For those who use the 85 F/1.2 L

[james_taylor11]

Although I have done some event and portrait photography, I will be a second

shooter for a wedding this Spring (my first wedding as a photographer-usually

video). I?ve been trying to put together a set of lenses that will do more than

just get the job done. I recently tried the 24-105 and although the photos were

fine, they were not stellar. I decided to change directions in my thinking and

go with a couple of low light primes instead of a do it all zoom lens. I sent

back the 24-105 and purchased a 35 1.4. This lens is fantastic and hardly ever

comes off my 20D. It is sharper on my camera at 1.4 then the 24-105 was at 4.

I decided I wanted to add an 85 to the kit and hope that I could shoot 90% of

the wedding with those two lenses. I also have a 70-200 F4 and a 17-40 F4 that

I use for landscapes and sports (in bright light of course). Now that I?ve

experienced what a fast prime can do, I think it would be hard to go back to a

slower zoom. I tried the 85 F/1.8, but it is too soft wide open for me. I am

currently trying the 85 F/1.2, and have been pleased for the most part. It is

truly a fantastic lens, but I thought it would be sharper wide open. I haven?t

had any prints done yet, so I?m use it will be great, but comparing the photos

on screen to my other lenses it isn?t the wow factor that I thought it would be.

It is also possible (and most likely the case) that I am not dead on with my

focusing. I?m sure it is going to take some time to get the results I want at

that aperture.

 

So, my question is this: Would someone that uses this lens allow me to email

them a photo to compare with photos from their lens? It is a big investment and

I want to make sure I don?t have a soft copy.

 

Thanks for any help with this,

 

James

[fotografz]

Sure James.

 

fotografz@comcast.net.

 

Better yet, send a large file or even a RAW file via an ftp site:

 

www.sendthisfile.com

 

Use the above e-mail address for them to notify me when it is ready for download.

Be sure to include your e-mail address in the comment box so I can respond.

[rob_s___san_francisco_bay_]

Honestly, I think the best advice is to not think about your lenses so much.<p>

Look at and study a lot of other peoples wedding images, find stuff that you like and figure out how they got those shots. You'll find that every lens imaginable can be used with great success. Use what YOU are familiar with and comfortable with...<p>

And always pay attention to the light and your backgrounds<p>

And most of all have FUN at the wedding! That's what usually brings out the best shots.<p> Weddings are about emotions, not glass and cameras... really... they are!

[ken c oshkosh, wi]

The 35L and 85L are my favorite combo on a pair of 5D's. Awesome...

 

If you want, drop one to ken@kgcphoto.com

[fotografz]

"Weddings are about emotions, not glass and cameras... really... they are!"

 

No argument from me on that point Rob.

 

Yet, as James has indicated, he is discovering other possibilities with some different tools.

Brand names probably don't mean a thing, but the difference between f/4 max aperture

and f/1.2 is significanly different if your objective is to isolate the subject from the

cluttered background, or want to shoot available light hand held.

 

James, there are a few thing to take into consideration when using some of these fast

lenses. I'm sure you understand that the depth of field is almost none existant when you

are close up with a fast 85 verses a fast 35. In addition some of these lenses are

maximized for rendering light in low light conditions where supression of hot points of

light are a priority.

 

Here's a couple of tips I picked up along the way. I added a split screen in my Canon, and

found that sometimes the AF wasn't dead on ... which with a f/1.2 lens can mean a soft

image (like if you were focusing on an eye). So I adjust those shots manually. It doesn't

happen often, but it happens.

 

You really have to watch your stance. If you sway a bit as you shoot, you can actually move

the focus point. You also cannot use the center focus square and then readjust the

composition if you are close up with a 85 @ f/1.2. Move the focus point in the viewfinder.

 

When I process some of these shots I selectively sharpen, not sharpen the whole shot.

 

Different tools require different diciplines sometimes.<div></div>

[marcin harla]

James,

If your 85 1.2 is not very sharp there are two possibilities. User error (most likely) as the DOF is ultra shallow and you need to get used to using that lens, or you have bad copy (rarely happens with this lenses).

 

I have both 85 1.2 mkII and 85 1.8 and both are very sharp wide open. 1.2 has better contrast and better flare control, but 85 1.8 is very good for the money and when you need fast AF performance is stellar (that's why I have both)

[steve george]

James

 

The best tip I was told for the 85mm f1.2 is that you can't focus then reframe like you can with something like the 85mm f1.8 - the dof is so shallow that a milimetre or two will throw it out.

