5D + 85mm 1.2II or 5D Mk II + 85mm 1.8

<p>hello there, what would be your recommendations, what is proper to get? Which of these will give me better image quality</p>

 

<p>Used 5D + New 85mm 1.2 II or Mint 5D Mk II and 85mm 1.8</p>

 

 

<p>At 1.2 -1.8 the former, everywhere else, the latter.</p>

<p>For large prints the latter, for general use, the latter, for low light work, for sports and the vast majority of situations, the latter.</p>

Go with the mark ii! As far as the lens goes, unless you need a very fast f/1.2 for very low light, I would go with the f/1.8.

You may want to check out a f/1.4 as a good compromise!

<p>Thanks, I forgot to mention I need it for low light use, great iq when wide open.</p>

<p>Is Sigma 85mm 1.4 that good?</p>

<p>Boris,</p>

<p>What are you shooting, what AF settings do you hope to use and what are you doing with the images (are you printing, web output etc)?</p>

The 5D2's ISO 3200 looks as good as the 5D's ISO 1600. You'll be able to get the same shutter speeds with the 5D2/1.8 combination as with the 5D/1.2.

<p>The mark II gives you a broader range of ISOs and the optical quality of the 85mm f/1.8 is very good (see <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d">Photozone.de</a> and <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/502-canon_85f12ff">Photozone.de</a>).<br>

I have the mark I, and love it, but I think that the improvements in the sensor are also as much a factor as the extra fractions of an f/stop.</p>

<p>Thanks guys,<br /> I am into street photography, I shoot at night on available light, as for my images they are for web.</p>

<p>The sigma 85/1.4 <em>is</em> that good. Even WO, it's edge to edge performance is vastly better than the EF 85/1.8 -- and comparable to the 85/1.2 -- especially on FF units.</p>

<p>Of the 2 options you originally posted, I'd probably go w/ the second (5d2 + 85/1.8), but if you can squeeze a Sig 85/1.4 out of your budget (2->2.5x the $$$ of a 85/1.8), I expect you'll see a <em>considerable</em> improvement in IQ (over the 85/1.8) especially wider than f4.</p>

<p>For street photography, the 85/1.2 is less than ideal, while it's aperture makes it <em>seem</em> better, it's slow AF, and razor thin DOF (WO, and near) will combine to both negatively impact your shooting. This lens is definitely geared for the portrait pro, where both deficiencies are largely a moot point. Both the Sig 85/1.4 and the EF85/1.8 are going to perform far better.</p>

<p>That makes it more difficult, on a practical level I'd still err on the side of the 1.8 and MkII, as the others say the iso performance of the MkII overcomes the slower aperture of the 1.8 lens. However if you really like and work the 1.2 wide open nothing else is going to replicate it, though the AF of the MkI 5D might not be up to the task in low light, certainly the resolution and IQ are there for web output images from either camera.</p>

<p>On balance, the 1.8 and 5D MkII, though I would have reservations about using an 85 as a serious street shooting lens, general consensus is to go wider, the 35 f1.4 is the best of the best. Having said the The Sartorialist has made a career out of using a 5D and 85 f1.2, though normally at f5.6, go figure :-).</p>

<p>5DMkII and figure out the lens afterward. There are numrous threads re 1.8vs1.2, I honestly don't believe having 85 1.2 in place of the 85 1.8 will outweigh the benefit of the 5DMKII over the 5D.</p>

<p>The 85mm f1.2 is a VERY HEAVY lens, and will take some muscles to haul around all day. It's primary focus is portraits, which it excels at like almost nothing else. If you were shooting street portraits it gives a very beautiful OOF area, but you better make sure you're subject knows to hold still, because focusing at f1.2/85mm is tricky and slow on this lens. Rent it for a week and make up your own mind. The 85mm 1.8 is one of my favorite lenses, but the 1.2 is on my wish list as well. I don't think I'd trade one for the other, though, since the 1.8 is a great lens.</p>

<p>I would go with the 85 f1.2 L II. The 5D2 is the better camera but you can't get the thin DOF that f1.2 gives you with the f1.8.</p>

<p>Thanks guys your help is much appreciated, but I am still confused, should I also consider 85 f1.2 II as an investment?</p>

<p>As an investment the best lens will retain value longer. But, for making pictures? I don't know.</p>

<p>No!</p>

<p>Lenses are not investments, they are tools. For sure if you keep it in mint condition you won't lose much money on it, but it will depreciate. The caveat is when new lens prices go up a lot, then you might break even, but it is not an investment.</p>

I think I'd go with 85 f1.8 or Sigma 85 f1.4 what you think of it? that Sigma looks tempting.

