Canon 50mm f1.2 or 85mm f1.2?

<p>Since I miss 28mm f1.4 prime for Nikon 700, I have decided to add Canon 5D MarkII with 35mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.2. Do you guys think it is the right choice to go with 85mm rather than 50mm f1.2?</p>

<p>How would we know? What are you going to shoot with it?</p>

<p>Oh yes... very much the right choice. Get the version II of the 85L if possible, better autofocusing and better coatings.</p>

<p>Those two lenses are my absolute favorite on full frame.</p>

<p>Bob, I will shoot with 5d MarkII. I guess you are the best person to advise as I do mostly low-light, indoor shootings like sports, concerts, and sometimes weddings. I have been trying to get Nikon 28mm f1.4, but I had some bad experience on ebay. Thought why not buy a full-frame Canon body and these two prime lenses.</p>

<p>It just seems odd to me that you aren't sure <em>what focal length</em> you want... and you are buying very expensive, very special purpose lenses like these...</p>

<p>Perhaps if you are not certain a zoom might be more useful?</p>

<p>Both, I'm sure, are fabulous lenses. I have both the FD 50/1.2 L and the FD 85/1.2 L. While the former is a great lens, the latter is my all time favourite prime. It's quite simply the best "portrait lens" I've ever used, and its EF equivalent is surely almost as good.</p>

<p>But I echo Bob and G Dan, though, and would like to know what you're going to be using the lens for before I give any definitive recommendations.</p>

<p>This may sound harsh... but if you don't know whether to buy the 50mm f1.2 or the 85mm f1.2 then you shouldn't buy either of them as you're obviously way out of your depth. If you own a 5D2 and are willing to spend that sort of money on lenses then you should already know the answer.</p>

<p>A 50mm and an 85mm are two very different lenses and you need to know what type of photography you'll be doing before even contemplating buying either of them.</p>

<p>For sport, wedding single portrait, concert you already choose 35mm, 50 is not much more, 85mm a lil more closer, but only you know your workin distance :) you may need a 2nd body to avoid too many lens changes</p>

<p>Unless you plan to shoot wide open a lot of the time I would suggest that a better combination might be to buy both the 50mm f1.4 and the the 85mm f1.8. If you then really do miss not having f1.2 you can sell one of these and the get the respective f1.2 lens.</p>

<p>Derek<br>

<a href="http://www.takebetterpictures.co.uk">www.takebetterpictures.co.uk</a></p>

<p>85: Slightly better sharpness over the 50, and a floating element to make focus easier.</p>

<p>50: Normal focal length is better for "general use". A bit lighter and smaller than the 85. The focus ring is smooth and silky, while the 85 is focus-by-wire.. Like power steering.</p>

<p>Given that you have the 35, I would think the 85 would be a better choice, because you will have more variety with just the two lenses.</p>

<p>My favorite kits are: (35 and 85) or (24 and 50 and 135).</p>

<p>Not sure I get your logic and how the 28mm Nikon comes into all this, but I would get the 85mm and forget the 50mm, you can always get it later, or why not buy the 50mm f1.4 instead when the time comes and save packets of money?<br>

But really, we cannot answer this question for you. Which lenses do you use the most on the Nikon?</p>

<p>".. indoor shootings like sports.."<br>

IMHO 85mm f1.2L is not for this use (it is rather slow for action), though great for static portraits. For indoor sports better 50mm 1.2L and 135mm 2.0L</p>

<p>As Stamoulis says, the 85L is not quick and may prove frustrating for that usage. It's amazing for fashion, portraiture, etc, but probably not for situations that require focus tracking. That said, it's still a 'better' lens than the 50L, which just isn't super sharp and doesn't focus accurately at close distances and wide apertures. </p>

<p>I hope you don't want the 1.2 lenses because of the low light situation. They're better than the slower lenses because of the bokeh and lens characteristics, but that half stop or whatever it is mathematically isn't going to make a significant difference in your context. If you need an 85mm, get the 1.8. Get the Sigma 50mm 1.4 - it's as sharp as the Canon 50/1.4, but with better bokeh and no halation at 1.4-2. </p>

