85 1.8 or 85 1.2 L

looking for a "fashion length" lens. i have a 24-70 2.8L. first off..who is shooting fashion

with one of those and in your opinion do i need to invest in the 85mm? second. is the

85 1.8 tack sharp or does the L version make a huge difference? i realize the L is a bit

faster. thanks. would love to hear from someone who can compare the two 85mm lenses

from experience.

-b

I shoot with a eos 5D, just to clear up questions about focal length.

The 85mm f1.2 L is only worth buying if you are expecting to shoot regularly at f1.2, f1.4 or f1.8 - if you are shooting at smaller apertures the 85mm f1.8 is as good, is lighter, is smaller, is cheaper and has faster AF - in fact its an all round great lens. BUT why are you thinking of an 85mm if you already have a 24-70 f2.8 L? It adds little in the way of reach. If you want larger apertures /smaller DoF then indeed the 85mm f1.2 is brilliant. It is a very special lens and can give unique characteristics to your shots.

<p>

But maybe a 135mm f2 L would give you a different option compared with the 24-70mm

This is a joke right? - how many times have we had this question this week so far.

Go here:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic_id=1545&category=EOS+Lenses

 

Hit Control-F and type 1.2

 

Open relevant thread in a new tab or window.

 

Repeat until you can't take any more.

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EUm7&tag=">Recent discussion</a><p>

In hundreds of posts since 1998, I have been civil in all but maybe two or three.

 

But considering this exact question has been asked at least twice in the last week, I and I think others, feel we deserve to be less than civil.

 

In other words...

 

DO A %*&$#@^ SEARCH! OR AT LEAST SCAN SOME RECENT THREADS!

 

Besides (and this is not envy because I have no interest in the 85 L lens):

 

IF YOU DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT PHOTOGRAPHY TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS BUYING THE L LENS. IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE 1-STOP DIFFERENCE WILL MAKE TO DEPTH OF FIELD, YOU WILL MOST LIKELY GET CRAPPY PICTURES OUT OF THE L. IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO USE IT AT LESS THAN F/1.8, YOU ARE WASTING YOUR MONEY AND OUR TIME.

i appreciate the nice answer that someone wrote, and i also appreciate the person who

gave me a link to look into. everyone else needs to lighten up. thanks again.

 

-b

umm, yeah, i said i know that the L is faster, i understand that it will offer more in DOF, i

specifically asked someone to compare the two lenses. and also to maybe comment on the

lens vs the 24-70 not for a photo lesson. if you would like to see how much i know about

photography please go to your newstand and buy house and garden magazine or 34

magazine or pick up a copy of vice magazine. next month i will be happy to offer you a

new list of international magazines that i have been hired to shoot for. i am sorry that i

do not read and respond to every post on photo.net. fatass.

Well, you obviously didn't search before posting or check the recent threads in the EOS forum, which explains the reactions you've had. You asked for it.<br>

<br>

Here's a good source of results: <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=canon+85+1.8+1.2+site%3Aphoto.net"/>http://www.google.com/search?q=canon+85+1.8+1.2+site%3Aphoto.net</a>

'it will offer more in DOF' -- Umm, no

 

Same back to ya f....ss

<em>the L is faster</em>

<p>

The L allows for faster shutter speed but is <em>slower</em> to focus.

<p>

I have neither but many reviews say so, e.g. <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.2-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx">

this one</a>.

LOL, I can't believe another thread on this came up.

Recurring questions are not going to disappear by crying "recurring question".

 

Advice about how to avoid recurring questions (e.g. "do this search") takes more time to type and requires more effort (than just saying "do a search"); thus I perceive it as good courtesy.

 

But sometimes I see the teaching how-to-fish as too much referencing. For example, I'm googling some exotic topic and first hits are again url references to other howtos and urls, instead of just plain simple text simply answering the simple (parts of the) question.

<i>Recurring questions are not going to disappear by crying "recurring question".</i><br><br>

It is just the forum jackasses (of which there are many) trying to out do each other with the sarcasm. Quite typical.

Alexandru, you are correct. thank you for being rational. still haven't had anyone address

my "fashion length" specific question, not that i care anymore. . everyone is too busy

yelling about a repeated topic. next time you see a subject about the 85mm lenses don't

open it, let people who have never commented on the topic or asked about it open their

own thread and discuss it as pertaining to a specific question or opinion. just a thought.