<p>If you do get the Sigma 85/1.4, it'll be useless on a 5D b/c every copy I've gone through of that lens vastly front-focuses. I.e. you need AF microadjustment, which isn't available on the 5D, but is on the 5DmkII. You could, of course, send the body in to Canon to get it calibrated with that lens (I presume), but then your body would be off from other Canon lenses, most likely.</p>

<p>Even the 85/1.2 might benefit from microadjustment. When shooting with such fast primes wide open, microadjustment is the greatest invention since sliced bread.</p>

<p>-Rishi</p>

<p>I wouldn't hesitate to go for the 5D MkII and the 85mm f1.8 - no doubt about it.</p>

<p>Not only do you get all the advantages of the 5D Mk II with every lens you own (better high ISO performance, larger LCD, higher resolution, Live View, HD video, etc.) but if I had to choose between the 85mm f1.2L and the 85mm f1.8 at the same price - choose one - I'd pick the f1.8 every time (and I did, price was not a factor) </p>

<p>I have the 85mm f1.8 and have used the f1.2L extensively. If you want to shoot wide open with the f1.2 A LOT then maybe it's worth the extra money to you, however the DOF is paper thin on tight head shot portraits (a couple of eyelashes in focus - forget about a whole eye!) and the whole shallow depth of field, creamy bokeh thing gets old quickly for me - it's as much of a purchased "effect" as Cokin filters or a fisheye (or a T/S lens used for portraits) if overused. The number of keepers at f1.2 will be somewhat disappointing.</p>

<p>If you use the lens above f2 the f1.8 version is the better lens for me every time - much faster focusing, smaller and lighter - factoring in minor post processing there is no difference at all in IQ (but there is an IQ advantage to the 5D MkII over the original 5D).</p>

 

<p>I have all three- my suggestion is the MK II body and the 1.8 lens. If and when cirumstances justified, you could move to the 1.2, but only after having shot a minimum of 5,000 images with the 1.8.</p>

<p>The 85/1.2 WILL benefit from microadjustment. The Sig 85/1.4 I used needed a bit, but not as drastic as I'd been lead to expect. Once that was done, it produced beautiful imagery (better by a fair margin than the 85/1.8, which I own), and the focus was pretty darn accurate.</p>

<p>Marcus-- yes I also found I needed a slight microadjustment for the 85/1.2, but a larger one for the Sigma. In general I worry about large microadjustment changes because sometimes I've found the changes work best at the focus distance the microadjustment was done. I.e. if you base your microadjustment factor on a target shot at MFD, the correction will work best for close subjects but infinity will be OOF at f/1.4. I guess this is why they suggest you do the microadjustment with a target set at 5x the focal length?<br /><br />Agree that the Sigma produces great images. But I've had two where the manual focus ring gets sticky/rough quickly over time, thereby not allowing very fine focus control. I'm debating whether or not to keep this copy b/c of that. Ever noticed anything like this?</p>

<p>-Rishi</p>

<p><em>" I guess this is why they suggest you do the microadjustment with a target set at 5x the focal length?"</em></p>

<p>Canon recommend a<strong> minimum</strong> of <strong>50</strong> times the focal length. But yes I have found tuning micro AF to the most used focus distance to be an advantage.</p>

<p>Sorry, I knew it was '5' something ;)</p>

<p>I wonder then if there's actually an advantage to swapping out lenses until you get one that requires no microadjustment... I wish they technically outlined better exactly what goes on when an offset is calculated from the phase adjustment system. As it is now it's hard to understand what's going on & how the microadjustment offset affects focus across the entire distance range, for anyone in the general public anyway. Would love to be proven wrong about that!</p>

<p>-Rishi</p>

<p>Used 5D + New 85mm 1.2 II. That's what I have and I love it for evening street photography.</p>