Canon EF 85mm f1.2L II USM Lens

[ddt0725]

What is it about this lens that has me so addicted to it!!?? I bought the 85mm f/1.8 thinking it would satisfy my obsession and it has not!

For my verybeginner needs, the 85mm f/1.8 is fantasic and a very practical lens for me and the 1.2 is very much NOT! I can find a huge amount of other gear to spend the money on, many things thatI really need to still get. I haven't even sold my 300mm lens to makeup some of theamountbut yet EVERY night I fight hitting the buy button on the 85mm f1.2L II USM lens!

I think I need to put a call into my sponsor @ photographers anonymous! [:P]

Denise

[Sean Setters]

Whatever you do, don't talk to Keith. Just don't do it... :-)

[ddt0725]

Whatever you do, don't talk to Keith. Just don't do it... :-)


LOL! I have been watching for any updates from him to see how he is enjoying his new baby! I was hoping to hear something like ...it's awful, just horrible, to help me break free but until then I have to keep fighting this demon![:P]

[Sean Setters]

The 85 f/1.8 is a fine lens....use it!

[Keith B]

Whatever you do, don't talk to Keith. Just don't do it... :-)






Haha!


I do love the 85L. I will be the first to admit it had a lot to do with L lust and there is no sexier L lens in my opinion. It feels just amazing in your hands and it is beautiful to look at. Remove the lens and rear caps and gaze through you will go into a deep trance and probably have an outer body experience.


A lot of reviews ask if you would recommend this to a friend. I can honestly say no. It is expensive and I'd say real world type stuff the 1.8 is plenty. 1.2 is rarely useable due to the ridiculously shallow DOF. You'll be amazed how still you have to be to get focus right at 1.2. If you (or your subject) lean forward or back the slightest bit you miss focus by a bunch. More than likely you'd end up shooting 1.8 or above just to get focus shots. The bokeh will be softer and sweeter but it is $1900.


This lens will make you very paranoid too. The glass is very vulnerable in front and rear. This an emphatic "HELL NO!" on the loaner request. So you may lose a friend or two.


This shot below was shot at 1.2. I pretty much nailed the focus but it's almost useless of a shot other than showing how tough the DOF is contend with.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_8569sm.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_8569c.jpg

[Sheiky]

Haha that's just sick!


In short: I guess 9/10 times the 85 1.8 will do even great and for a lot less money.


I just had to smile at the loaner request by the way [:D]

[peety3]

I will be the first to admit it had a lot to do with L lust and there is no sexier L lens in my opinion.





I said this once before about the 85L, but now I'm going to say it again in a different light: Do not, I repeat do not rent/touch/try the 200/2. You will commit grand theft (actually five-grand theft) if you touch that lens and don't have the greenbacks standing by to buy it. If 200mm suits the composition you're after and you can get the DoF to suit your desired shot, you WILL have a great picture. It's stunning in its versatility - low-light anything, sports anything, and long portraits. Not only is it just Dreamy Goodness (see http://neilvn.com/tangents/2008/07/29/canon-200mm-f2/), the IS unit is out of this world too. If you find yourself with the 85L and the 200/2, you will simply put the 85L back in your bag, and you will walk to get the shot with the 200. The poor 85L will feel lost and neglected (I have done it, both times I've rented the 200/2).






A lot of reviews ask if you would recommend this to a friend. I can honestly say no. It is expensive and I'd say real world type stuff the 1.8 is plenty. 1.2 is rarely useable due to the ridiculously shallow DOF. You'll be amazed how still you have to be to get focus right at 1.2. If you (or your subject) lean forward or back the slightest bit you miss focus by a bunch. More than likely you'd end up shooting 1.8 or above just to get focus shots. The bokeh will be softer and sweeter but it is $1900.





I wouldn't recommend the 85L to a point&shooter. For those who want good results and are willing to take the time to learn the lens, 85L is worth every penny. I recommended the 85L to friends - they're both high-energy, type-A people; he loves it, while she hates having to sneaker-zoom and doesn't appreciate the need to plan her compositions.


pt

[neuroanatomist]

I said this once before about the 85L...Do not, I repeat do not rent/touch/try the 200/2.


