Tamron SP 85mm F1.8 Di VC USD to be Announced Next Week
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I bit disappointed in the f/1.8 as I too was hoping for f/1.4. But I'm guessing f/1.4 would have been impossible to implement along with VC.
I don't share the love/need for IS/VC as much as most people around here so maybe I'll keep my eye on the Sigma Art f/1.4. Either way I'm curious to see some reviews, images this lens can produce, and the price. If the image quality is a solid improvement over the Canon 85 f/1.8 and the price is reasonable, I may have to consider this lens.
I don't share the love/need for IS/VC as much as most people around here so maybe I'll keep my eye on the Sigma Art f/1.4. Either way I'm curious to see some reviews, images this lens can produce, and the price. If the image quality is a solid improvement over the Canon 85 f/1.8 and the price is reasonable, I may have to consider this lens.
Upvote
0
ecka said:Luds34 said:
In a portrait lens, which is what 85mm practically is IMHO, I'd take F1.4/F1.2 over VC any time.
Anyway, it must be good for videos then.
Most portraits are shot between f/2.8 and f/5.6 wide aperture is a specialty portrait.
Upvote
0
jebrady03 said:
I hear you. A stabilized 85mm would fit my needs nicely. Had the 24-105L, twice. Looking for more than it offers. I'll wait for reviews and pricing, then give it some time to see if people start reporting any initial unseen service issues before making the jump. Paired w/the 70-200L IS ll, that will handle nearly all my portrait needs.
Upvote
0
Etienne said:ecka said:Luds34 said:
In a portrait lens, which is what 85mm practically is IMHO, I'd take F1.4/F1.2 over VC any time.
Anyway, it must be good for videos then
Most portraits are shot between f/2.8 and f/5.6 wide aperture is a specialty portrait.
Not really. For full body F1.2 is fine, or even preferable. Most pro's just don't bother using fast primes, they shoot with F2.8 zooms. That's why it's usually 2.8 ~ 5.6
Upvote
0
ecka said:Etienne said:ecka said:Luds34 said:
In a portrait lens, which is what 85mm practically is IMHO, I'd take F1.4/F1.2 over VC any time.
Anyway, it must be good for videos then
Most portraits are shot between f/2.8 and f/5.6 wide aperture is a specialty portrait.
Not really. For full body F1.2 is fine, or even preferable. Most pro's just don't bother using fast primes, they shoot with F2.8 zooms. That's why it's usually 2.8 ~ 5.6
What you shoot with depends on the type of photographer you are. I think nearly every wedding photographer uses primes...at least good ones. I think journalists are most commonly the ones not shooting with primes. When I am covering a journalism assignment, I bring my 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 with either my 50 Art or 85mm. I may never bring the prime out of my bag, but it's with me just in case. I use primes as much as possible and as wide open as I can get away with to achieve the look I want.
- Kevin
Upvote
0
Luds34 said:
+1. I don't see myself switching to this from my sigma 85 1.4 EX. In a prime - and especially a portrait prime - I want the wider aperture.
Recently had a look at the Tamron 45 1.8 VC, but decided if I upgrade my 50 it would be to the 50 Art. Trying to tell myself I don't need a 50 prime at all though!
Upvote
0
LSXPhotog said:ecka said:Etienne said:ecka said:Luds34 said:
In a portrait lens, which is what 85mm practically is IMHO, I'd take F1.4/F1.2 over VC any time.
Anyway, it must be good for videos then
Most portraits are shot between f/2.8 and f/5.6 wide aperture is a specialty portrait.
Not really. For full body F1.2 is fine, or even preferable. Most pro's just don't bother using fast primes, they shoot with F2.8 zooms. That's why it's usually 2.8 ~ 5.6
What you shoot with depends on the type of photographer you are. I think nearly every wedding photographer uses primes...at least good ones. I think journalists are most commonly the ones not shooting with primes. When I am covering a journalism assignment, I bring my 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 with either my 50 Art or 85mm. I may never bring the prime out of my bag, but it's with me just in case. I use primes as much as possible and as wide open as I can get away with to achieve the look I want.
- Kevin
Agreed. I'd add to that it really depends on the client and the type of shot. Conservative, corporate headshots are one thing. An artsy, free spirited photoshoot is another. A good pro may have a style, but even he/she knows who butters their bread and will adapt for the shoot at hand.
Upvote
0
jd7 said:
Yep, I got a bit carried away for a while and in the last year have really worked on consolidating my gear and focus on what I need. I actually sold my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX. At the time I was anticipating/waiting for a possible new Canon 50mm. But more and more I'm reminding myself I don't need a 50mm prime. A good 35mm and 85mm should fill the need well enough.
I've never shot the Sigma 85 EX, but everyone raves about the IQ of that lens. The more I think about it, the lack of IS on my current Canon 85 f/1.8 has never held me back. I think if I want to upgrade my 85mm I'll hold off for an f/1.4 type of lens.
Upvote
0
Luds34 said:LSXPhotog said:ecka said:Etienne said:ecka said:Luds34 said:
In a portrait lens, which is what 85mm practically is IMHO, I'd take F1.4/F1.2 over VC any time.
Anyway, it must be good for videos then
Most portraits are shot between f/2.8 and f/5.6 wide aperture is a specialty portrait.
Not really. For full body F1.2 is fine, or even preferable. Most pro's just don't bother using fast primes, they shoot with F2.8 zooms. That's why it's usually 2.8 ~ 5.6
What you shoot with depends on the type of photographer you are. I think nearly every wedding photographer uses primes...at least good ones. I think journalists are most commonly the ones not shooting with primes. When I am covering a journalism assignment, I bring my 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 with either my 50 Art or 85mm. I may never bring the prime out of my bag, but it's with me just in case. I use primes as much as possible and as wide open as I can get away with to achieve the look I want.
- Kevin
Agreed. I'd add to that it really depends on the client and the type of shot. Conservative, corporate headshots are one thing. An artsy, free spirited photoshoot is another. A good pro may have a style, but even he/she knows who butters their bread and will adapt for the shoot at hand.
I'm a free type of photographer, I do it exclusively for pleasure. I don't carry any bazooka style optics
(like 70-200/2.8 ). I don't stage my shots. I wait for the moment. I rarely shoot must-gets, so I'm not bored with it enough to use whatever lens gets it with the least effort and time spent, like most professionals do.
Upvote
0
grainier said:ecka said:grainier said:ecka said:I think Sigma 50-100/1.8 Art beats this one.
I mean for crops
It's gonna cost more than 45/1.8 + this together.
45/1.8 + 55/1.8 + 65/1.8 + 75/1.8 + 85/1.8 + 95/1.8
:
If you have no legs, then yes.
Regardless if you have legs or not, that's what that lens is.
Upvote
0
LSXPhotog said:
I love my 85 f/1.8 USM! Yes it purple-fringes at large apertures, but Lightroom fixes that easily enough.
My only real complaint is the crappy (& expensive) lens hood.
Curious to know your beef with it?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
