josmanuel Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Hello, I want to buy one of these two lenses, 85 f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4... I have the Canon 28 f/1.8, the "plastic fantastic" 50 f/1.8 and the canon macro 100 f/2.8... I like them all, but I wonder if one of these two lenses would really upgrade my set... What do you think about this...!? Thank you all, Jose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Well obviously you like only primes. I guess since you have the 50 1.8 I would vote for the 85 1.8. But what are you shooting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul hart Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 You've got 50mm covered with the 1.8 so the 85 is surely the way to go? It's an outstanding lens and wonderful value for money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall5 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 The 85 f1.8 does seem to be the logical choice with your current set up given. While you have the 50 f1.8, why are you thinking of the f1.4? They are very close in optic quality. The f1.4 has other things going for it, build, better AF, Full time Manual Focus, metal mount, and a few others. If you are maybe thinking the f1.4 will give you better pictures...you would be mostly wrong. The only thing it has in that area, is that the f1.4 has 8 apature blades and not 5. That does account for something (nicer bokeh) but the f1.8 still does well. All that said I love the 85 f1.8. I assume you are useing a croped body and not full frame. To me the 85 is a little long indoors in a lot of cases. I have gotten some of my favorite shot with it on a 30D indoors. So as long as you are aware of what that focal length will give ya, you will not go wrong with the 85. Besides, you already have a 50mm. After a while you see what lens you favor the most, if it is the 50mm, then at that time would I upgrade to a better version, maybe Canon will have upgraded the f1.4 by then. My only complaint of the 85 is the close focus distance. Sometimes when it is on my 5D, I can not get as tight as I want, that should not be an issue with a crop sensor camera. That is currently my favorite combo, 5D + 85 f1.8. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josmanuel Posted July 22, 2008 Author Share Posted July 22, 2008 Tommy DiGiovanni, I shoot portraits, most of the times... don´t you think that my 100 f/2.8 does the job that the 85 f/1.8 would do...!? except for the aperture... Thank you both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stamos Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 I agree with previous posters, buy the Canon 85 f/1.8. It is great for portraits and it's rather cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josmanuel Posted July 22, 2008 Author Share Posted July 22, 2008 Ok Jason and Stamoulis, I post the same question that I did to Tommy, don´t you think that my 100 f/2.8 does the job that the 85 f/1.8 would do...!? Thank you for your quick response to my post :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdigi Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 If you have the room and want to save the money move back a bit the 100 will be just fine ( a bit long and bigger but it will do just fine for tight portraits ) I have the 50 1.4 and the 100 2.8 and I see no reason for me to get the 85. In your case It depends on how serious you are. If you are shooting where size and weight is an issue the 85 will serve you well. If its just for a hobby I would go ahead and use the 100 and keep the $$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apetty Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 What do you want to do with the lens? I think the 85 1.8 is awesome (see my post yesterday http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00QF0g ). To answer your other question, "don´t you think that my 100 f/2.8 does the job that the 85 f/1.8 would do...!?" Cant really say without knowing what you plan to photograph I don't have the 100mm but going by the numbers, its not as fast as the 85, and for portraits, indoors, it maybe too long. The 85 is almost too long. If you are using a crop, the 100mm will be like using a 160mm lens. the 85 is like a 136 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josmanuel Posted July 22, 2008 Author Share Posted July 22, 2008 Sorry, forgot to tell... I´m using a 40d... and 50% of my shots are indoor... Oh, and I do it as an amateur, mostly family portraits... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 If you aren't going to shoot wider than f/2.8 I'm not sure you should be considering adding either lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall5 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 >>>>"don´t you think that my 100 f/2.8 does the job that the 85 f/1.8 would do...!?"<<<< Close, It is 1 1/3 stop slower and 15mm longer. Where the 85mm is sometimes to long for indoors, the 100mm will be more so more often. But if being limited indoors is not a problem then the 100 will be fine. If you feel the 100 will do the job for you that the 85 would do, then why the question in the first place? We could spend all day spliting hairs here. I don't think that you need to fill the gap between 50 and 100mm but the 85 and 100 will not completely do the same thing. For me the 85 is better suited for portrait, but that is just me. That said the 50 f1.8 and 100 f2.8 would produce really nice images also. If you find you really like the 50mm focal length but just want a better lens, then the 50 f1.4 would do well. It cost a bit more and I am not a fan of thrid part lens, but Sigma has a new 50 f1.4 out. The specs look real nice and it seems to be what the Canon version should be. To be honest, I have ever been impressed with the Canon 50f1.4 in terms of build and such when compared to my 85f1.8...but that is just me. It seems to me you know you want the 50... Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall5 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 As Mark pointed out...I begin to wonder why you want to buy a new lens at all. Money burning a hole in your pocket? :o) Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasan Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 >>"don´t you think that my 100 f/2.8 does the job that the 85 f/1.8 would do...!?"<< close but there are significant differences both in speed and obviously focal lenght as. There is more difference between the 100 and 85 than betwee the 50mm 1.4 and 1.8. As others pointed out it's hard to recommend anything without knowing what you want to do with the new lens and why you feel limited in your photography by the 100 and 50 you currently own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Just one? <p> 50/1.4 for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
