, after experiencing the lense I WOULD pay 2k€ for it. Why? After decades of having a lot of lenses from wide angle to longer zooms I just made a summaryline and asked me... what lense do you use very often and which one is hunting dust?

I got me catched on 85 1.2, 100 2.8 L IS and the Magic Drainpipe. Of course I like my other lenses, but you just can shoot with the Canonball and everything works out to be beautiful. The only thing I would criticise is the lack of wheathersealing and the sometimes annoying 0,95m minimumdistance.

This lense could be the REASON why someone should buy a Canonbody. And as I still use the 5DC, I enjoy the FULL step over the (otherwise fantastic) 85mm 1.8.

P.S. How can I change the camera in my profile? Damn

Hey, vscd...just get a 12mm Canon Ext. Tube for when you want to get close. With the Canon tube I had no focus shift...(Had a Kenko and there was a ton of focus shift). Ideally if Canon made a 7-10mm tube it would be better...because with the 12mm tube there is a gap from the minimum focus of the lens to the focus of them lens with the 12mm tube...but it isn't too much lost... It is definitely worth checking out.
Hope that helps.

You can also free-lens it, which yields some unique results, if you can get any results at all

 

[peteroc]

Just a few details concerning some points I read earlier.

The gap of the front barrel
Yes, dust can get in the lens, probably from this gap. I own this lens for about two years now, and I had to have it clean twice. It's no big deal, my local professional store did it with ionized air, by delicately taking the screw off on the mount. Dust seems to go between the two rear glass.

This is the lens I use the most, and the only one not weather sealed I have, so... I'm guessing a mark III would be, like all recent L-lens upgrade.

The colors
Don't compare the 50 f/1.2L to the 85 f/1.2L II. The 50L is a first generation, with a lot of CA. the 85L II is much more controled and the Lightroom profile takes care of what's left.

The vignetting
I use the 85L on a 1D Mark IV (1.3x) and it's fine. I really think it's not noticeable on a APS-C (1.6x) sensor body. 85mm x 1.3 gives a nice 110mm, almost like old times 105mm portrait lens.

The quirkyness
Yes, you need to use this lens for a while to get used to it. But once you get a hold of it, it'll become your go to portrait lens. The background are creamy and contrast perfect for B&W. This lens is really made to make your subject stand out. It's worth the investment.

 

[CarlTN]

The vignetting
I use the 85L on a 1D Mark IV (1.3x) and it's fine. I really think it's not noticeable on a APS-C (1.6x) sensor body. 85mm x 1.3 gives a nice 110mm, almost like old times 105mm portrait lens.

While I'm glad to see you enjoy the lens, and a 1D Mark IV (I like those as well), I do need to point out that indeed there is a lot of vignetting at f/1.2 to f/1.6, even on a 1.6x crop camera. This can be "corrected" of course, but it's there.

I have no doubt that if there is ever a version 3 of the lens, it will also have noticeable vignetting even on a 1.6x crop camera.

None of that is necessarily unusual for such a lens, or should discourage anyone from owning one. Vignetting is even something usually preferable for portraiture. I used it more for landscape, only did a few portraits.

 

[JVLphoto]

The vignetting
I use the 85L on a 1D Mark IV (1.3x) and it's fine. I really think it's not noticeable on a APS-C (1.6x) sensor body. 85mm x 1.3 gives a nice 110mm, almost like old times 105mm portrait lens.

While I'm glad to see you enjoy the lens, and a 1D Mark IV (I like those as well), I do need to point out that indeed there is a lot of vignetting at f/1.2 to f/1.6, even on a 1.6x crop camera. This can be "corrected" of course, but it's there.

I have no doubt that if there is ever a version 3 of the lens, it will also have noticeable vignetting even on a 1.6x crop camera.

None of that is necessarily unusual for such a lens, or should discourage anyone from owning one. Vignetting is even something usually preferable for portraiture. I used it more for landscape, only did a few portraits.