But what if there was a solution that blended the best of both worlds ("http://www.velodramatic.com/archives/5293)?!? [:P]

[Keith B]

I will be the first to admit it had a lot to do with L lust and there is no sexier L lens in my opinion.





I said this once before about the 85L, but now I'm going to say it again in a different light: Do not, I repeat do not rent/touch/try the 200/2. You will commit grand theft (actually five-grand theft) if you touch that lens and don't have the greenbacks standing by to buy it. If 200mm suits the composition you're after and you can get the DoF to suit your desired shot, you WILL have a great picture. It's stunning in its versatility - low-light anything, sports anything, and long portraits. Not only is it just Dreamy Goodness (see http://neilvn.com/tangents/2008/07/29/canon-200mm-f2/), the IS unit is out of this world too. If you find yourself with the 85L and the 200/2, you will simply put the 85L back in your bag, and you will walk to get the shot with the 200. The poor 85L will feel lost and neglected (I have done it, both times I've rented the 200/2).






A lot of reviews ask if you would recommend this to a friend. I can honestly say no. It is expensive and I'd say real world type stuff the 1.8 is plenty. 1.2 is rarely useable due to the ridiculously shallow DOF. You'll be amazed how still you have to be to get focus right at 1.2. If you (or your subject) lean forward or back the slightest bit you miss focus by a bunch. More than likely you'd end up shooting 1.8 or above just to get focus shots. The bokeh will be softer and sweeter but it is $1900.





I wouldn't recommend the 85L to a point&shooter. For those who want good results and are willing to take the time to learn the lens, 85L is worth every penny. I recommended the 85L to friends - they're both high-energy, type-A people; he loves it, while she hates having to sneaker-zoom and doesn't appreciate the need to plan her compositions.


pt






I'd recommend it to a pro shooter (or someone with a ton of disposable cash), with out a second thought. It is just too big of an investment. I personally feel VERY good about MY investment, f/1.2 is right up my alley. I'd never tell someone it was not a great lens. Just wouldn't want to persuade someone to get it.


I was shooting an indoor event this weekend, I had the 85L on my 7D and the 35L on my 5DII and I loved sneaker zooming. I always looked at pics that had interesting crops and would think to myself "Wow! How did they think to crop that like that?" Then you realize it was necessity. With a zoom you tend to try to capture all the elements in there entirety, but with primes you have to predict, react and capture as much as possible. It was a blast.


I definitely intend to pick up the 200/2 sometime in the future. I don't know when though. Hopefully my 85L won't get neglected. The event I shot would have been great to have the 85L on my 5D and the 200/2 on my 7D.

[Neil1000]

Hi


your observations of this lens are the same as I have for the 50mm f1.2. But I would not swap it for anything. To have f1.2 indoors in winter when the light is rubbish and where flash is forbidden and the family are round the table is just wonderful (ie a birthday partyat a restaurant where flash is not allowed).


I know the 50mm 1.2 is not popular but the problems you describe with the 85mm 1.2 are the same.


DOF at f1.2 takes a lot of time to learn.





best wishes, neil

[Brendan7]

Denise, have you rented the lens?

[ddt0725]

The 85 f/1.8 is a fine lens....use it!
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



I did use it today at the Chicago Botanic Gardens along with a few other lenses and I use it alot at home for portraits. I am very happy with my 85 f/1.8 so I don't know why there's this absurd obsession I have with the 85mm 1.2!

[ddt0725]

Denise, have you rented the lens?
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



Nope, for myself I would never rent anything unless I knew it was something I would only need for a day or two and never need again like a rental car on vacation. To just try something out and I'm really serious about wanting to own one, I'd rather just buy it and simply return it if I don't like it and only pay shipping if it's out of town. So far, anything I've bought and later sold I either made money or lost alotless than I would have if I rented it ...with the exception of the 300mm.

