So which really is better, the FDn 85/1.2 L or the FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical?

[mark_pierlot]

<p>For years, I've been saying that the 85/1.2 L is my all-time favourite prime lens. Quite recently, however, I acquired an 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical (in near mint condition, for a song), and I'd have to say that I'm very impressed with the results I've obtained with it thus far.</p>

<p>So my question, which is more an appeal for reports of experiences from those who've used both of these superb lenses, is which do <em>you </em>think is "better"? I realize that these kinds of value judgements are subjective, but that's precisely what I'm looking for: <em>your opinions</em>.</p>

<p>And if I'm permitted to make a small confession, I must say that I'm a little scared to put these lenses head-to-head myself (although I'm sure I'll break down and do it soon enough).</p>

[User_502260]

<p>There are many old threads on this exact question both here and elsewhere. </p>

[richard_cook2]

<p>I would be more impressed if I saw pictures of the same subject taken with both lenses than by a discussion of what people 'think' is the best one. This would of course limit the discussion to people who actually own both lenses. (And rule me and most other people out!)</p>

[rick_janes]

<p>Did the original 85mm Aspherical use thoriated glass element(s)? If so, some yellowing / browning of may occur with time and "tint" this comparison. It may otherwise be difficult to find examples of each in truly pristine condition, not helped by the potential difference in age: an early Aspherical would be at least a dozen years older than a late-production L!<br /> Canon Museum also lists the older lens design as having 9 aperture blades, the newer with 8.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I would be interested to hear how the older lens performs as I only have the newer one (albeit two copies). Test them and let us know</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>Mark -The Canon FD 85mm SSC 1.2 Aspheric lens is a better lens than you are a photographer, and you "Got it for a song", so why worry ?, we all worry too much about the hardware, and not enough about the content and meaning of our images.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I guess I've come across more seriously than I intended about my concerns over comparing these lenses. I meant to be ironic in my "confession," expecting more lighthearted responses.</p>

<p>I am fully aware that the 85/1.2's share the same optical formula, and, perhaps apart from the effect of their varying number of aperture blades, should deliver very similar images. I'm also cognisant of the fact that the potential of each vastly exceeds my skill as a photographer.</p>

<p>I guess what I was really trying to do, evidently not at all successfully, was to hear of some interesting photographic experiences people have had with these lenses, and perhaps in the process to liven up this forum, which has been relatively dormant of late.</p>

[awahlster]

<p>No thorium elements in the 85mm's</p>

[awahlster]

<p>No thorium elements in the 85mm's to the best of my knowledge</p>

[dennis_kushner2]

<p>Would you have had the same impression if you had shot the FD version? Since you have both lenses, your own opinion is what really matters & please do a follow up for us. </p>

[User_4136860]

<p>I'm a very keen portrait photographer I've had the FD 85mm f1.2L lens for twenty three years I bought it new, and it's such a good lens it will have to prised out of my cold dead hands .</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>I agree with Ben. The 85/1.2L is an amazing lens. I have never used the aspheric version. Maybe it is as good as the L version.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>Raid- I think the question we should all ask ourselves if contemplating buying either of these optics is, are our photographs good enough to do lenses of this quality justice ?</p>