<p>And, the 135/2 is probably a good bet for events/indoor sports. </p>

<p>For full frame portraits the 85 F1.2 is hard to beat (unfortunately mine is FD). I have the EF85 F1.8 which is a really good lens and if you are unsure i would suggest that you may want to save money and buy the 50 F1.4 and 85 f1.8 rather than the F1.2 optic. unless you have a very specific use and really need the extra stop the cheaper lenses are still really good. I bought my F1.2 lenses when i was getting paid for shots. By the way the 135 F2 is also a great lens on full frame (mine is an FD version when it was not called an L lens). If you plan to shoot digital the advantage of F1.2 over f1.4 or F1.8 is not as great as it was in the days of film. Today the main thing you will appreciate the F1.2 lenses for is their super shallow depth of field and thsi is why you should consider them. Of the two the 85mm on a full frame body will give you the smallest depth of field. I have rented the EF 85 f1.2 mark 1 and it is a great lens but the AF was really bad and not suited for sports at wide aperture. The super shallow DOF means that the camera struggles to focus. I was shooting it on a 1V body which has Canon's best AF - my 5DII is definately not as quick to focus. While canon may have improved the AF the physics of the super narrow DOF still exist so I would certainly test the lens before I bought it. The mark I version i rented might as well have been an MF lens for shooting sports! (i rented it for portarits and it could take up to a second to focus!).</p>

<p>Get a crop body for less than the price of the 85mm f/1.2, buy the 50mm f/1.2, and use it for "normal" lens on the 5D and for a portrait lens on the "crop body". ;) Best of both worlds. Of course, I personally still use my old Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 on both with cheap adapters. It's manual, but then it always was manual focus anyhow.</p>

<p>Philip, 85 mark II has defnitley better AF than mark I. And you are right the super shallow DOF is a factor here. I think I will also have a close look at 135mm f2.<br>

JDM, thanks for suggestion. I definitely intend to add D40 to take advantage of the crop factor. That's why I am more inclined towards 35mm (which becomes normal lens on it) and 85mm, not 50mm.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Not having the 50, aside from the focal length, I think the major differences are:</p>

<ul>

<li>85 is heavier and bulkier </li>

<li>85 has slower AF, probably slowest from all current Canon L lenses and is not suitable for action shots </li>

<li>85 does not have environmental sealing</li>

<li>85 is susceptible to flare under harsh sun and certain angles</li>

<li>85 has focus by wire, which is not a big deal for me, but some people do not like it for MF</li>

<li>85 is consistently sharp</li>

<li>85 has more dramatic background blur</li>

</ul>

<p>If your other lens will be 35mm, it is a great combination. But if I had to shoot concerts or indoor sport, I would probably keep the 85 at home and bring either 135/2 or 70-200/2.8. I hear that 85/1.8 is a good choice for some sports and concerts due to the faster AF.</p>

<p>Is it wise to spend $6000 USD because you had a bad experience on eBay? Go to your local retailer and buy the Nikon 28/1.4. Done! </p>

<p>Of course I would take the 5D II over the D700 any day of the week, and I currently own a D2X!</p>

<p>Since the Nikon 28/1.4 was your target then perhaps the Canon 24/1.4 L would be better, though not as highly rated as the 35. Otherwise go with the 35/1.4 L and 85/1.2 L. You don't need another 1.2 standard lens so later on the 50/1.4 would be a more appropriate choice to add. I had a Zeiss 85/1.4 so I completely understand your desire for the 85/1.2 L. Of course once you get this set of lenses you'll likely crave the 135/2 L!</p>

<p>Thanks for suggestion, John. I am not interested in 50mm as I will use 35/1.4 on 40D for this purpose. Yes, adding 135/2 L later won't be a bad idea. </p>

<p>If i were u, i will pick 35mm and 85mm both f1.2. getting 50mm f1.2 is unwise as it's too close to 35mm.</p>

<p><strong><em>"I definitely intend to add D40 (40D, I guess) to take advantage of the crop factor. That's why I am more inclined towards 35mm (which becomes normal lens on it) and 85mm, not 50mm. . . adding 135/2 L later won't be a bad idea."</em></strong><br /><br />If you are exploiting the low light and FL range of your lens cache, by having a dual format camera kit: <br /><br />Is not it more logical to have: 24F/1.4L; 50F/1.2L; 135F/2L?<br /><br />WW</p>

<p> . . . or, if 24mm is too wide for your use, then, by the same logic, consideration of:</p>

<p>35F/1.4L; 85F/1.2L; 200F/2LIS.</p>

<p>WW </p>

<p>IMHO 35-85-135 is a very good set of FL's for FF.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>