[ddt0725]

This shot below was shot at 1.2. I pretty much nailed the focus but it's almost useless of a shot other than showing how tough the DOF is contend with.



Hi Keith,


If ANYONE SHOULD own this lens, it is definitely you! These photos definitely show that you know exactly how to use this baby with awesome skill!

If ANYONE SHOULD NOT own this lens, its me! It is as far as a lens can get as being the right lens for me so I think I'm just going to go on with it being a never ending crush that I'll justhave to live with! [:'(]

Denise

[ddt0725]

Do not, I repeat do not rent/touch/try the 200/2. You will commit grand theft (actually five-grand theft) if you touch that lens and don't have the greenbacks standing by to buy it. If 200mm suits the composition you're after and you can get the DoF to suit your desired shot, you WILL have a great picture. It's stunning in its versatility - low-light anything, sports anything, and long portraits. Not only is it just Dreamy Goodness (see http://neilvn.com/tangents/2008/07/29/canon-200mm-f2/), the IS unit is out of this world too. If you find yourself with the 85L and the 200/2, you will simply put the 85L back in your bag, and you will walk to get the shot with the 200. The poor 85L will feel lost and neglected (I have done it, both times I've rented the 200/2).



Hmmm...maybe I'll have to lust over this one for awhile! That way, I'll know I'm super safe ...I won't commit a crime and I don't have the $$$$ so it will safely remain a secret crush forever!

Denise

[Keith B]

Hi Keith,


If ANYONE SHOULD own this lens, it is definitely you! These photos definitely show that you know exactly how to use this baby with awesome skill!

If ANYONE SHOULD NOT own this lens, its me! It is as far as a lens can get as being the right lens for me so I think I'm just going to go on with it being a never ending crush that I'll justhave to live with! [:'(]

Denise






Hi Denise


You are way too kind. I held off on posting portraits I shot with it, they were some kids dealing with heavy stuff and didn't feel right posting them. I use to shoot my 24 1.4 wide open all the time and now I do the same with my 35. So I've gotten pretty steady at shooting shallow DOF. It's not rocket science but it can be frustrating if your shots are OOF when you thought you actually nailed the shot.


Here a couple of candids I took with the 85L at 1.2 though


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_5782sm.jpg


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_5881sm.jpg

[neuroanatomist]

Denise, have you rented the lens?







<div>



Nope, for myself I would never rent anything unless I knew it was something I would only need for a day or two and never need again like a rental car on vacation.


I'm absolutely with Denise on this one. Yes, I recommend renting lenses to some people on the forums - generally, to people who are truly unsure what they want, or would clearly benefit from short-term use of a lens which they cannot otherwise afford (e.g. honeymoon trip).


I'd even consider renting myself, for something like a TS-E lens. But, if I'd rented my three most recent purchases (7D, 100-400mm, 70-200mm f/2.8 II) from lensrentals.com for just 4 days each, that combined cost would have paid for a new EF 85mm f/1.8. If I've done my research and know I want something, especially when it adds features in a focal length I already have covered, I'd rather not waste the money on confirmation via a rental.


__________


Denise, I'd second Sean's recommendation to use your EF 85mm f/1.8 for a while before moving to the EF 85mm f/1.2L. What about the 85mm f/1.8 is unsatisfying?
</div>

[ddt0725]

Denise, I'd second Sean's recommendation to use your EF 85mm f/1.8 for a while before moving to the EF 85mm f/1.2L. What about the 85mm f/1.8 is unsatisfying?



Absolutely nothing, I really like it alot! That's why I cannot explain this obsession for the 85mm f/1.2! It will have to remain just a lens to lust over!


I have moved on to admiring the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (the older version), at least it doesn't require quite as much percise skill and it's reasonably priced! But I have a number of smaller accessories that I want to get out of the way first before I purchase it.

Denise

[Keith B]

I have moved on to admiring the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (the older version), at least it doesn't require quite as much percise skill and it's reasonably priced! But I have a number of smaller accessories that I want to get out of the way first before I purchase it.



