Canon 85mm f/1.8

[ddt0725]

I am thinking of ordering the 85mm f/1.8 lens within the next few days. I am looking for something really sharp w/ great contrast at a lowto moderateprice. It looks like this may be the only lens that falls into that category. Actually, it is at such a low price, Iwill be able to get a few otheritems as well! []

After I saw Garrett's photo in "Post Your Best Portrait" thread, I thought this may really be a great purchase! Before I was torn between the 135L & 24-105mm but the 85mm appears to come thru at alot less $.

Is anyone using the 85mm f/1.8 on a 7D? Are you happy with the results you're getting?

My current lenses i own are:
Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro L IS USM
Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4

If I don't order the lens, I will probablyorder a monopod, beauty dish and of coursea shutter release I asked about earlier this week.

All feedback/suggestions greatly appreciated!

Denise

[MrGreenBug]

I am thinking (saving) on buying this prime too and I'll be glad to hear some thought. Thanks Denise for bringing this one up. []

[Sean Setters]

I own the 85mm f/1.8 and have used it on the 7D, but I haven't used it much. I *almost* used it today, but I was too lazy to fish it out of my other camera bag. The 85mm f/1.8 is indeed a fantastic performer. Here's a shot using the 85mm f/1.8 at f/3.5.






To be honest, the 85mm f/1.8 was the first lens I ever purchased. At the time, I found the prime to be too long (for indoor use, especially) and decided I wanted the convenience of a zoom. I sold the 85mm prime to help fund the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Fast-forward about 3 years and, after owning three really good zooms and a couple of primes, I began to miss the capabilities (and quick, accurate AF) of the 85mm. In my mind, it's not a great general purpose lens (I personally prefer a zoom that covers a shorter focal length); however, it's a fantastic lens for the price and one of the best economical "second lenses" I can think of.

[ddt0725]

The 85mm f/1.8 is indeed a fantastic performer.

Awesome self-portrait, Sean! [:-*]Shhhh...don't tell them but I think Canon made one heck of a mistake pricing this little gem!

Denise

[neuroanatomist]

Hi Denise,


Yes, I've used my EF 85mm f/1.8 on my 7D - it's a great lens, and I'm very happy with the results! With any prime, you're giving up flexibility - meaning you probably want to know what you're going to use the lens for before you mount it on your camera. I love the 85mm f/1.8 for close-up portraits of my daughter; it also works well for head/torso portraits of an adult. 135mm on FF is the 'classic' head/shoulders portrait length - enough compression to be flattering, but not too much compression; the 85mm lens is the 1.6x equivalent of 135mm. I have been thinking that 135mm on a crop body might be too long for indoor work; in another thread, Jon Ruyle stated that he really likes the 135mm f/2L for tight portraits indoors.


I do think the 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent value, even more than the 50mm f/1.4 (the 85mm has ring USM, and it's sharper at f/1.8 than the 50mm is at f/1.4). Compared to f/2.8, the narrower DoF with the primes makes a noticeable difference in OOF blur, to me. There's not really much difference between the two primes in terms of DoF for the same framing, though (e.g. 85mm @ f/1.8 and 10 ft distance has the same DoF as 135mm @ f/2 and 15 feet distance, but the 135mm will be a little 'flatter' in terms of telephoto compression).


If you're considering indoor portraits as a use for the 85mm or 135mm lenses, one thing you might consider is setting your 100-400mm to 135mm, just to get an idea of framing at that focal length in places where you'd be shooting. If you like the framing, the 135mm may be the way to go - it's a spectacular lens, would also be great for twilight backyard shots of your dogs, for example. But if 135mm seems long, consider the 85mm f/1.8. Or, just use your 100mm f/2.8L Macro and see if you'd want to go a little longer or a little shorter, or even just stick with the 100mm f/2.8 if you're happy with the OOF blur from that aperture.

[Jayson]

Denise,


I have grown to love the 85mm on my 7D. I was skeptical at first when I bought my 7D and wasn't getting the results I wanted, but I gave myself an assignment of on lens one hour and worked with it a little while. When I was done, I realized that my technique had to change from when I was using it with the rebel and since then have gotten stellar results. I had it out yesterday capturing the kids in the back yard. I will have to post a picture or two when I get the chance. It is very sharp stopped down past f2.2 on my camera and love the DoF it gives. I too own the 50mm 1.4 and the 100mm macro(original flavor) and use my 85 mostly to get the kids playing in the back yard. For larger than 3 year olds, I believe it would make a great head and shoulders lens. I have been really looking at the 135mm L for some time, but I think that for my needs it would be a little long. I did the test with my 70-200 set at 135 and shot with it for a day. It was a little tight for everything I tried. I would do as suggested above and try shooting your 100-400 at 135 for a day and see if it works for you.


