I'm wondering how many of you use the 85mm 1.2 on a crop body? I had the 85mm 1.8 and I found it was usually too long to be used much indoors, but I loved the images it produced.

I'm getting a new body soon, and I was pretty much set on the 5D, but, the 40D has really come down lately and the 85mm 1.2 has a great discount too at B&H. Sooo... my current funds will allow me to get:

a) 5D body or
b) 40D body + 35L or 85L

If I choose "b", I could still probably end up with a used 5D towards the end of the year, depending on how the year goes. I know, some will say I should buy the 5D, 35L and the 85L now, and make payments. (if I were a real photographer, blah, blah...). I could do that, but the interest would eliminate any advantage the "deals" offer, and there is this little thing called a "budget".

Just for more info, I currently have a 17-55 IS, 24-70L and the 70-200 2.8 IS, so that's covered. This is just an open topic for discussion. I realize it's a little convoluted, but I'm hoping it will generate some ideas. Thanks in advance!

Edited by mcarr on Jan 15, 2008 at 04:33 PM GMT

I find my 135L too long indoors sometimes but never feel that way about the 85L
on the 40D/30D. Your 17-55 f2.8 IS can cover the 35 range with ISO bumped but
you've got no fast prime. When you finally put the 85L on a 5D you'll be changin' shorts.

you've got no fast prime.
Ain't THAT the truth...

When you finally put the 85L on a 5D you'll be changin' shorts.
That's what I hear...

Wedding wise - the 85L on the 1D-III and the 35L on the 1Ds-III is standard setup.

How about the 40D and 50 1.2? It's like the 85 1.2 on a FF, and $500 or more cheaper. I too have the 85 1.8 and find it a tad long indoors. I got the 28 1.8 and I like it, but to use it for blurring out the BG means getting up in their face.

I just got a 50 1.2 and am still learning what works and what' doesn't - landscapes at 1.2 are not a good thing (focus issues if you pick a distant object)
People pics though...these aren't much more than a grab shots of a friend, both at 1.2.

I thought about the 50mm 1.2, but I honestly can't bring myself to drop $1,300 on any equipment with known issues. I'm sure they're blown out of proportion on the internet, but I still would like to get the 35L and 85L first, and then if I have extra cash, try out the 50L.

If the 50L was as good as the 85L, then this would be a no brainer. Too bad, really. There's no reason it shouldn't be.

I almost always opt for glass... get the 85 1.2, nothing quite like it...

I'll be another 85L lover. It rarely leaves my camera. Once I put it on, it stays there.

Sell your 17-55, your 24-70 will cover you. Get the 5D and 85L. You'll thank me later.

I own the 5d, the 85mm 1.2 and a 40d. There's no way I could happily use the 85mm on the 40d. In fact.. I just hate the 40d. I agree with sboerup, somehow find a way to get the 5d and 85mm 1.2.
JD

Selling the 17-55 is not really an option right now. My wife (second shooter) loves it with her 30D. So far, it sounds as though people are confirming my experience that the 85mm focal length is a bit too long on the 1.6 crop. I'm going to go recheck the sofa cushions for loose change.

mcarr wrote:
I'm going to go recheck the sofa cushions for loose change.

To help motivate your loose change search just have a look around at some of the wedding photos shot with the 85 1.2 and a full frame sensor .. they have that certain je ne sais quoi that will help set your photos apart from the everyday standard.

Well, hopefully, next month there'll be a flood of lightly used, low cost 5D's on the market with Canon's PMA announcement. I think I just need to be patient. I have until 2-17 on the lens rebates.

With the 40D you get better build quality and weather sealing and better auto focus. For a 1.6 crop camera I would use the 24mm f1.4 lens (FOV equal to the 35mm on the 5D).

The 85mm f1.8 is going to produce the same IQ at f2 and larger apertures as the 85mm f1.2 so you may want to rethink your choice in this regard with your budget. There are better places to invest your limited funds, like a 5D which with the new model coming out there should be some rebates on the original model to help clear the shelves.

IMO - get the 35L. I have both on crop bodies at the moment and I much prefer the 35. Plus, for weddings it's a lot more useful as it allows you to shoot in very low light quite easily. The 85L on a crop body is not nearly as useful in low light.

Of course, some of this is just which focal lengths you prefer. I don't use anything above 35mm very often so I guess it also comes down to taste too....

ken

RedWhiteandRed wrote:
Wedding wise - the 85L on the 1D-III and the 35L on the 1Ds-III is standard setup.


Dayum. Standard for who? That's almost $15k of kit right there.

That said, once the 1D3 is in my hands (today!), I'll be shooting with the 85 on that and the 35 on my 5D - so I'm close.

elkhornsun wrote:
The 85mm f1.8 is going to produce the same IQ at f2 and larger apertures as the 85mm f1.2 so you may want to rethink your choice in this regard with your budget.
I had the 85mm 1.8 and while it's a great lens, I'm at the point where I see what the 85 1.2 can do, and it's not at f2 or above. I found I liked the 70-200 2.8 IS better for portraits, so I sold the 85 1.8.

I'm going to wait and see what 5D prices do. If I can find a great deal on one new or used, I might be able to swing the 35L. I think the 85L will have to wait until the end of the year, but I do intend to get it eventually.

How about the 50 MM 1.4. It'll be an 80mm 1.4 on a crop and if you ever go FF, it still works as a fast, normal lens. And it's (relatively) cheap.

Just remember, your apparent magnification has nothing to do with the size of the sensor, but has everything to do with the pixel density. See my chart below......and scroll to the right.....

Oh, and FM Mods, please excuse the extra width for this one instance. If I make it smaller to fit, it becomes illegible.

I own the 5D and the 85mm 1.2L version 1.... What a combo... I had before a 20D and the 85mm 1.2.... Not satisfied at all, one of the major reason I went to FF.... since, just a word, wow, especially for portrait...
By the way, for those who says that 40D is better for autofocus, watersealing, etc, doesnt know what they are talking about... For the same price of a 40D, you can have a used 5D FF, what a deal... and the 40D is not watersealed anyway (and I have taken pix under srain without any problem anyway...), and I have never had a single problem of focus wether with the 20D and the 5D... so....
And consider that 3/4 of the most beautiful pix in this website have been taken with the 5D.... so it is not the 40D or the 5DmkII which will make your 5D to stop working... pure canon marketing to sell more of the newest model... That's it....
By the way, I use the 70-200 2.8L as well.... For portrait and a FF, what a discovery, because it is like getting a 44-130mm on a 40D....Much more efficient...