moondigger:
The 85/1.8 is very close to the 1.2L in terms of sharpness.
I do not have 85 f/1.2 L but can say that my numerous tests of (5 copies) 70-200 f/4.0 L IS (that is valued so highly for its sharpness here) show that 85 f/1.8 is sharper at f/4.0 and equally sharp at f/2.2. I am not saying that 70-200 f/4.0 L IS is not sharp (it is very good at 135 mm) but that 85 f/1.8 is better that appears in these discussions.
According to photozone.de, the highest center sharpness is achieved by: 24 1.4L, 85 1.2L, 135 2L and 70-200 f/4 IS L.
Corner sharpness, and MFD performance is another story tho'.
tom s wrote:
According to photozone.de, the highest center sharpness is achieved by: 24 1.4L, 85 1.2L, 135 2L and 70-200 f/4 IS L.
Corner sharpness, and MFD performance is another story tho'.
Photozone is alright, but doesn't consider performance outside of the crop frame. Some other testers test across the full frame. William Castleman has done some pretty thorough testing on the 85s. They show a slight resolution advantage for the 85/1.8 over the 1.2L Mk2; a small advantage in AF accuracy with the L, and a slight advantage for the L in 50% MTF. The summary here would be that they perform roughly equally, though of course the L can shoot at apertures the 1.8 can't.
My point isn't whether either 85 is Canon's sharpest lens, but that both are excellent performers and among the sharpest of the non-superteles.
My 180L is the sharpest lens in my bag and the only one that truly provide photos on my 1Ds MIII that look they would not need any USM capture sharpening, it is tack sharp.
Breitling65 wrote:
Right, it is also slightly better in colors and contrast. But heavy/big and slow.
