Canon 85mm 1.2 or Sigma 85mm 1.4?

[Micktheexbiker]

Firstly can i hank everyone for your past advice on lens choice. All advice has been spot on and ive never regetted any choice ive made. So thanks. But, its happened again.........


Recently ive done quiet a few portrait shots using natural light. I much prefer natural light and candid shots but thats me. I use my 70-200 , 24-105 on my 1DS3 and rarly 7D. I was happy with the results but considered moving up a notch by purchasing a prime for low light shots. Poor weather seems to follow me unfortunatly. I have a strange 'L' disease which i know a lot of you suffer from so had a look at the options. Luckily ive saved some money so i had a lok at Canons offerings. 50mm 1.4 on my 1d or 7D looked a great option. Top reviews on here and pretty low cost. Then unfortunatly i was off doing some shots at a local steam railway and ran into one of the countrys top pros. I didnt know him but we got chatting and i found out who he was. He was using a 85mm 1.2. His results were excellent. He needs the best as he does photoshoots of the Queen for example! GULP! Anyway, when i thought 50mm 1.4 on both bodies would suit me and the 85mm 1.2. Then Sigma launch a 85mm 1.4!!! ARGH! Anyone used one? I dont use Sigma as ive never had a Canon lens let me down (until my 180 Macro autofocus stopped working).


Mick

[neuroanatomist]

Then Sigma launch a 85mm 1.4!!! ARGH! Anyone used one?

Probably people at Sigma have, and some selected professionals chosen to test the lens. Announced via press release ≠ launched. As it's not yet been released to the public (you can pre-order on Amazon, but there's no release date listed), you probably won't find hands-on reviews quite yet...

[Brendan7]

Whichever you can afford. For most people though the 1.2 is not worth $1000 (or whatever the difference is) more.

[Fast Glass]

I'd go for the Canon.


John.

[btaylor]

I'd go for the Canon.


John.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

So would I... if I could afford it. I'll be interested to see what the Sigma is like, 85mm would be a nice focal length for me so hopefully it performs well.

[clemmb]

I was thinking about the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM till I read Bryan's review. It sounded like a better lense than the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM till I read Bryan's comment; "Inconsistent focus accuracy is definitely the downside of this lens"


I just trust Canon lenses more than Sigma.


Mark

[neuroanatomist]

Have you considered the EF 85mm f/1.8? It's ~2/3 stop slower than the Sigma f/1.4, and a full stop slower than the f/1.2L. But it's really a stellar lens, and at less than half the cost of the Sigma and 1/5 the cost of the f/1.2L, the price/performance ratio is excellent.


The inversion of the price/performance ratio from EF 85mm f/1.8 to EF 85mm f/1.2L is pretty much the only thing holding me back from getting the f/1.2L at this point (the EF 85mm f/1.8 was the second lens I purchased, and I still use it frequently).

[Keith B]

Did my first real shoot with my 85 1.2II yesterday. Mind boggling. AD was blown away. No one in my area has anything close to it. That in itself makes the price worth it. Most folks are shooting with 2.8 zooms at best. My 35L and 85L blew them away.

[neuroanatomist]

Keith, you're not making this any easier... [:P]

[Keith B]

Oooh, sorry.


I intentionally didn't post pics because...well nevermind...


I will say this though. I was trying to blur the background as much as possible and at 1.2 I was nailing the focus on the eyes but the nose was completely lost. So I was actually shooting at 1.8 and 2.0 quite a bit.


I still wouldn't suggest the 1.2 to someone who wasn't using it to make a living with it. I definitely wouldn't recommend it to a pro in my area either.[]