Can the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II Lens be used for Sports Action Photography?

Bryan just posted an article, Can the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II Lens be used for Sports Action Photography? This has been the subject of discussion here and elsewhere. Bryan's conclusion is 'yes'. That echoes his review of the lens, actually.

However, it's worth pointing out that in his review of the lens, his sports testing was on a 1DsIII, and for this recent article, he is using the 1D X. Chuck Westfall has stated, "...the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack." Personally, I've noticed that the 85L II does focus more rapidly on the 1D X than on the 7D or 5DII. I wonder...would the same conclusion that the 85L II can be used for sports/action photography be reached if one was using a non-1-series body?

if you send me yours to try i can test it on a t4i lol :p

One of my favorite shots to do at the beach is too have models running and splashing in the ocean. My favorite is when the they run right at me, I put my 1DsIII's AF in servo and with 85 @ 1.2 and click away. It locks on and stays on the model. It looks very cool to see all the water splashes with varying degrees of OOF and then the ones that are in focus look very cool.

Not always the fastest moving subjects but it gives me a lot of sharp sharp keepers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith B

One of my favorite shots to do at the beach is too have models running and splashing in the ocean. My favorite is when the they run right at me........

---

That would be one of my favourite shots as well, especially if they were Victoria Secrets models......it would probably be OK if I didn't have my camera with me too.... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Chuck Westfall has stated, "...the EOS-1D X achieves a higher lens motor drive speed with select L-series USM telephoto lenses than the 5D Mark III because of the 1D X’s more powerful battery pack."

---

Of the lenses Chuck Westfall is referring to, the 85mm would be on the low end of the amount of glass that has to be moved to focus. Not to mention the amount of power to drive one of the large telephoto's IS.

I hear few complaints about the 7D used for sports mated to a 300mm f/2.8L IS, 500mm or even 600mm. I doubt the 85mm would eat more power than these lenses.

Possibly if we knew someone who had a 7D, 1D X and a 85mm F/1.2 he could do a few comparisons. I wonder who we know around here has all of these :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve U

That would be one of my favourite shots as well, especially if they were Victoria Secrets models......it would probably be OK if I didn't have my camera with me too.... ;)

---

I bought the wife a T4i with a kit lens for her trip to Florida. She texted yesterday and said she was at the beach and there were girls sunbathing naked.
I guess I should have sent her with one of the telephoto lenses as well. All I got were crummy cell phone pics from several hundred yards away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

I guess I should have sent her with one of the telephoto lenses as well. All I got were crummy cell phone pics from several hundred yards away.

---

If you had the 85/1.2, you'd still be in trouble. At the distance you'd need to be, you'd be close enough to get slapped. And, who cares about bokeh with the subject matter, eh? ;)

I love the 85 1.2L II for indoor sports (volleyball mostly) b/c I can get action stopping shutter speeds and good IQ w low enough ISO's to keep noise at an acceptable level. I have used it with the 5DMK II, 5DMK III and 1Dx. The 1Dx does seem to help w the focus speed (non scientific assessment), but the biggest difference in these bodies for this application is by far the improvement in the AF system and ISO noise in the MKIII and 1Dx versus the 5DMK II. The big advantage in the 1Dx over the MKIII is the frame rate - I just get a lot more captures of the ideal moment at 12 fps. As usual, technique matters (and mine can always improve). With the 85, I tend to track a single player and not try follow the ball from pass to set to spike - the AF is really too slow for this to work in my hands. Other lenses (135 f2 and 200 f2) can be used to track the ball movement - assuming the photographer can frame properly to follow the action - the lens AF speed is typically not the limiting step with these. Overall, I have learned to work with the relatively slow AF of the 85 1.2L II and find it a key component of my indoor action photography. And - you have an awesome portrait lens to catch non-action moments as well. Tight portraits at f1.2 are just amazing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve U

...it would probably be OK if I didn't have my camera with me too.... ;)

---

So you could frolic around splashing water in a skimpy bathing suit with them? I can see you doing this too :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clemmb

So you could frolic around splashing water in a skimpy bathing suit with them? I can see you doing this too :rolleyes:

---

Heheh :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

I bought the wife a T4i with a kit lens for her trip to Florida. She texted yesterday and said she was at the beach and there were girls sunbathing naked.
I guess I should have sent her with one of the telephoto lenses as well. All I got were crummy cell phone pics from several hundred yards away.

