EF 85mm f/1.8 vs EF 85mm f/1.2

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by triotary, Jul 25, 2006.

  1. triotary macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    #1
    can anyone tell me what is the difference between these two canon lenses other than the price and f/0.6 differences?
     
  2. homerjward macrumors 68030

    homerjward

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Location:
    fig tree
    #2
  3. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #3
    f/1.2? Dang, would that even be useful? I can't imagine myself taking many photos at f/1.2.
     
  4. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #4
    Yes it would and yes I could ;)
     
  5. triotary thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    #5

    certainly with that speed!
     
  6. triotary thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    #6
    wow Awesome link!!! thanks!
     
  7. triotary thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    #7
    lol I got this response from other photohraphy forum!

    "one is a grenade, and the other is like a toilet paper roll."































    ...if any of you do not catch the joke... the f/1.2 one is uber heavy while the other is light weight :D
     
  8. lucero1148 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    #8
    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.
     
  9. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #9
    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. :)
     
  10. atari1356 macrumors 68000

    atari1356

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    #10
    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:
    [​IMG]
     
  11. wilburdl macrumors member

    wilburdl

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #11
    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.
     
  12. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #12
    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
     
  13. wilburdl macrumors member

    wilburdl

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta
  14. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
  15. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #15
    Great shots wilburdl.

    Do you have a website or any place we could see some more of your work?
     
  16. wilburdl macrumors member

    wilburdl

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #16
  17. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #17
    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...
     
  18. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #18
    If you are shooting pro, a 1.2 may be justified. :)

    wilburdl, I'm lovin' your site -- nice job!
     
  19. wilburdl macrumors member

    wilburdl

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #19
    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.
     
  20. snap58 macrumors 6502

    snap58

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Location:
    somewhere in kansas
    #20
    I think everyone on this forum already knows which way you would go with out posting anything. : )
     
  21. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #21
    What exactly is that supposed to mean?
     
  22. extraextra macrumors 68000

    extraextra

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Location:
    California
    #22
    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.
     
  23. mcarnes macrumors 68000

    mcarnes

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2004
    Location:
    USA! USA!
    #23

    If you're a shooting pro the 1.8 is more justified because pro photographers make so little money. :p
     
  24. jared_kipe macrumors 68030

    jared_kipe

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2003
    Location:
    Seattle
    #24
    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.

    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
     
  25. wilburdl macrumors member

    wilburdl

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #25
    Thanks. It's due for an update.

    :rolleyes: I'm :cool:


    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.
     

Share This Page