 |
|
|
tom s
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2007
Location: Croatia
Posts: 158
|
|
Review Date: Jul 27, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
price, size, fast focusing (ring type USM), sharp from f/2.5-f/11
|
|
Cons:
|
not very sharp between f/1.8-f/2.5, not good for close ups, nasty purple fringing wide open (f/1.8-f/2), average bokeh
|
|
|
This lens is a nice inexpensive lens. It's an improvement over lowly 50 f1.8 and 50 f1.4 USM. It has better bokeh (although still in the average category, it's not as creamy as 135 f/2L or 70-200 f/2.8L), and ring type USM. But, it has pretty low magnification ratio, so forget about close-ups with this lens (you can buy extension tubes, tho'; the results can be really nice)...Also, purple fringing is the real problem with this lens...This is a special type of CA, and not that easy to correct...It appears when there are shiny objects in your pictures (water, lamps, jewels...) and large apertures are used (f/1.8-f/2.8).
The lens is somewhat soft wide open, so I don't use it that much for natural light portraits, but it gets really sharp by f/4 and remains sharp up to f/11. The best setting for portraits is f/5.6.
Overall, it's good, but there are better portrait lenses around (135 f/2 is much sharper at f/2, it has better colors and microcontrast, and bokeh is so creamy).
But, if you shoot portraits in studio at f/5.6-f/8 and need an occasional indoor sports lens, 85 f/1.8 will be the perfect choice for you. It's cheap, so why not?
|
|
 Jul 27, 2007
|
|
dimitris77
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 511
|
|
Review Date: Jun 18, 2007
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $350.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, Image Quality, Size
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This is THE lense to beat at the price. I am getting amazing results on my 20D with creamy bokeh and very sharp pictures overall. Its size and internal focusing makes this a really nice lense to drag around. I shot this mostly in the f2.2-f2.8 area and it really gives very nice colors, sharpness and bokeh. I have tried it sometimes on f1.8 but the in focus area is so shalow that areas go out of focus. Generally speaking its an amazing lense and delivers better results than a 70-200mm L in a smaller package. It also holds its own against my old trusty Nikor 85mm F1.4.
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2007
|
|
Per Zangenberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 11
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2007
|
|
LotsToLearn
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 12, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 434
|
|
Review Date: Jun 5, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp. Great DOF. Fairly solid build.
|
|
Cons:
|
None yet.
|
|
|
This is another lens along with the 50 f/1.4 that I wish I would use a little more. I picked up my copy second hand at a good price for my area from a fellow FMer.
For most of what I find myself shooting, it's a little long indoors at home and a little short outdoors. Also, I usually have my 135L on my camera. However; since I've recently upgraded and added a second body with a different FOVCF, I hope to get more use out of this apparent little gem.
The times I've used it on my 20D, it has produced really sharp images with superbly rendered colours. The bokeh is beautiful and the focus is quick and accurate. It's too bad it's a little long on the 20D for my cramped indoors because it's f/1.8 has been great for low light.
Although similarly built to the 50 f/1.4, I guess because it's a little larger it doesn't feel too flimsy in my hands.
|
|
|
Jun 5, 2007
|
|
Aaron Hogsed
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 31, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor sharp. Great color and contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
doesn't have the prestige of the 85 1.2L
|
|
|
This is likely the most lens I have ever got for the money. Incredible sharp and contrasty. Similar performance to my L series lenses and sharper than some L zooms. Very good performance at 1.8 even better at 2.8-5.6.
|
|
|
May 31, 2007
|
|
Andrea1975
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 26, 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 26, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, fast and silent AF, bokeh, size, price
|
|
Cons:
|
Backfocusing
|
|
|
This lens is amanzingly sharp from f2.0 on. Its build quality is not up to the L lenses standard, but perfectly adequate for the price. Apart from that, it meets all the requirement of a professional grade portrait lens.
I found backfocusing when using it on a 5D and I had it calibrated under warranty.
|
|
|
May 26, 2007
|
|
Breach
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 7, 2005
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Apr 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very fast AF, good IQ, good build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
CA in certain situations, could be sharper, bit too long on a 1.6x
|
|
|
That was my third lens, with the 70-200 2.8 IS now locked on budget allowing.