correct_exposure Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Save your cash for a rainy day. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josmanuel Posted July 22, 2008 Author Share Posted July 22, 2008 Jason, my money is not burning a hole in my pocket... no way...:) That´s the reason why I post this question... to see if you think that I should buy any of these lens... to safe my precious $$... :) I like a lot my 50 f/1.8, but I don´t now if I would get better results with the f/1.4... This is the lens that I use most of the times for portraits... but sometimes it just feels that focus is a little bit slow... Manual focus is also that I use and with this lens it´s dificult to do it... About the 85 f/1.8... My little girl has music auditions, sometimes in low light, dark places where I can not use my EX 430... would the f/1.8 help with this...!? I only have $$ for one of them... 85 or 50 f/1.4... so... Thank you all for all the precious information, and sorry for my bad english... I´m Portuguese... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_myers Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Hi, The 85/1.8 and the 100/2.8 are quite a distance apart when it comes to portraits. Get the 85/1.8... But be warned... After you do you will probably also want the 50/1.4 to compliment it better than the 50/1.8 does. Particularly for portraits, the 50/1.4 gives nicer bokeh than the 50/1.8 in many situations. So does the 85/1.8. Plus, the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are more similar in terms of build quality and handling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall5 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Don't worry about the english, its the only Language I know and I am terrible at it... f1.8 would be better than f2.8 for low light. But if there is enough light the f2.8 maybe fine with the right ISO. I think you said you had a 40D, ISO 1600 should not be a problem if you shoot RAW. When conditions are less than Ideal, I recommend shooting RAW. But then again I only use RAW myself. This is a question of what focal length you need, I would think the 100 maybe better. Again we can spend all day spliting hairs, It seems to me you need to hold off until you KNOW what you need/want. I think you can do what you need to do right now with what you have as long as you understand how to get the most out of it. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall5 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 Maybe get a nice lite tripod.... Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_hall5 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 >>>"I like a lot my 50 f/1.8, but I don´t now if I would get better results with the f/1.4... This is the lens that I use most of the times for portraits... but sometimes it just feels that focus is a little bit slow... Manual focus is also that I use and with this lens it´s dificult to do it... "<<< This sounds to me you maybe ready for a better 50mm... Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 >>> About the 85 f/1.8... My little girl has music auditions, sometimes in low light, dark places where I can not use my EX 430... would the f/1.8 help with this...!? <<< The EF85F1.8 creams (meaning is MUCH better than) the EF100F2.8Macro in this circumstance. For: Indoors; low available light; hand held; moving subjects; and comparing using both lens wide open the 85F1.8, is clearly a better choice. As a practical example that extra 1 and 1/3 stops will give you 1/100s vs. 1/40 at the same ISO, which is significant in that shooting scenario. WW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drfuzz3899 Posted July 22, 2008 Share Posted July 22, 2008 I love the 50mm perspective on my crop body, but if I had the chance to buy the 85 I would. The f/1.4 is nice, but not necessary IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_holland Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 You've got a narrow spectrum of fast primes, but not a lot of versatility either on the wide side or the long side. Personally one of my most used lenses is my 70-200 2.8 zoom. Second would be the 16-35, again covering a focal length outside of the range that you have. Of course for those expensive zooms you have to save a lot more dough than an 85 1.8 will cost, but it would add a new dimension and much more value to your set. If you want to stay with primes, go for the 200mm 2.8, or maybe the 20 mm 2.8 To me, there is so much similarity between the 100 and the 85 that you will have trouble telling the difference, compared to changing position with your feet or cropping later. There should be a big difference in the image to justify fumbling while changing lenses. And when you do eventually build a complete set of lenses you will find that the lenses that are close don't get used so often. Of course I am proposing slower glass. But I'm sure you know that these really fast primes are not so sharp when shooting wide open anyway. I find that with my 50 1.4 I have trouble keeping both of my subject's eyes in focus, because the plane of focus is so narrow. And to shoot sports with such a narrow plane of focus is really difficult. So, you may find that you are using that really fast glass partially stopped down anyway. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
correct_exposure Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Buy a high precision focus screen for 35 bucks for your fast primes. Then you can tell what's in focus and what's not easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now