---

What part of FL?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith B

What part of FL?

---

Jacksonville,

girls weren't actually naked, they had skin colored bathing suits.

I have the 1DX, 5DIII, 5DII and 7D bodies and the 85mm f1.2L II. I read Bryan´s article and wondered about the same thing. I do not have any scientific equipment available to help me assess this, so I just did a subjective comparison with the 3 bodies (did not try the 5DII). To be honest I cannot really detect any significant difference between any of the bodies in good light. But the 5DIII and 1DX seems to be faster in locking AF when the light goes down.
I agree with Bryan that this lens works well also for sports, as long as you don´t have too fast objects moving towards you. But the very shallow DOF with this lens at f1.2 is a challenge and you need to shoot more to get a fair share of keepers. But that is the case with all other use for this lens as well. I also think that the f1.2 capability is the only reason for using it. At 2.8 and above I use the 70-200, which has significantly faster AF.
When focus is right I don´t know of any other lens that can challenge the outcome of the 85mm 1.2L II.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

Jacksonville,

girls weren't actually naked, they had skin colored bathing suits.

---

Ah. I'm 40 miles from Playalinda but would never go sniping. It's actually a beautiful beach to shoot on. The first 12 beaches aren't nude and can be pretty unpopulated and great for shoots.

Just as an 85L addict, I share my own experience with the 85L1,2II as one of my two preferred sport lens (with a 300L2,8USM) .. I am using it for a few years with a 1DMKIII, 5DII, 50D and now 1Dx ... AF is definitely accurate and reliable.
That lens needs to be understood and user must be really trained before hoping shooting action. I would say, it's an urban legend that 85L has a defective AF ! it's fast and accurate for any action subjects (users are probably not)

=> DOF can be too small between 90cm and 2m ... I don't think you can get any interesting pictures with one eye or the nose out of focus, so you probably have to close a bit in such short distance range.
=> You have to micro adjust correctly your body not to get any error (I use -3). I even change micro adjustment on the fly depending on the subjects and if eyes are behind an Helmet
=> Action focusing can only be done wide open @f1.2, so users errors are the main difficulties. You have to get trained to be able to keep the right focus point and be able to track one eye, head, helmets for a few seconds (most people are not trained/skilled enough to manage this point).
=> You must be skilled enough to change quickly your focus points and re-frame your subject while shooting.
=> CA can be an issue and must be understood too. For some situations it can be really annoying and it's better to close @f1.8 (CS6 can correct nearly 100% of the CA).
=> AF is as fast as any other L lenses and within 3 meters to infinite. Focusing is near to instant (assuming you are skilled enough to point and shoot correctly !) ... with 1D series you've got more option to give some margin for shooting and tracking with some more users errors margin. Even with apsc like 50D, I get easily more than 80% in focus pictures. With 5DMKII, it's more tricky as DOF is even thinner, but if user is skill-full, AF is really working perfectly too (fast and accurate).
=> 85L1.2II'AF can track any subject without any difficulties at least, I can shoot till 140km/h quadbikes without any errors, I can do even panning @f1.2 (with ND filter).
=> 85L1.2II, 135L2.0 and 300L2.8 can focus and track any subject without hunting, it seems users probably can't . I use more often 85L than 135L because in the night I get more margin for AF.

I have tons of various samples with 85L (I have already put my links quite often on some forums):


=> panning with 85L on fast erratic quadbikes mixing 5DMKII and 1DMKIII http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=bc9hkN


=> some dancers in the night with 5DMKII http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=BR39X6

=> some fast dogs indoor with 5DMKII http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=Hf3kBr

=> quadbikes in the night with 1DMKIII http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=ZKGqnT

=> some car race in the night with 1DMKIII http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=SdmSFr


Playing near MFD with erratic playing dogs with 5D MKII (I think I got 50% with both eyes in focus, which is not that bad)
http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=ZHDFCQ
http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=NMvfrr
http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=h4KzBQ


tracking capabilities

=> panning shots ith 1DMKIII (some pictures are with ND filters to get a smoothest background as possible) http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=bc9hkN

=> Some test of a dog running indoor with 5DMKII http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=RFxNqG

=> Some test with dogs running outdoor with 1DMKII (outer focus point used) http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=ZrB55t

=> A hundred quadbikes pictures in sequences with 50D (95% were in focused) http://photos.corbi.eu/photos/swfpop...lbumKey=fbJNvC



So in short, 85L1.2II's AF is really accurate and not hunting, assuming users can point and track subjects with F1.2 DOF ! ....