I was using the EF-S 60mm for portraits, but then figured, all positives aside, I needed the 85mm. It's f/1.2 brother is in a league of its own. So as far as FL was concerned it had to be the 85mm f/1.8.
The good: A compact prime, good build quality. I really enjoy the AF speed, especially in low light. AF is very accurate, very fast and generally superb. The bokeh you get is superb for this FL. Since this lens if about 135mm on a crop (equivalent that is), I've been using this lens heavily for stage photography with excellent results. This lens could be almost sharp to very sharp -- still don't quite get when it decides to behave better than average. It's usable at f/1.8 (which usually goes hand in hand with ISO 1600). It gets really good from f/2.2 onwards with f/2.8 being the aperture at which it really starts to shine.
The bad: It's not as sharp as my EF-S 60mm or even my EF-S 17-55... Guess I am spoiled :-) Seriously, it's an old design and costs $300. Don't get me wrong IQ is generally good to excellent, but sometimes it just sucks, even at high shutter speeds and f/2+ apertures... The hood is flimsy too -- I got the ET-65III hood which has some sort of textile padding, but clipon hoods are hopefully dead as far as I am concerned. Every time I put the hood on it feels as if it will break off the next second :-) Next -- CA can be a BIG problem with this lens... it only shows in certain high contrast situations and truth be told I only rarely experienced it, but when CA shows it SHOWS. On another note, 85mm on a crop could be a bit too long, so think again if you intend to use it on a 1.6x crop in a studio -- you'll need the distance.
Generally, I am quite happy with this lens. Sure, the f/1.2 II is way better in terms of sharpness and low light capability, but I hear its AF is slower for one, plus it costs BIG. I never played around with the 50mm Canon primes, but I never missed them either (since I have the EF-S 17-55 :-) 100mm is too long for portraits IMHO. So there you have it -- another happy user.
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2007
|
|
Greg Feldman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 14, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5847
|
|
Review Date: Apr 10, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $320.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, weight, fairly solid build, image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
CA wide open
|
|
|
Surprisingly sharp wide open. It does improve at f/2.8, and even just stopped down a third to f/2, but this lens defines the often-heard "usable wide open." The only issue is prominent chromatic aberration at high-contrast areas. This is probably not an issue for most intended uses of the lens.
It's really nice to be able to shoot at 85mm indoors with ambient light.
The size is perfect, and the focusing ring is quite comfortable--and very "nudge-able," which is important when working with such small DOF.
I wasn't sure if this lens would be redundant, since I already have a 70-200 2.8 and the 100 2.8 macro. And a 28-75, come to think of it. It's not redundant; the zoom is literally too big to use in cramped quarters, and the extra 1.3 stops make a big difference in low light. Moreover, this lens is probably sharper wide open at f/1.8 than the zoom is wide open at f/2.8.
For someone who's used only zooms before--even if they've been good ones--this lens would be the perfect introduction to primes. The price-to-performance figure is fantastic. For someone who's used only a kit-lens zoom that needs to be used at f/8 for decent photos, this lens would be a revelation.
|
|
|
Apr 10, 2007
|
|
b3n08
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 23, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 33
|
|
Review Date: Mar 27, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
incredibly sharp, strong build, great price, excellent colour and contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
none that I have encountered
|
|
|
It took a while to get the feel of what this lens was capable of, but since then, my best shots have come from this lil baby.
A definite must have for portraits.
|
|
|
Mar 27, 2007
|
|
samnz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 24, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact | Quick and Sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
None yet
|
|
|
Its size and weight is comparable to the 28-105 f3.5-4.5 so it's very compact and light.
The optional barrel hood is quick to mount/dismount with 2 quick release tabs on the side. Can be reversed on your lens for easy storage. Not the best of lookers but, you get over it pretty quickly when you see the results.
Operation: AF is very quick. Very similar to the speed of 17-55 f2.8 IS - which is damn quick! Silent and accurate operation allows this lens to sit on my 30D alot longer than any other lens...17-55 included!
The rest you've heard before: sharp wide open...contrasty and sharp all round...great in low light...great in low light!
