Samples of Canon 85mm f1.4 IS posted by DPreview

[SecureGSM]

I deliberately used poor light to ensure the Sigma performance peripheral AF points in such a conditions.
Once again, 95.6% QoF result is very good. You just not looking at the right numbers the compare with. Do you research if do not believe my experience.

 

[Viggo]

I deliberately used poor light to ensure the Sigma performance peripheral AF points in such a conditions.
Once again, 95.6% QoF result is very good. You just not looking at the right numbers the compare with. Do you research if do not believe my experience.

No, I agree, in those low light levels I’m seeing that as very good result myself. Doesn’t make me change my mind about buying Sigma ever again though ;D

 

[SecureGSM]

Fair enough, I was contemplating to let my Sigma 85 Art go and buy a new Canon 85 IS instead.

I was expecting the new Canon to best Sigma in CA and AF department. It did not eventuate. Bar that Sigma is a better glass optically and cost half of what Canon is charging for 85 IS in Australia. $1125 vs $2250.
Just do not see a point to upgrade to end up with optically inferior glass. That’s all.
That said, I sold all other Sigma Art primes due to very poor AF consistency on 5D IV.

 

[edoorn]

Great your copy is working good! Not every one seems to work as well; I know some pro photogs who have used the sugma but are not happy with the AF, in particular on outer focus points

 

[pwp]

Fair enough, I was contemplating to let my Sigma 85 Art go and buy a new Canon 85 IS instead....

...That said, I sold all other Sigma Art primes due to very poor AF consistency on 5D IV.

Same here with a string of sold Sigma primes, purely on AF inconsistencies. When will I ever learn?
But you're happy with the Sigma 85 Art? If the AF is acceptable, it's a compelling option.

-pw

 

[SecureGSM]

Oh yes, very compelling indeed. contrasty, Next to nothing vignetting wide open. Virtually none. Mind boggling sharpness wide open. Please see mtf charts at f1.4 and F4 posted on previous page. that 86mm filter size is there for reason.

CA level is a bit higher than I really wanted it to be at but very easily addressed in post.
Bokeh... I would like to mention this if I may. Nothing like anything I have seen before. Creamy, smooth??? No, not the right word. I would say it is relaxed, deep, rich and intensive at the same time. Not nervous or busy, no. Rather punchy and vibrant.

Fair enough, I was contemplating to let my Sigma 85 Art go and buy a new Canon 85 IS instead....

...That said, I sold all other Sigma Art primes due to very poor AF consistency on 5D IV.

Same here with a string of sold Sigma primes, purely on AF inconsistencies. When will I ever learn?
But you're happy with the Sigma 85 Art? If the AF is acceptable, it's a compelling option.

-pw

 

[mb66energy]

Again, no BR (Blue Goo). I have to now wonder why BR has just about disappeared. Then again, this lens might have been designed before BR was developed.

Not a wide enough lens to need it.

A 600mm DO with BR is rumored to be coming. I also thought that maybe the longer focal lengths wouldn't see a benefit. Since reading about the 600mm DO, I have no idea why. Maybe it is only used with lenses that need help with CA?

That's true. BR is just another refractive material with another type of dispersion. Dispersion is a generic property of each optical material which measures how large is the refractive index (= capacity to alter the light path in optical elements) for different wavelengths (= colors). Dispersion is never a constant function, it has different refractive index values for different colors. A lens (e.g. a simple magnifying glass) has different focal lengths for different wavelengths / colors. That is the reason for CAs.
The art of lens design means that you have to combine two lenses with DIFFERENT DISPERSION to create a constant function for the dispersion of the lens system - same focal length for each wavelength / color.
My idea: Canon used the BR material just to add another type of "glass" which is not solid hence it is more expensive to integrate it into a lens: create sealings which show long term stability and maybe the material itself isn't that cheap.

As far as I know Canon telephoto lenses are very well corrected, so there is really no CA issue which needs to be compensated with BR material. But introducing a DO element and trying to make the lens light and compact might have been a reason to omit some lens elements and replace it e.g. with a BR group. Think about taking out 5 lenses and replace them by three flatter lenses to make things lighter and make more room for the movement of other lens groups: Then BR can be helpful while it is usually more important to wide angles.

The 1.4 85 hasn't got a BR element so maybe size / weight / pricing constraints lead to a non-BR design. And everything between 85 and 135mm for FF was always very good, just the great FD 2.5 135 S.C. which suffers only from LOCA wide open.

 

[mb66energy]

From what I see:
Technically it is very sharp in the image plane but shows a lot of LOCA if there is a high contrast in the scene - see the images of the light bulbs against the sky and the autumn leaves on the street. Viewing the latter one I thought the photographer has spotted some oil spill and put the color rich newton rings in the focal plane but ... it seems to be strong LOCA.