I would say that my 300L2.8 is hunting exactly like my 85L if I miss eyes, head or helmet ...
Such lens is really specific, but there is no difficulty to use it for action/sport.
With 1Dx ... I would say, that I can even shot in a rocking-chair and get 80% of my shots with eyes in the focus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newworld666

Just as an 85L addict, I share my own experience with the 85L1,2II as one of my two preferred sport lens (with a 300L2,8USM) .. I am using it for a few years with a 1DMKIII, 5DII, 50D and now 1Dx ... AF is definitely accurate and reliable.
That lens needs to be understood and user must be really trained before hoping shooting action. I would say, it's an urban legend that 85L has a defective AF ! it's fast and accurate for any action subjects (users are probably not)

---

That is a very impressive collection of pictures, an excellent range of that lens potential.

With a 300L2.8 the 85L is still my favourite sports combo !!!!
Yesterday in ultra rainy low light environment .. even with a supposed slow AF's 5DII the 85L gave me pretty nice results

All pictures best viewed in FullHD optimized size mode, by clicking once on pictures ..


http://photos.corbi.eu/Quad/St-Symph...20copie-XL.jpg

http://photos.corbi.eu/Quad/St-Symph...20copie-XL.jpg

http://photos.corbi.eu/Quad/St-Symph...20copie-XL.jpg

I'd say the 85/1.2 is OK for sports if you're perpendicular to the action. As such, the rate of approach is going to be rather small, and therefore something the lens can keep up with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peety3

I'd say the 85/1.2 is OK for sports if you're perpendicular to the action. As such, the rate of approach is going to be rather small, and therefore something the lens can keep up with.

---

I disagree. I have had this lens for quite some time and, due to all the talk of it not working for sports, I took it for granted and did not use it for anything that moved at all. But after Bryan´s article, I decided to use it more frequently and, as newworld666 says, because of the very shallow DOF, it requires practice. He seems to have gone a step or two further though, by micro adjusting also in the field. I have not done that so far.

It is true that the lens is slow from minimum focus distance out to about 3-4 meters (10-13 feet). But from there on it is no problem. Remember that the total rotation from minimum to far end is about 250 degrees, of which about 200 degrees covers minimum to 4 meters (I´m sure someone has the exact figures).

I have lost many shots with this lens and more than with any other lens. But that is because I shoot it wide open and therefore have to live with its very shallow DOF. But again, that shallow DOF is why I use the lens in the first place. With the 1DX and 5DIII, I have not had any problems with AF hunting or inability to track moving objects (I have not had race cars driving straight at me though, which is why I am able to write these words :p)

The only thing that irritates me with this lens is that it requires power for manual focus and I seem to have mental disorder which prevents me from learning/remembering to activate power before turning. IS would be nice, but who needs IS for action photography with an 85mm lens ...

/Eldar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newworld666

=> You have to micro adjust correctly your body not to get any error (I use -3). I even change micro adjustment on the fly depending on the subjects and if eyes are behind an Helmet

---

"micro adjustment on the fly."

As I understand it the point of micro-adjusting is to determine the plane of focus for a particular body/lens combo. Once you've found it you're done...aren't you? For that specific body/lens combo I mean.

I imagine certain (extreme) weather conditions could throw off the adjustment a bit and I would certainly recheck the adjustment from time to time... but what is the benefit of changing it "on the fly?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canoli

As I understand it the point of micro-adjusting is to determine the plane of focus for a particular body/lens combo. Once you've found it you're done...aren't you? For that specific body/lens combo I mean.

I imagine certain (extreme) weather conditions could throw off the adjustment a bit and I would certainly recheck the adjustment from time to time... but what is the benefit of changing it "on the fly?"

---

Subject distance affects AFMA - testing is usually done at a distance of 25-50x the focal length, when the effect of distance is minimized. But, what is an ideal adjustment for a subject at that distance might not work for for a subject near the MFD.

Also, newworld666 referred to 'eyes behind a helmet' - the AF system is going to grab onto the highest contrast feature, for a driver/rider wearing a helmet, that's going to be the edge of the helmet, not the person's eyes. So, one might want to intentionally dial in a bit of backfocus using AFMA, so the eyes are in focus. Probably sounds easier than it is...