I keep mentioning vignetting in my reviews, but it's almost pointless, same as saying an L lens is expensive, they're practically givens with fast primes. That said, not everyone knows what we know, so I'll keep saying it. Thanks for helping fill in the 1.3 & 1.6 crop gap - I sold my 7D so don't have one to test out the lenses with anymore.

 

[CarlTN]

The vignetting
I use the 85L on a 1D Mark IV (1.3x) and it's fine. I really think it's not noticeable on a APS-C (1.6x) sensor body. 85mm x 1.3 gives a nice 110mm, almost like old times 105mm portrait lens.

While I'm glad to see you enjoy the lens, and a 1D Mark IV (I like those as well), I do need to point out that indeed there is a lot of vignetting at f/1.2 to f/1.6, even on a 1.6x crop camera. This can be "corrected" of course, but it's there.

I have no doubt that if there is ever a version 3 of the lens, it will also have noticeable vignetting even on a 1.6x crop camera.

None of that is necessarily unusual for such a lens, or should discourage anyone from owning one. Vignetting is even something usually preferable for portraiture. I used it more for landscape, only did a few portraits.

I keep mentioning vignetting in my reviews, but it's almost pointless, same as saying an L lens is expensive, they're practically givens with fast primes. That said, not everyone knows what we know, so I'll keep saying it. Thanks for helping fill in the 1.3 & 1.6 crop gap - I sold my 7D so don't have one to test out the lenses with anymore.

No problem. I agree, although the Rokinon (laugh if you need to) has very little vignetting on my crop camera...and neither does my 58mm Voigtlander f/1.4. So the reason the strong vignetting might be a concern via the 85mm f/1.2L, is because it starts so early toward the image center. In portraiture (even on a full frame camera), I could see where it might throw off the composition if you are worried about always getting someone's face in the exact center, for this reason. Otherwise, the face would not be spotlighted, but rather the chest or something would have the most light on it due to the vignetting. Meaning you would be forced to remove most or all of the vignetting anyway...which means your exposure gets lifted in post processing...and might introduce more noise than the "noise freaks" are willing to bear. Then, if you really wanted a vignette in the first place, you would have to put one back into the final image, while avoiding getting the face dark, etc.

Or at least that's how it seems to me...I could be wrong.

 

[JVLphoto]

The vignetting
I use the 85L on a 1D Mark IV (1.3x) and it's fine. I really think it's not noticeable on a APS-C (1.6x) sensor body. 85mm x 1.3 gives a nice 110mm, almost like old times 105mm portrait lens.

While I'm glad to see you enjoy the lens, and a 1D Mark IV (I like those as well), I do need to point out that indeed there is a lot of vignetting at f/1.2 to f/1.6, even on a 1.6x crop camera. This can be "corrected" of course, but it's there.

I have no doubt that if there is ever a version 3 of the lens, it will also have noticeable vignetting even on a 1.6x crop camera.

None of that is necessarily unusual for such a lens, or should discourage anyone from owning one. Vignetting is even something usually preferable for portraiture. I used it more for landscape, only did a few portraits.

I keep mentioning vignetting in my reviews, but it's almost pointless, same as saying an L lens is expensive, they're practically givens with fast primes. That said, not everyone knows what we know, so I'll keep saying it. Thanks for helping fill in the 1.3 & 1.6 crop gap - I sold my 7D so don't have one to test out the lenses with anymore.

No problem. I agree, although the Rokinon (laugh if you need to) has very little vignetting on my crop camera...and neither does my 58mm Voigtlander f/1.4. So the reason the strong vignetting might be a concern via the 85mm f/1.2L, is because it starts so early toward the image center. In portraiture (even on a full frame camera), I could see where it might throw off the composition if you are worried about always getting someone's face in the exact center, for this reason. Otherwise, the face would not be spotlighted, but rather the chest or something would have the most light on it due to the vignetting. Meaning you would be forced to remove most or all of the vignetting anyway...which means your exposure gets lifted in post processing...and might introduce more noise than the "noise freaks" are willing to bear. Then, if you really wanted a vignette in the first place, you would have to put one back into the final image, while avoiding getting the face dark, etc.