Portrait shots of 2-3 people (head and shoulders) = amazing! You're not in their face - unlike the 30mm 1.4 or even 50mm 1.4.
|
|
|
Mar 24, 2007
|
|
Dede Multazam
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2007
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast & Sharp Edge to Edge, Cheap Enough.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
No Comment
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2007
|
|
Rene Michaels
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 18, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $319.99
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Awesome clarity and focus, nice DOF, great range on a DSLR, great for portraits and low-light work. A must for every camera bag!
|
|
Cons:
|
The fact that Canon doesn't make more affordable lenses like this!!!
|
|
|
I put off this purchase for a while. Now that I have it, I wish I'd bought it a long time ago!
What an awesome lens this is! All the reviews on here are accurate (thanks for posting them). I've used it on a 10D and 30D with great results. I shoot a lot of low-light, no-flash action photography and needed something in this range (136mm with DSLR's extender) with a large aperture. My Sigma 70-200 EX is on 80% of the time, but at 2.8 I can't always get the shots I want in those low-light - no-flash situations. I dream of a 70-200 f/1.8!!! What a jewel that would be!
Buy one!
|
|
|
Mar 8, 2007
|
|
Heatseeker99
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 163
|
|
Review Date: Mar 7, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very usable wide open, nice & sharp by f 2.2. Good build. Awesome bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
Great for portraiture work, nice out-of-focus backgrounds. Awesome lens for indoor sports in a crop camera. Great value.
|
|
|
Mar 7, 2007
|
|
Phast1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 14, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2082
|
|
Review Date: Mar 2, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
fast focus, cheap price.
|
|
Cons:
|
overly hyped.
|
|
|
I've read alot of reviews comparing this lens to the 85 f/1.2L. Some say the f/1.8 is a good alternative, I say poppycock. The two lenses are not in the same league. After using many different copies of both the 1.8 version and 1.2L (MkI & II) I feel I can now give my honest appraisal based on experience.
The 1.8 is faster focusing without a doubt. The contrast and colours are not in the same league as the 1.2 but very good. The 85 1.8 (the copies I used) is only acceptable wide open with no post processing and doesn't get any wow factor until at least 2.2, 2.8. From there on it's spectacular. In comparison, the 85 1.2L is very acceptable wide open f/1.2 and by 1.6 it's astounding. The minimal depth of field at these open apertures of course is particular to the type of shot you want to take. That being said, If I buy a large aperture lens it's because, well... I want to use the large aperture right?
The 85 1.8 is priced right and is not a crappy lens by a longshot. It is however non-L for a reason and you get that impression after using the 85L's extensively. When I need faster focus I stick to a 70-200 2.8IS for that range, otherwise it's the 85L all the way.
|
|
|
Mar 2, 2007
|
|
jirok12944
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 22, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 27, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, very good build, priced well
|
|
Cons:
|
high CA at f/1.8 and f/2
|
|
|
PROS
Extremely sharp at f/1.8 and f/2 out of the box. I dont have any problems using it at f/1.8. Much better that 50mm f/1.4 wide open
Quick and consistent AF
I would say underpriced at $350. Retail was $570. It sill would be very good lens at that price. Bottom line it delivers more that you pay for it
CONS
Excessive CA at f/1.8. Need a lot of post processing or conversion to B&W to fix this issue
|
|
|
Feb 27, 2007
|
|
David Murrell
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 26, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Feb 26, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp; light; fast; excellent bokeh; lovely contrast; cheap; fast focus
|
|
Cons:
|
Perhaps only that there is no hood in the box; maybe not as solid as an 'l' lens
|
|
|
Well I now have a 70-200mm f4 l lens, so I reckon I know what is sharp and what isn't. And the 85mm f1.8 lens is sharp. A truly excellent portrait lens for not very much money. Fast focus, which is also accurate.
I use it on a Canon 20d (giving around about 135mm f1.8) and it is simply brilliant. I agree with other users who argue that it is the best non 'l' Canon have made. I would be surprised if there is a better one.
|
|
|
Feb 26, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
307
|
462653
|
Feb 14, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$349.50
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.92
|
9.46
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