Denise






I thought I'd sell my 70-200 2.8 IS after getting my 85 1.2. But after using the 70-200 last weekend I realized how valuable and different than the 85L it is. The images are so clean and smooth that ISO 1600 isn't that bad (sometimes). At some events you just can't sneaker zoom in and 70-200 is so valuable then.

[Jon Ruyle]

But after using the 70-200 last weekend I realized how valuable and different than the 85L it is.


The two lenses have about the same aperture, so in some situations you get about as much blur with 200 @ f/2.8 as with 85 @ f/1.2, but with more DOF. Of course, often the thin DOF (and not *just* the degree of oof blur) is quite the point of such a fast lens.


Very different.

[Keith B]

The bokeh is very different. I think the 200/2 would be closer.


These shots have similar framing.


7D 85 1.2 @1.2


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/IMG_5F00_7611s.jpg


7D 70-200 2.8 IS @ 200mm f/2.8


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/IMG_5F00_7512s.jpg

[Jon Ruyle]

I really like the first (and I think the second would be better at 85mm f/1.2, because the background, while blurred, is still a bit distracting )


These shots have a relatively close background, so it is not surprising that the faster lens does a better job blurring it out. With a more distant background, I think it would be closer.

[alex_sb]

What is it about this lens that has me so addicted to it!!?? I bought the 85mm f/1.8 thinking it would satisfy my obsession and it has not!

For my verybeginner needs, the 85mm f/1.8 is fantasic and a very practical lens for me and the 1.2 is very much NOT! I can find a huge amount of other gear to spend the money on, many things thatI really need to still get. I haven't even sold my 300mm lens to makeup some of theamountbut yet EVERY night I fight hitting the buy button on the 85mm f1.2L II USM lens!

I think I need to put a call into my sponsor @ photographers anonymous! /emoticons/emotion-4.gif

Denise









Have you heard of Zigmund Freud? He was not quite a photographer, though...


( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigmund_Freud )

[Keith B]

I really like the first (and I think the second would be better at 85mm f/1.2, because the background, while blurred, is still a bit distracting )


These shots have a relatively close background, so it is not surprising that the faster lens does a better job blurring it out. With a more distant background, I think it would be closer.






Yeah the second shot was shot first actually. I changed lenses for that exact reason. The nice thing about 200mm, people don't always realize they are being shot, 85mm they know.


The night shot of the guy above show what 1.2 does with even more distance. The distance between subject and background will have to be increased for the bokeh of the 7-200 2.8 to be equivalent, with similar framing. Then that makes the comparison kind of irrelevant I think.

[neuroanatomist]

My newEF 85mm f/1.2<span style="color: red;"]LII USM was delivered direct from B&amp;H at the end of last week. My first impressions were thatpictures don't do it justice, the lens is BIG. It's as big around as the 100-400mm, but only a little longer than the 85mm f/1.8. It's like holding a (very heavy!) softball. I'm reminded of Keith's comment - you can slip into a trance staring though all that glass!


The first chance I had to play with it was just sitting in my office. To me it feels very well balanced on my gripped 7D. Focusing on objects in my 12'x15' space was not terribly exciting. The AF speed seemed 'deliberate' (to be charitable) - but that may have been partly due to my impatience to shoot real subjects.


One random thing I do find interesting is that the transmissive LCD which displays the AF points in the VF is affected by the wide aperture. Even though the VF doesn't get any brighter as you go wider than f/2.2 (due to the etching to brighten up typical slow lenses), the AF points in the 7D's VF get progressively more 'washed out' by the additional light.


I did a few test shots of a contrived situation in my office - yep, the DoF is pretty thin, the bokeh is nice. At that point, I wasn't convinced the new lens was worth the $1,400 premium over the 85mm f/1.8.