In defence of recurring questions, I have found that the search logic in photonet not particularly effective. Every time I do a search I usually end up with an advert or the suchlike. Perhaps I don't ask the right question, or I phrase it the wrong way but nearly always I don't get the answer I am searching. Please for those who like to complain about repeated questions either give a link to the answer or do not answer at all. Please be civil.

that a person who can afford or is willing to spend $3000 to buy a digital camera and $1500 to buy a lens doesn't know the differences between the two 85mm 1.8 and 1.2L. I'm also confused that a professional portrait and fashion photographer doesn't know how to search many popular websites to find reviews regarding these two lenses.<p>Secondly, this is a forum. We post a question and expect friendly replies so we can learn. First and foremost, we should respect people whom we're asking. Typos or writing flaws are acceptable and understandable since this isn't a forum of writing workshop. Unfortunately, a private email writing style shows the writer the lack of seriousness in asking a question. English is my second language. Hence I make mistakes while writing at this forum. But I always try my best so people will answer my questions with their best.<p>Last but not least, we do need to search before asking a question because we can save our time if the question or topic has been discussed or answered multiple times in the past

"It is just the forum jackasses (of which there are many) trying to out do each other with the sarcasm. Quite typical." - yeah thats just like sooo right Don - LOL.

again, i know the difference between 1.8 and 1.2. in simple terms all i was asking is if the

cheaper one is good. and then maybe someone who has the 24-70 can tell me if they

would bother to use the 85 in a fashion situation. its just a conversation. i have my

opinion, just wanted to compare it to everyone elses opionion. again, thanks to everyone

who linked me to reviews, those are helpfull. be helpfull or don't waste your time

responding.

<em>a private email writing style shows the writer the lack of seriousness in asking a question.</em>

<p>

Yes and no. Worried about being "trolled"? I wouldn't care that much. The advice is not only for the troller but for this site and it's going to stay posted. Also, corelating someone's writing style to the meaning of the saying is meaningless. Imagine you were to write using a font you designed yourself (have you ever?). Best font designers are not good at writing, and maybe best photographers aren't either.

Yes, 85/1.8 is very good wide open and is a very good lens for the money. I have the lens and would never sell it. However, if I have more space, I'd rather use the 135/2. The bokeh quality is just different. 85/1.2? I don't know, but I've heard from ppl whose opinion I respect, they believe it has better contrast & color qualities, and those are qualities what make it "pop up". May be a bit sharper, but not much. Slower AF, that's for sure. 85/1.8 AF is very fast. If I have plenty of money, I might get the 85/1.2, but for sure I know I won't sell my 85/1.8. Just MHO

<p>Why do you feel the need for the prime in the first place? Because I say so? Because

Joe

Bloggs says so? Or because you *need* less DOF? Do you need a faster lens? Less DOF?

Better low-light capabilities? If yes then get the prime. If not, just use the zoom and be

happy. One thing I learned is that if I ask whether I need a lens, I probably don't. A lens

covers a need. </p>

 

<p>-Do I need a 50/1.8?<br>

-Yes because my f/2.8 zoom is not fast enough for low light</p>

<p>-Do I need a 50/1.4 or the 50/1.8?<br>

-The 50/1.4 because I (a) have the money to buy it, (b) I don't like the bokeh of the 50/

1.8.</p>

 

<p>So, do you need the 85/1.8. Or the 85/1.2? Why do you need them? Once you answer

that, you will know what you need. Otherwise, you are looking for solutions to problems

which you don't have.</p>

<em>and then maybe someone who has the 24-70 can tell me if they would bother to use the 85 in a fashion situation.</em>

<p>

Maybe the right 24-70 owner isn't reading...

<p>

I contemplated buying one a while back and I was disappointed by reviews saying 24-70's sharpness doesn't stand to the 'L' qualification. Read: it's not as sharp as expected. Others saying that <em>some</em> 24-70 L copies are bad, complaining about Canon quality testing.

<p>

In this way, many would say that you're sure to get better sharpness with an 85 (L or not) than with the 24-70.

<p>

Also, the 85 L is often touted as _the_ portrait lens, so it would qualify much better for fashion photography, especially if this is a business, because main complain about the L is its price (the non-L is cheaper and as good as the L above 1.8).

<p>

One may talk also about how much the bokeh (background blur) is necessary in your particular fashion shooting. Tha L has obviously more and better of it. But people can't guess at how much bokeh you need.

<p>

Alternatively, it may be easier to get a discussion rolling by stating the contrary of some well-rooted knowledge. Just post "24-70 is better than 85 L for fashion" and then one may see much energy deployed to defend or to destroy that statement (not the poster).

There's a good comparison here: http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/85mm/

 

Short version: there's little difference, except that the f/1.2 is faster and therefore blurs backgrounds better wide open.