EF 85mm f/1.2 II in the studio experience?

[evangelos_koutsavdis]

Hello:

 

I am considering to buy the EF 85mm f/1.2 II for use as a portrait lens in and

outside of the studio. In the studio, you usually shoot at f/8 and smaller.

How is its resistance to flare in the studio at these arpetures? Do you see

improvements in clarity, color and contrast at these arpetures compared with the

f1.8 version?

 

Thanks in advance.

Evangelos.

[bryantan]

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/85mm/index.htm

[peter_foiles2]

The whole point of buying the 1.2 is for the shallow DOF you get at wide apertures. If you are going to be shooting at f8 there is not much to choose from over the 1.8 version.

[chrisjb]

Research in past post tells me this lens has better contrast and OOF than the 1.8, at f8 you may and I maybe corrected, depending on body see some form of defraction, with single portraits I rarely use more than f4. the wider aperture would help to focus and compose easier in a low light studio. at f8 the 1.8 probably not show much different. I have not got this lens at present I know some that do love its versitility.

[chrisjb]

BTW the 85 1.2 is quite slow to focus compared to the 1.8 and slightly big and heavier ☺

[derek_stanton2]

Evangelos ?

Why would you have flare in the studio? You have the opportunity to place lighting exactly

where you want, and to flag off any extraneous light. As well, you have no excuse not to

use the standard shade, or a larger, 'accordion' type.

 

In the studio, as well, you have control over all of the background elements. Bokeh is

largely irrelevant if we're talking about shooting with seamless backgrounds, and/or with

strobes when you're going to have small apertures almost by force.

 

I seriously doubt you'll notice any difference in "clarity, color, contrast" under these

circumstances. If there are any differences, since you will be modifying your files in a RAW

converter and then Photoshop, the differences disappear. You might even find it more

difficult to prevent flare with the L lens, owing to its huge front element.

 

Out of the studio, all of the factors are changed, but still, unless you want to shoot at

shallower than f 2.8, you probably won't find much advantage with the 1.2L.

 

With that said, i have the 85/1.2L v1, and i love it. Except when it's too big to consider

carrying for 'casual purposes.' I thought of 'trading down' for the 1.8 lens, and if i were

practical, i would. But, i'm not really very practical....

[pkallos]

I was thinking of getting that lens for studio work as well, and also available light outdoor portraits. In order to get the benefits, you'd want to use the lens wide open to create some nice OOF areas. I know in my studio, that would let in WAY too much light without some ND filters.

 

If you're just shooting at f/8, I'd get the 85 f/1.8

[evangelos_koutsavdis]

Derek Stanton:

 

The reason I was asking about flare had to do with a recent shoot that I did, where I lit the model with two silver reflectors and with light reflecting off a white background and I did notice flare with my 50mm f/1.4 at arpertures wider that f/5.6.

 

Evangelos

[andrew robertson]

The others have said it above. Why buy an f/1.2 lens to shoot it at f/8? Unless, of course,

you are looking to intimidate other photographers.

[derek_stanton2]

Evangelos,

Without seeing the images, i can't give you a solution for the "flare."

- By "flare" from light reflecting off a white background, do you mean that the subjects

were 'wrapped with light' reflecting off the background? If so, that's not an issue with the

lens. You just need to give greater separation between subject and background. You will

always get light reflecting off a white background. Whether or not it is registered as

exposure on the subject depends on how much of it reaches the subject.

- You may also need to flag-off light sources or reflectors from your subject, so that that

light only hits areas you want it to hit. The same as you would use a reflector to add light,

you would use a "gobo" to block light.

 

A 'for instance': If a photographer were shooting in the studio, with white seamless, and

lighting it with two strobe heads on each side for a high-key white effect, if he wanted the

subject completely isolated from those lights and the corresponding bounce of light, he

would use large foam-cor sheets (4' x 8') with black on the model's side, to keep those

background strobes from affecting the model's exposure. Some fashion fotogs have a

curtain system installed in their studios, with a 'window' cut out to accommodate the full

model figure, so that no background light hits the model....

 

- If, though, you were shooting wider than 1.4 with the Canon 50mm lens, you would

probably get 'halation' effects on white/light colored areas within the image. That's just a

'flaw' of that lens.... At 1.4, with my 50/1.4, anything white has a sort of halo/glow around

it. It's faint and sometimes very subtle, but it diminishes apparent resolution.

 

- If you're talking about actual flare, hot spots in the image frame caused by light sources

out of the frame that fall on your lens element, you will have to either use flags/gobos at

the point of camera placement, or use a compendium lens shade, with an

accordion/bellows that extends to give maximum protection from stray light.

 

In any of these situations, i don't believe changing from the 1.2 to the 1.8 or vice versa is

really going to be the answer. If anything, using a lens with a smaller front element may

make it easier to protect, but it's possible that the higher-priced L lens has better internal

structure/flocking to suppress flare. Who knows. Which works better may depend on very

specific, non-repeatable circumstances. I wouldn't make a decision on the lens based on

any of this.