But: For those who do portrait work it seems to be a great lens: Very good texture reproduction of the skin and very good bokeh just at f/1.4.
Plus IS for low light situations without using a disturbing flash.

If I were portrait photographer I would not hesitate to add that lens to my tool set. But too often I need good technical IQ with the typical great rendering of Canon lenses so I will stay at the moment with 60mm and 100mm non-IS macro lenses for that work.

About the samples of dpreview: I do not think they are bad. There are a lot of f/1.4 samples which help to evaluate the general IQ of that lens - I have seen a lot of worse sample galleries showing two or three wide open samples and 50 with boring f/8 ...

 

[wockawocka]

I know folks like to have the best lens optically but there is a line to be drawn where the size and weight is an issue. When I saw the Sigma I genuinely laughed out loud at the sight of it and knew it would never be practical for a wedding.

That factor alone stopped me from getting one. The 1.4 from Canon though with it's shorter hood looks perfect. I can't see image quality being worse than the Sigma which says a lot seeing as generally the bigger prime lenses have better IQ.

 

[Viggo]

If only it would arrive soon, postponed until December is the last I’ve heard here...

 

[StudentOfLight]

How noisy is the IS and AF? Will it be good enough for video or would one need an off-camera mic setup due to buzzing and/or click sounds.
Also, how nicely does it play with DPAF?

 

[ahsanford]

How noisy is the IS and AF? Will it be good enough for video or would one need an off-camera mic setup due to buzzing and/or click sounds.
Also, how nicely does it play with DPAF?

I think Canon had to update the famously slow 85 f/1.2L II AF (and eliminate the FBW setup) and move to modern ring USM = a long overdue win for stills shooters in this FL.

Adding IS helps videographers, sure, but it's still ring USM. Until Canon allows us to drop ring USM into 'slow/smooth video mode' ;D, videographers are probably not going to enjoy using it (...with AF that is, some may focus manually).

I was wondering if Canon could ever make a Ring USM / STM hybrid lens so that there would effectively be a 'Stills' / 'Video' AF selector switch on the barrel, but it appears that their answer is Nano USM. Despite that, Canon has only put that tech into two modestly priced non-L zooms to date, so smooth video AF + IS is only available on slower/cheaper glass.

- A

 

[John]

i am very, very curious to know about the AF on this lens. is the AF as fast as the 85 f/1.8. if it is, then i would consider buying it.

 

[John]

i am very curious to know if the AF ans sharpness of the lens is as good or better than the 85 f/1.8. these 2 factors will weigh in on whether i buy it or not.

 

[ahsanford]

i am very, very curious to know about the AF on this lens. is the AF as fast as the 85 f/1.8. if it is, then i would consider buying it.

It's a $1600 L lens with ring USM. 100% confidence the AF will be at least as quick as the 85 f/1.8 USM.

- A

 

[Jopa]

How noisy is the IS and AF? Will it be good enough for video or would one need an off-camera mic setup due to buzzing and/or click sounds.
Also, how nicely does it play with DPAF?

Anything that's not STM or Nano USM won't work with an on-camera mic. Even super quiet Ring USM will be noticeable...

 

[hne]

i am very, very curious to know about the AF on this lens. is the AF as fast as the 85 f/1.8. if it is, then i would consider buying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXxgA8KglDQ

A video comparison of the AF speed between 85/1.2II (sloooooow), 85/1.8 (fast), and the new 85/1.4 IS (faster).

 

[ahsanford]

i am very, very curious to know about the AF on this lens. is the AF as fast as the 85 f/1.8. if it is, then i would consider buying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXxgA8KglDQ

A video comparison of the AF speed between 85/1.2II (sloooooow), 85/1.8 (fast), and the new 85/1.4 IS (faster).

Nice. That's that.

- A

 

[hne]

i am very, very curious to know about the AF on this lens. is the AF as fast as the 85 f/1.8. if it is, then i would consider buying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXxgA8KglDQ

A video comparison of the AF speed between 85/1.2II (sloooooow), 85/1.8 (fast), and the new 85/1.4 IS (faster).

Nice. That's that.

- A

Test description for those not interested in looking closer at the Youtube video: the 85/1.4 was about 1 video frame faster at focusing from far to near, but 1 frame slower at focusing from near to far, so pretty much the same speed as the f/1.8 lens. If the AF perfomance in that video is to be taken as indicative, racking focus between two objects of significantly different objects would need in the order of 200ms with the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM. Plenty fast enough for me!

 

[mclaren777]

Also, how nicely does it play with DPAF?

It works great on my 5D4.