 

I've set my 5D up so the little joystick thing (can't remember what it's officially called) selects focus points - this helps nail it every time.

[fotografz]

It's true, the DOF is so shallow that you have to teach yourself to use the variable focus

area selector, and practice it until you're quick at it. It does make a difference when

framing a subject off center using the 85/1.2 ... same for lenses like the 50/1.2, 100/2,

135/2.

 

I think it should be noted that the objective of this lens isn't one of obvious sharpness. At

f/1.2 most of the photo will be out of focus. What you want is reasonable sharpness at the

critical point of focus in contrast to all that softness. It produces a 3D look to a

photograph.

 

When you stop this lens down, it is quite sharp at the point of focus and still helps

supress the hot points of light in the frame.

 

Here's another tip if you are using the 85/1.2 in available light: the STE2 transmitter

throws out a focus aid beam when using it from 12 feet or less, and really speeds up the

focus lock on.<div></div>

[medina photography cherry]

Hate to jump in, but I have a question for Mark(or anyone with a 1DMKII). When using the 85 0r 35 1.4 or any other wide ap lens in a dark room, do you have problems using AF on the 1d MK II?

I saw that you noted the STe2 transmitter helping out. I unfortunately sold mine to help purchase pocket wizards and now find AF extremely slow and sometimes just non existent in low contrast scenes.

[fotografz]

The newer 85/1.2MKII is marginally faster AF. Yes, the STE2 does help quite a bit by giving

the lens something to grab onto in low contrast conditions.

 

I'm using a 1DsMKII and 5D, so I can't comment on a 1DMKII. But even with the slower

focusing 5D it's okay.

 

I think there was a thread on how someone was trying to turn off their 580EX flash head

but keep the focus assist active. That would act like a STE2 then. Don't know if they were

successful.

 

The other trick I use with slower focusing lenses is to anticipate and pre-focus on

something relatively close to the subject distance that offers more contrast, then go for

the real thing ... the lens doesn't have to move the elements so far then. Those are some

hefty pieces of glass that have to be moved into position.

[james_taylor11]

Thanks for letting me send some photos and for all the tips, this has been really helpful. I should also note that my laptop screen is probably a little softer than a true photo editing monitor. I don?t think this should be an issue when comparing one lens to another on the same screen, but I guess the photos could look sharper on a better monitor.

 

Marc ? sent the file. Thanks for offering to look it over. Your tips were great, I?m going to pay attention to these things. I am finding that shooting with fast primes is a different task altogether. But I am so pleased with the results that I want to learn as much as I can. I just got some prints back from my 35 1.4 and I am very impressed. I?m starting to get the look I want to be associated with my work. Subjects are popping like never before! The photos you attacked is awesome, it?s photos like that that I?m striving to achieve. I wish the 20D allowed for a split screen, but I think that would take some modification. Once I get the lens collection I want I will look into getting a 1 series Canon; hopefully at the end of next summer. I keep telling myself glass first, it makes the biggest difference. However, it seems there was a thread recently about the 1D series Canons having more precise focusing with fast lenses. This would be nice when shooting at 1.2. You also mentioned that the ST-E2 was for 12 feet and under. I ordered one of these with the 85 and used it with my 35 last night. I felt like it really helped. If the distance is over 12 feet does it hinder you focus? Like it is waiting for the lens to see the focus assist? Is it ok to leave it on all the time when I?m shooting?

 

Rob ? I agree with you ? I?m in the process of developing my style and as I mentioned above I want to move in the direction of low light fast prime work. This was strengthened last night at a Christmas party I took photos at. Normally I would stand back with a zoom and flash and quietly take photos. I would get good results, but not exactly what I was looking for. Instead, last night I put on my 351.4, my new ST-E2 (for focus assist), and set my ISO between 800 and 1600. I then proceeded to get more involved with what was going on. I feel like the photos from last night?s party where more in line with what I am looking for. I have a long way to go, but I feel like I am moving in a direction that I like. I wanted to use the 851.2 last night, but the room was just too small for it on my 20D. I guess the reason for this post was to make sure the results I get from the 85 1.2 are more a result of my ability, and not a lack of sharpness on the part of the lens. I bought this lens to use at 1.2 and I just want to make sure I?m getting the most out of it. Thanks again for the tip on lights and background ? I sometimes forget these things, but thankfully less and less.

 

 

Ken ? sent you a photo, thanks for looking this over.

 

Marcin ? I do believe it is probably my skill (or I should say lack of). I just want to make sure I?m the limiting factor here.