Jayson

[ddt0725]

I too own the 50mm 1.4 and the 100mm macro(original flavor) and use my 85 mostly to get the kids playing in the back yard. For larger than 3 year olds, I believe it would make a great head and shoulders lens. I have been really looking at the 135mm L for some time, but I think that for my needs it would be a little long. I did the test with my 70-200 set at 135 and shot with it for a day. It was a little tight for everything I tried. I would do as suggested above and try shooting your 100-400 at 135 for a day and see if it works for you.


Jayson

Hi Jayson,

Yes, I will be taking some test shots this weekend of the 100-400mm @ 135mm just to see the results but I think I am sold on the 85. A majority of people are very, very happy with this lens and the photos taken with it that I've seen are breathtaking! Now I'm just wondering if used is a safe way to go to save even a few more extra $. I guess for the low price new maybe it's not worth the risk.

Denise

[ddt0725]

Yes, I've used my EF 85mm f/1.8 on my 7D - it's a great lens, and I'm very happy with the results! With any prime, you're giving up flexibility - meaning you probably want to know what you're going to use the lens for before you mount it on your camera. I love the 85mm f/1.8 for close-up portraits of my daughter; it also works well for head/torso portraits of an adult. 135mm on FF is the 'classic' head/shoulders portrait length - enough compression to be flattering, but not too much compression; the 85mm lens is the 1.6x equivalent of 135mm. I have been thinking that 135mm on a crop body might be too long for indoor work; in another thread, Jon Ruyle stated that he really likes the 135mm f/2L for tight portraits indoors.


I do think the 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent value, even more than the 50mm f/1.4 (the 85mm has ring USM, and it's sharper at f/1.8 than the 50mm is at f/1.4). Compared to f/2.8, the narrower DoF with the primes makes a noticeable difference in OOF blur, to me. There's not really much difference between the two primes in terms of DoF for the same framing, though (e.g. 85mm @ f/1.8 and 10 ft distance has the same DoF as 135mm @ f/2 and 15 feet distance, but the 135mm will be a little 'flatter' in terms of telephoto compression).


If you're considering indoor portraits as a use for the 85mm or 135mm lenses, one thing you might consider is setting your 100-400mm to 135mm, just to get an idea of framing at that focal length in places where you'd be shooting. If you like the framing, the 135mm may be the way to go - it's a spectacular lens, would also be great for twilight backyard shots of your dogs, for example. But if 135mm seems long, consider the 85mm f/1.8. Or, just use your 100mm f/2.8L Macro and see if you'd want to go a little longer or a little shorter, or even just stick with the 100mm f/2.8 if you're happy with the OOF blur from that aperture.

Hi John,

I would mostly be taking photos of kids and grandkids like the one you posted of your daughter. Canon should pay you an advertising fee because that photo of her really sold me on the lens! She is just precious!

I would love to have the 135mm but yes, I do think it would be to long for indoor use. I will take a few indoor shots with the 100-400mm this weekend @ 135mm as you suggested just to be sure but I think I will move that lens to my long list. With the other things are do want to get right off, the $ saved will enable me to make a few more important purchases.

Thanks for all your insight on comparisons! You are ALWAYS a tremendous help!!

Denise

[neuroanatomist]

I am looking for something really sharp w/ great contrast at a lowto moderateprice.

Just re-read this line - that describes the EF 85mm f/1.8 perfectly!


One thing to point out about this lens' IQ, by way of full disclosure (Bryan doesn't mention it in his review, but other reviews like this one touch on it) - the 85mm f/1.8 does have sometimes-noticeable purple/green fringing in high-contrast lighting.


Here's an example outdoor portrait (one that I really like! []).


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.35.15/85mm.JPG[/img]


These 100% crops show off both the sharpness of this lens even at f/1.8 (you can count her eyelashes!) and the purple/green fringing on thebacklit hair at the back of her neck.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.35.15/85mm_2D00_Sharpcrop.jpg[/img] [img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.35.15/85mm_2D00_CAcrop.jpg[/img]


I don't find the fringing to be a major issue - I've taken a lot of shots with this lens, and have only seen it a couple of times, but just so you're aware.


You can also appreciate the very thin DoF with this lens - her eyelashes are in focus, but her lips are not. I was probably ~6 feet away from her, and the DoF at f/1.8 with that subject distance is around 1.5".


--John

[Brendan7]

Denise, the 135 f/2 is meant for a fullframe body, on a 1.6 crop an 85 f/1.8 is a 136mm lens. And you save $700.


I have used this lens but I didn't buy it because I wanted the 85 f/1.2 which will be coming soon.


Overall the 85 f/1.8 is a great "bang for the buck" lens. Highly recommend it for any crop body, on FF a 135 f/2 would be better.


-brendan