I own the 85mm f/1.8, and for years tried to justify buying the L. Never could quite do it, because I am not that fond of minimal depth of field, and that's where the advantage is, shooting wide open.
So recently I decided instead to improve on the Canon 1.8 with the Zeiss 85 P f/1.4. I had in mind mostly stopped down performance for landscape use, not portraits. I'm a big fan of Zeiss lenses, and with a gun to my head I would probably tell you I preferred the contrast and color of the Zeiss. But the difference was tiny. I sent the Zeiss back and kept the 85 1.8. It really is an extraordinary lens for the money.
Well... all depends on your shooting style and what you want out of the lens.
I've owned a couple of copies of the 85 F/1.8 over the years and it's a great lens for the money. You can't go wrong.
If you want to shoot F/1.2 well.. you know the answer (my favorite 85 ever)
I tired the Sig 85 and had to send it back for erratic focusing issues. I would try it again as I've seen tons and tons of wonderful images produced with the lens.
I've owned 85L (both I and II), 85 1.8 and now Sigma 85. Both Canon L and Sigma produce superb images and you won't be able to tell the difference between them. Sigma is tack sharp wide open, has less CA than Canons and its AF is as fast as Canon 1.8 (maybe a bit slower). The bokeh and contrast are superb and comparable to 85L. The only issue with Sigma is that some copies have AF irregularities. Canon 1.8 offers great value but IMO its IQ is nowhere near Sigma and 85L.
The main reason for buying the L is to shoot it wide open at 1.2
- for non-moving subjects it can't be matched
- however the ultra-shallow DOF is unforgiving if your subject moves
If you're mainly going to be using it for candid portraits at f/1.8 or f/2, you'll appreciate the faster AF and smaller size/weight of the 1.8. It produces great images and is also a lot cheaper.
The 1.8 is relatively cheap; you could just buy both lenses!
Gonemad wrote:
Alexdi, I do qualify for CPS gold and didn't know the membership would allow me to "test" lenses! Awesome!
Thanks all for sharing great pictures. I know it'll most likely come down to the Canon versions, though I'm sure, to many, the Siggy 85 is an equally respected product.
If it is down to Canon go for the L. You will not be disappointed. BTW I purchased the Sigma on the used market for $700.00. If it were more than that I would have just purchased the L.
I have both 85 1.2II and 85 1.2. I agreed with some of the comments earlier that 85 1.2 is slow particular indoor. The focus is slow even with the version II but the IQ is better than 1.8. However, I prefer to use the 85 1.8 much more because the focus is fast and sharp wide open.
Both are good and they are not the same.
Back then, I was asking this 85Lvs85f1.8 question and someone here told me i was not ready for the 85L.
It took me 3 years to get the first one then added the backup one 3 months later... i still have 85f1.8 but it always at home.
the battle of 85's. the arguments will rage for ever, and you will not find a consensus. as it turns out all 3 lenses are optically very good, and none of them are perfect.
With my 70-200 2.8 IS II, I would personally not have much use for the 85 1.8, unless I was looking for something small and light, or was shooting sports. I owned both 85 1.8 and 85 1.2 II at same time. the L has better colors, and nicer bokeh. it is also sharper at f2, but not of consequence in portraits.
that much said, I shoot the 85L usually at 1.4 to 1.8, and occasionally 1.2. if I knew I want to shoot the lens primarily at f1.8-f2, and really wanted a prime, the answer is quite easy. go for 85 1.8.
Thanks everyone for the many great feedback. It's pretty clear to me that most who own both canon 85's will reach for the 1.8 due to its faster AF and still get great IQ, while others who swear by the 1.2 will tend to avoid using it in situations that need fast AF and call it good. Both are valid choices/concessions and I think it's pretty low investment to buy a 1.8 first followed by the 1.2, if needed. Thank you all!
If you want to impress other photo enthusiasts, be sure to get the Really Big And Impressive 85mm L. ;-)
If you prefer to work with gear that is smaller and lighter but very excellent, consider the 85mm f/1.8...
Dan
Gonemad wrote:
So, with my recent upgrade to 1D4 I'm considering investing on a 85mm prime lens. This range seems very useful as my 70-200 MK2 is glued to 1D3 and I saw myself using mostly around 85mm range when shooting portraiture. The composition seemed perfect - not much cropping needed. What I found was that I always had to crank the ISO up to get sharper images due to slight motion of my subject. So, sadly, I've decided to sell/trade my awesome performer 1D3 for either an 85L 1.2 or 1.8. I know there's a huge price difference and have heard of great things about both. So, a couple of questions:
1. I love my 1D3 as it is a TOP performer (never let me down when locking on BIF). Those who sold/traded it, did you miss its low-light and large pixel!! I'm losing sleep over it!!
2. I've heard 85L is a bit slow to AF, but very accurate. Slow and fast is relative. So, could I shoot candid shots of people at an event? They're not necessarily perfectly still but not moving either...
3. How does the 85L compare to the 85 1.8 at say f1.8 or f2, which I'm mostly going to use in low-light.
I've owned both -- sold the 1.8. The 85L is a special lens. If you are not sure you need it, then I would skip it. It will do fine for events, but if you are shooting fast moving sports then the 1.8 is the way to go. However, I've shot some basketball with the 1.2 and got some nice images. Just have to predict focus a little more. If you are shooting mostly portraits (like me) not many other lenses will compare.
I've owned all three, in some cases several copies of each. I now have the 85/1.2 and it's my favorite lens by far (I shoot mostly portraits).
The Sigma was close in terms of IQ, but it's AF was inconsistent (tried two copies). The 85/1.8 is an excellent lens, but shooting portraits with the 85/1.2 wide open is so much fun.
I haven't touched my 85 1.8 in several months and was going to put it up for sale. So I took some photos of it and took a few shots with it. I had completely forgotten how vibrant the colors and sharp the focusing was on it. i still haven't listed it, and am kinda really thinking i may just keep it.
Shot wide open at 1.8 no flash, no adjustments at all, just resized. The DoF on a crop is there. Things even 1/4" forward or back already begin to blur on closer shots.
I have the 85mm F1.8 and I have used the 85mm F1.2 extensively.
I have to say the 85L is better than the 85 1.8 in every category from contrast, sharpness and bokeh and color. The 85 F1.8 beats the 85L in autofocus speed.
The subjective thing is how much better is the 85L over the 85 1.8. IMHO if I rate the 85L as a 10 in image quality, I would say the 85 F1.8 would be a 9. The question is if the 3-4X cost your paying for the 85L is worth the extra bit in image quality, the ability to shoot at F1.2 and the slower focus speed.
(my favorite 85 ever) 
my awesome performer 1D3 for either an 85L 1.2 or 1.8. I know there's a huge price difference and have