Over the weekend, I had a chance to actually use the 85L, out in the real world and indoors in the evening. In the real world, the 85L is a fantastic lens! One thing I wanted to do was an informal head-to-head comparison with the 85mm f/1.8. After doing so, my belief that the 85mm f/1.8 is a great value stands strong. Having said that, the 85L is truly an amazing lens!!


Here's a comparison shot of water lily blossoms, with the focal point on the bloom in front. The crops below are ~1:3 pixels of the blossom that is vertical to the focal point (the right one of the pair). To me, the bokeh of the 85L at f/1.8 is smoother and softer than the 85mm f/1.8 and of course, f/1.2 is f/1.2.


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4122/4743753884_72aef2de35_b.jpg





As a side note, the 85L consistently metered 1/3 stop brighter than the 85mm f/1.8 across all apertures - not sure if this is a copy variation with one lens or the other, or if the 85L just sucks in 1/3 stop more light.


As for the concern that I had about the AF speed, well, I'm less concerned about that now. After shooting the above sequences (I took both lenses from wide open to f/8 in one stop increments with a couple of different subjects), I pulled my camera off the tripod and looked up as I heard the distinctive scraawww of a grackle flying by. I spun the mode dial to C3 (my BIF settings), raised the camera, found the bird, pressed AF-ON then the shutter release once it locked.


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4082/4743753892_5f36a8616b_b.jpg


There's a fair bit of noise evident from ISO 2000, and the 1:1 crop is a bit brutal - obviously this isn't the focal length of choice for shooting birds. But for me, it made the point. The 85L may have 'slow' AF - and it is noticeably slower than the 85mm f/1.8 - but if it's fast enough to lock onto a small, relatively fast moving bird in flight, it's good enough for me.

[Jon Ruyle]

Oh, cool. The bokeh comparison @ f/1.8 is dramatic.


I don't need that lens. But...


I want. I want. I want. [:)]


Congrats!


(BTW I *still* think you should go full frame, but no longer think you should get a 5DII. You require a 1DsIV, if it ever comes out)

[ddt0725]

Congrats on your new lens, John and thank you so much for posting your review of the lens and this this wonderful comparison!!

I'll second the "I want, I want, I want""!!

Denise

[Sheiky]

John, congratulations and thanks for the comparison!


I'm wondering though, how sharp is that 85mm at f1.2....compared to the 85mm 1.8 @ 1.8?


I'm really interested in that part. Not that I will ever buy the 85mm L, but I'm just curious.


Thanks and I agree with Jon...[:D]



BTW I *still* think you should go full frame

[neuroanatomist]

I'm wondering though, how sharp is that 85mm at f1.2....compared to the 85mm 1.8 @ 1.8?


I'm really interested in that part.





Sharp. Very sharp.


These are 100% crops of my daughter's eyelashes. One is from the 85mm f/1.2L II @ f/1.2, the other is from the 85mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8.


Which is which?


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4095/4754272373_718043f466_b.jpg


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4136/4754272377_1759d1d77b_b.jpg

[Keith B]

Here is a 100% crop of a f/5.6 shot. No sharpening was applied. These shots were the reason I said I have no desire for Medium Format.


This lens is ridiculously sharp at all f/stops (under the cameras DLA of course).


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_0915_5F00_800px.jpg

[realityinabox]

Keith, is that a self-portrait? If so, your eyes and pours are almost as mesmerizing as staring into the end of the 85L. There is something magical about that lens.


Made with fairy dust? I think so.


I must have it!

[Keith B]

Keith, is that a self-portrait? If so, your eyes and pours are almost as mesmerizing as staring into the end of the 85L. There is something magical about that lens.


Made with fairy dust? I think so.


I must have it!






Not a self portrait. It is a shot of friend. He got a wild hair one day and had his girlfriend give him a mohawk. Then he wanted pics of it before he shaved it off.


It's funny I was taking candids of them after I broke down the lights and back drop, and his girlfriend commented on how mesmerizing the lens was.


This is the shot I liked the best.


/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.25.81/_5F00_MG_5F00_1059alt2xs.jpg