 

 

James ? Thanks. Last night I paid close attention to this with my 35 1.4. I?ve never had to change my focus point so much. It felt completely awkward at first. I need to look into setting this up a little better, so it is more natural.

 

 

Thanks again,

 

James

[ken c oshkosh, wi]

I had a look over your image. Really nice. Looks like you nailed focus. Eyes are nice and sharp and so is the nook.

 

One thing that I do when shooting with this lens is I usually focus and shoot all in one continuous push. This helps a lot.

[steve_hovland]

What is the point of using a really sharp lens if you use an f stop that has almost no depth of field?

[fotografz]

So the eyes are in sharp focus Steve?

[steve_hovland]

What if the subject moves in the time between focus lock and shutter firing?

 

It seems to me that people who shoot wide open are making life harder for themselves.

[rtrace]

"What if the subject moves in the time between focus lock and shutter firing?"

 

Then you're out of luck, but that's not the point..

 

"It seems to me that people who shoot wide open are making life harder for themselves."

 

No - they are exploring more creative options. I shoot wide open all the time - almost exclusively. Sometimes to get that *reall* shallow DOF, and sometimes for low light where I'm far enough so that the subject is all in focus.

 

Do you think we should all shoot at f/8 and that's it?

 

Bogdan

[steve_hovland]

I think you should shoot any way you want.

 

Personally, I tend to shoot a lot at 1 stop down from full open in order to get the lens close to the sweet spot, which is still there after all these years.

 

If you read lens tests at some place like

 

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/index.php

 

you will see that the performance of almost any lens improves dramatically at 2 stops down, so my 1 stop practice is a compromise.

 

In my hand-held pictures I worry more about camera shake than I do about depth of field.

[ken c oshkosh, wi]

Yup, 95% of the time I use this lens wide open. Actually that is the case with all of my fast primes (24L, 35L, 50L, 135L). It is a certain look. I know how to shoot with it to get that look and to improve my chances. My clients like it too. ;-)

[steve_hovland]

To be more scientific you may want to try some shots at f4 and see if they say anything :-)

 

When people look at their wedding pictures are they looking at the technique the way that photographers do?

 

I recently attended a wedding where the principal photographer was a guy who had spent a lot of years doing PJ in distant parts of the world. I noticed that although he shot with natural light most of the time, he brought out a flash when appropriate.

[er1]

James, The 35 1.4 & the 85 1.2 are my favorite lenes but I would never give up my 24-105 f4. As an event & (2nd shooter) wedding photographer I find the 24-105 invaluable. This allows my partner to direct his complete attention to prime lenes. I am also a solo shooter for many political & party events that are held in confined areas with lighting changing from bad to worse. I am often in a close proximity (several feet)of my subjects and unfortunately a 35 won't cover in many group situations. Shooting with 1 lens allows me to travel very light on the run which I often do.

[fotografz]

"Personally, I tend to shoot a lot at 1 stop down from full open in order to get the lens

close to the sweet spot, which is still there after all these years."

 

IMO, Steve's right in this regard in certain conditions. The closer you get to the subject

with these super fast lenses, the flatter on you have to be in terms of perspective.

 

Even a 7/8th perspective of a face close up with a 85/1.2 can sightly defocus one eye ...

which looks like crap ... it needs to be in or out of focus, not almost in focus. Stopping

down 1 or so stops fixes that. Just because you have f/1.2 at your disposal doesn't mean it

should be used all the time.

 

It should be noted that these lenses need not be used up close to provide that separation

from the background. However, the further away you are, the greater the depth of field

you get on the subject.

[robbie_caswell]

OK Marc... given one...which would you rather have the 50 or the 85 f/1.2

[kipling]

Bet a million he says the 85mm ; )

[kenghor]

See the full res images taken with the 35L, 50L and 85L towards the end of the review:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.lens-scape.com/article/50mm-12vs14/50mm12vs14.htm">http://

www.lens-scape.com/article/50mm-12vs14/50mm12vs14.htm</a><p>

 

The images are selected from the sharpest of each lens and unsharpened.

[steve_hovland]

Robbie- I think if you get the 50 you will find that you didn't gain much.

 

A 35 is short enough for group shots, and the 85 will let you stand far enough away so you are out of personal range in relation to your subjects. You will be off their "radar," and you will get many nice candids.

 

Going from the 1.4 to the 1.2 doesn't seem to do much other than add more cost and weight. You are only gaining a fraction of an f-stop.

 

For both the 50 and the 85, it looks like the 1.2 costs about 3 times what the 1.4 or 1.8 costs. Are you really getting value for the extra money?