Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EF 85mm f/1.8 vs EF 85mm f/1.2
- Thread starter triotary
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
one's an L series and costs several times more, and focuses slower from what i've heard. take this with a grain of salt as i've never used either.
here's a comparison/review: http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/85mm/
here's a comparison/review: http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/85mm/
I've got a 1.2 and its a great lense for portraiture. especially if you prefer doing available light photos. Offers the ability to shoot backlight subjects without image degradation from lens flare and for overall image sharpness. that's where it shows its strengths.
The other thing that I have heard is that with any relatively fast lens, it may be a little spotty wide-open. But it's my impression that when it's stopped down, a faster lens will often be sharper at the same f/stop than a slower lens... like my 50/f1.4 will be sharper at f/2 than a 50/f1.8. But then there are things that the really wide open settings are good for in themselves. Although, in the case of that particular lens, it's so big and heavy... mmm... that those two things in themselves may dissuade a person from it unless they specifically need it. Also I've seen great work done with the 85/f1.8. 
I have the 85 f1.8 and am extremely pleased with it... it's a very sharp lens (I have noticed some purple fringe with it on rare occasions - but nothing I'd consider too problematic).
I've heard great things about the 85f1.2 as well. It would be a great purchase if money is no object, and you don't mind a slightly slower focus... but the low price of the f1.8 make it an amazing value in comparison.
I suggest reading these technical reviews if you haven't already:
Canon 85 f/1.8 test report | Canon 85 f/1.2 test report
Here's my favorite photo I've taken with the 85 f1.8 so far:
![electric_bw.jpg]()
I've heard great things about the 85f1.2 as well. It would be a great purchase if money is no object, and you don't mind a slightly slower focus... but the low price of the f1.8 make it an amazing value in comparison.
I suggest reading these technical reviews if you haven't already:
Canon 85 f/1.8 test report | Canon 85 f/1.2 test report
Here's my favorite photo I've taken with the 85 f1.8 so far:
Well the difference comes down to features and with a lens there are a couple of features that you look for. The most obvious feature would have to be image quality. The 85 1.2 is one of the premier L lenses Canon has. The weight is noticeable. I have the 1.2 (not 1.8) so I can attest to this.
The speed is definitely not there and you can forget focusing in low-light. On the other-hand, The look of the image at 1.2 is phenominal. The plus side to this is that they've issued an update (version II) to address this problem specifically, of course, in doing so, they've raised the price even higher.
I'll post some samples later.
The speed is definitely not there and you can forget focusing in low-light. On the other-hand, The look of the image at 1.2 is phenominal. The plus side to this is that they've issued an update (version II) to address this problem specifically, of course, in doing so, they've raised the price even higher.
I'll post some samples later.
wilburdl said:
I'm really looking forward to see your shots form this lens.
And for the OP, here is a great source to get reviews for Canon lens and other gear:
The Digital Picture
Mike Teezie said:
Actually, these shots should be on my site.
http://definitiveworks.com/portraits/portrait1.html
People people, for the price of an 85mm 1.2 you could have
Canon 50mm 1.4 +
Canon 85mm 1.8 +
Sigma 30mm 1.4 +
$500
I certainly know which way I would go...
Canon 50mm 1.4 +
Canon 85mm 1.8 +
Sigma 30mm 1.4 +
$500
I certainly know which way I would go...
jared_kipe said:
If you are shooting pro, a 1.2 may be justified.
wilburdl, I'm lovin' your site -- nice job!
jared_kipe said:
I have the 50 1.4 and it's optical quality isn't as good as the 1.2. That said, it's a lot easier for me to use when I'm shooting fashion as it isn't as sharp and is a hell of a lot faster focusing. There are different tools for different looks.
jared_kipe said:
I think everyone on this forum already knows which way you would go with out posting anything. : )
The f/1.2L is amazing. But for around $350, the f/1.8 is really hard to beat. If you've got the cash, definitely go for the f/1.2.
From what I've seen the 85mm 1.2 and 1.8 are very similar at 1.8, the 1.8 version being slightly behind in the corners. And they both have very similar performance near their peak at f4. The 1.8 is just a little lower in the corners at 1.8 and 2.8 which is no so necessary for the kind of portraits on your site.wilburdl said:
That combined with the slower focusing speed of the 1.2 makes me seriously question the price difference for that 1 stop of light. Even for a pro. But the 1.2 is a very serious looking lens.
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_85_18/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_85_12/index.htm
Thanks. It's due for an update.carltonmusic said:
mcarnes said:
I'm jared_kipe said:
It's fun. It's 1.2 that makes it special. The look of the blurred areas are different. The images it produces at that aperature has a medium format look to them.
The difference would depend on the resolution of the camera, the higher the resolution the more apparent the difference in image quality.