Or at least that's how it seems to me...I could be wrong.

Nope, you got it about right. Works better on a telephoto lens than a wide-angle IMHO, look for my 24mm f/1.4 review coming soon to see how it affects the "look" in a less desirable way.

 

[CarlTN]

Thanks JVLPhoto, glad to know I get something correct every now and then!

 

[RS2021]

The vignetting
I use the 85L on a 1D Mark IV (1.3x) and it's fine. I really think it's not noticeable on a APS-C (1.6x) sensor body. 85mm x 1.3 gives a nice 110mm, almost like old times 105mm portrait lens.

Even on a full frame the vignetting never bothered me to be honest... in fact, sometimes I add a bit more in LR.
I can see how it may matter in some cases, probably full-trunk portraits or odd framing and astrophotography... but then we are wandering well out of what I use it for.

 

[smithy]

I love the 85mm focal length. What this review really needs is an update that includes comparisons with the Canon f/1.8 and the Sigma f/1.4. Even if only because the review asks the question:

"Practically, how does f/1.2 hold up against 1.4? Is the lenses [sic] $2,000 price tag justified? After all, Canon shooters have the option of a Sigma 1.4 at half that price, and the Canon 85mm f/1.8 for about $500."

...but doesn't actually answer it. Just some constructive feedback there.

I own the Sigma 85mm lens and it's beautiful. The thought of buying a non-Canon lens (especially one as expensive as the 85mm f/1.4) made me squirm initially, but my hesitation was unwarranted. Perhaps I got lucky - I haven't had any focus or quality issues with mine (used on a 5D III and 1V). Yes the minimum focussing distance isn't great, but none of the 85s do particularly well in this area. The Sigma also features the very versatile 77mm filter thread, whereas the f/1.2L uses a 72mm thread.

If the Canon were the same price (or thereabouts) as the Sigma, I might have bought it, but at twice the price? Not a chance.

 

[JVLphoto]

I love the 85mm focal length. What this review really needs is an update that includes comparisons with the Canon f/1.8 and the Sigma f/1.4. Even if only because the review asks the question:

"Practically, how does f/1.2 hold up against 1.4? Is the lenses [sic] $2,000 price tag justified? After all, Canon shooters have the option of a Sigma 1.4 at half that price, and the Canon 85mm f/1.8 for about $500."

...but doesn't actually answer it. Just some constructive feedback there.

I own the Sigma 85mm lens and it's beautiful. The thought of buying a non-Canon lens (especially one as expensive as the 85mm f/1.4) made me squirm initially, but my hesitation was unwarranted. Perhaps I got lucky - I haven't had any focus or quality issues with mine (used on a 5D III and 1V). Yes the minimum focussing distance isn't great, but none of the 85s do particularly well in this area. The Sigma also features the very versatile 77mm filter thread, whereas the f/1.2L uses a 72mm thread.

If the Canon were the same price (or thereabouts) as the Sigma, I might have bought it, but at twice the price? Not a chance.

Questions that I'd love to answer! Just need to get some of those other lenses. I've worked briefly with the Canon 1.8 and Sigma 1.4 - not enough to pass judgement on them - I did find the Sigma focus was way off on the copy I tried, and needed major micro-adjustment to "hit." The Canon 1.8 gets it done, but not in any significant or "wowing" way, it's a very compact lens, though, and there's advantages to that as well.

Thanks for bringing your experience into the forum!

 

[RS2021]

I still have my EF 85 f/1.8 and use it at times...nothing to complain about...fast AF, sharp, good bokeh for the price...I even recommend it to those who don't want to go the L route for whatever reason.

But in all fairness, as noted by justin, it doesn't have that "umph" the 85L does. This is not some L brand fawning...the images generated by the 85LII are very different in caliber from the f/1.8.