Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Canon 7DMKII vs Canon 5D MKIV - Image quality

  1. #21
    Senior Member Photog82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    321
    Quote Originally Posted by peety3 View Post
    IMHO, you're absolutely dreaming if you think an 85/1.2L III would actually be "fast" to focus. IIRC, v2 has eight elements, and seven of the eight elements move for focus (that rear element is quite obviously parked in place; I can't imagine trying to make it move so close to those contacts).

    Back to the use case, it already is a good (err...great) portrait lens. I use mine in AI Servo and although I can hear and feel it constantly tweaking focus as I breathe and so does my subject, it's spot-on once it's in the general zone. What is so bad about the 50/1.2? What's bad about the 85/1.8? What's bad about the 100/2, 135/2, 70-200/2.8 non-IS, 70-200/2.8 IS II, or heck, either of the 70-200/4 variants? Heck, both the "old" Zeiss 85/1.4 and new Zeiss Milvus 85/1.4 include electronic focus confirmation, as do both variants of the Zeiss 100/2 Makro, the Zeiss 135/2 variants, and apparently the TS-E 90 as well.

    With all of those great options on the market, we own several (50/1.2, 85/1.2 II, 100/2.8 IS Macro L, 135/2, 70-200/2.8IS v1, 70-200/4IS, 70-200/4), and yet, for my new passion in headshot work, I'm using the lowly 70-200/4 non-IS at f/5 and about 90mm for essentially all of it.
    I just found that in certain situations the 85 1.2 II lens AF was off more than the new Canon 35 1.2 II that I own. Granted, I did capture some excellent photos with the lens, I just thought it was a bit off in some cases- some of which could have been my fault.

    As for the 50 1.2, that thing is so soft in 90% of the photos that I took when I rented it, focus was super slow too. When they release a newer version, I'll be in line to order if the reviews are good.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Photog82 View Post
    As for the 50 1.2, that thing is so soft in 90% of the photos that I took when I rented it, focus was super slow too. When they release a newer version, I'll be in line to order if the reviews are good.
    What aperture were you at? It's known to create quite a love/hate relationship, as the plane of focus tends to bow a bit between f/1.4 and perhaps f/4 (if for no other reason than DoF is taking over at this point). Admittedly it's a pain to ONLY shoot wide-open or f/4 and beyond, but I find the results are so visually pleasing that it has become a really fun lens for me. I think Bryan is the one who originated the "love/hate" comment, though I see it (or think of it) more often when I read Roger's Take on this lens at LensRentals.com.
    We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.

  3. #23
    Senior Member Photog82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    321
    Anywhere from 1.2 - 2.8. It may have been a bad copy, it was a rental.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Kombi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Photog82 View Post
    Anywhere from 1.2 - 2.8. It may have been a bad copy, it was a rental.
    The 85 is my goto lens. -- focus is slow no doubt in my mind ---

    I don't know what the lighting was like when you were using the lens, but since you were used to shooting the 35 something that may have been overlooked is shutter speed.

    As a general rule for crisp handheld images double the inverse of the focal length.

    At 35mm you can goto 1/60 and get a clean image, with the 85 you'd need 1/160 to get an image equally as blur free.

    In poor light , I often get caught shooting to slow.

    Just another variable.

    Congratulations on the 5Div

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Big Mouse Florida
    Posts
    1,030
    Shutter speed is really key - I noticed when I rented the 5Dsr I had to both bump the speed AND be very precise in my technique otherwise those tiny pixels would blur right up.
    If you see me with a wrench, call 911

  6. #26
    Senior Member Photog82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Posts
    321
    Thanks for the tips. I'm deciding between the 70-200 2.8 and the 85 1.2; I want both but need to buy one first and save up for the other. I really think that the 85 would be best first.

  7. #27
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    4,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Photog82 View Post
    Thanks for the tips. I'm deciding between the 70-200 2.8 and the 85 1.2; I want both but need to buy one first and save up for the other. I really think that the 85 would be best first.
    Going with either is probably a "win" in that they are both remarkable lenses. But my bias takes over here, the 70-200 II on FF is an absolute dream. Unless you really want less than f/2.8, and at those focal lengths f/2.8 already has pretty narrow DoF, I would get the 70-200 II and not even think twice about it.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Jonathan Huyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Canmore, Alberta
    Posts
    862
    The 85 f/1.2 is great for single-person portraits, assuming you are buying it for the wide aperture. Operating any wider than f/2.8, I'd think it would be nearly impossible to get two or more people in focus at the same time. And yes even though f/2.8 does have a pretty narrow DOF, when you go wider than that it's easier to make the background completely disappear into a buttery-smooth bokeh.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •