p.2 #5 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
Edit: Dang, artificialyello beat me to the TDP test!
Edit again, OK, I'm still having trouble getting the link to work so will try another way where you may have to cut & past it into your browser. It doesn't work right w/o the "s" added to "http".
p.2 #6 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
nathanlake wrote:
Allow me to blaspheme...I do like the Canon 85 1.2 and 1.4. However, IMO the Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art is a better lens. Faster focusing, sharper, 4 year warrant, overall feel...the Sigma wins.
The Canon 1.4L does have IS and weather sealing, but does that make it worth an extra $400
Canon $1599
Sigma $1199
Sigma just had $100 discount on their Sigma Art lens including the 85 Art and 135 Art.
This lens have been lackluster on its bokeh rendering. I still don't know of circumstances I would ever need to use IS. If I shoot at slow shutter for portraits, I would definitely need OCF to get a decent since the lighting is horrible.
Nov 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM
Guest
Guest
p.2 #7 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
Kind of disappointed. The 85L IS is not as good as Sigma optically.
Nov 29, 2017 at 06:54 AM
Guest
Guest
p.2 #9 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
phuang3 wrote:
Kind of disappointed. The 85L IS is not as good as Sigma optically.
Who would have thought a few years ago that a situation like this would've been possible. Moreover, anyone who had suggested that would've gotten himself tarred and feathered for even implying that a Sigma lens can be as good as a Canon L, let alone better. Some people here haven't given up this routine even now.
That aside, there are a few compelling arguments in the favour of the Canon, size and IS being the two biggest ones. Personally, I'm in no rush but I would've probably chosen the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 VC.
p.2 #11 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
I think the differences are very small. In a blind test I doubt we could tell them apart. The ART has less vignetting and there are differences in distortion. I frequently think that in reality these TDP tests are not really sensitive enough to detect these small differences convincingly, and I am almost 100% certain that in real life these are probably equivalent, given more important factors that reduce image quality such as camera shake, or focus accuracy.
phuang3 wrote:
Kind of disappointed. The 85L IS is not as good as Sigma optically.
What is the definition of 'good'? Sharpness? Contrast? Rendering quality? The latter is quite subjective, but not to be dismissed. For this kind of lens, with which I'll mostly be photographing people, I'll gladly give up some absolute sharpness/contrast for more interesting (more technically flawed) rendering. Apparently the one I ordered has arrived at the store, but unfortunately I'm out of the country for about another week. I'll be quite curious how it compares to the 85/1.2L, in respect to rendering...
p.2 #14 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
rscheffler wrote:
What is the definition of 'good'? Sharpness? Contrast? Rendering quality? The latter is quite subjective, but not to be dismissed. For this kind of lens, with which I'll mostly be photographing people, I'll gladly give up some absolute sharpness/contrast for more interesting (more technically flawed) rendering. Apparently the one I ordered has arrived at the store, but unfortunately I'm out of the country for about another week. I'll be quite curious how it compares to the 85/1.2L, in respect to rendering...
I'm still on the fence. I've seen many samples from the f1.4 and the lack of micro-contrast has kept me from rushing to buy. Maybe I would have rushed out if the f1.4 was outfitted with the blue-goo element resulting in better contrast. Faster focusing, weight are not, IMHO, features and functions which help me capture better images than my f1.2.
I'll be very interested in your comments regarding your f1.2 and the f1.4 comparison.
p.2 #15 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
Above and beyond the tech specs, the definition of 'good', IMEO, is that in portraits you can see a real person in the eyes. Some highly-touted lenses, at least in the sample shots, render people like inanimate objects. Not true of the Canons I'm familiar with. I thought that that one portrait shown in the Digital Picture 'preview' was great. Looking forward to more info on the lens.
p.2 #16 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
I've had the lens for a few days now.
My initial feeling is that optically it falls into the VERY GOOD to EXCELLENT category. I wouldn't give it excellent across the board optically, due to the CA that often comes up when one shoots in conditions where that is a possibility. Of course, most or all of this can be fixed in post. It's a very, very, very good lens.
The AF with my 5D4 is fast and accurate. While there may be better lenses in this regard, it can be used as an indoor sporting event lens.
Build-wise, it's solid as a rock. It's an "L" lens, so we shouldn't expect anything less, especially at its price point.
The feature which sets it apart, however, and the reason I purchased it is of course the image stabilization. I can consistently get good results hand-held at 1/10th of a second, and occasionally even at 1/8th second. That's impressive, and will allow people to "get shots" where they otherwise wouldn't and would have to resort to a tripod or other support. But dynamic subjects won't allow one to setup a tripod in time.
I look forward to experience the world more with this lens!
p.2 #17 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
cameron12x wrote:
I've had the lens for a few days now.
My initial feeling is that optically it falls into the VERY GOOD to EXCELLENT category. I wouldn't give it excellent across the board optically, due to the CA that often comes up when one shoots in conditions where that is a possibility. Of course, most or all of this can be fixed in post. It's a very, very, very good lens.
The AF with my 5D4 is fast and accurate. While there may be better lenses in this regard, it can be used as an indoor sporting event lens.
Build-wise, it's solid as a rock. It's an "L" lens, so we shouldn't expect anything less, especially at its price point.
The feature which sets it apart, however, and the reason I purchased it is of course the image stabilization. I can consistently get good results hand-held at 1/10th of a second, and occasionally even at 1/8th second. That's impressive, and will allow people to "get shots" where they otherwise wouldn't and would have to resort to a tripod or other support. But dynamic subjects won't allow one to setup a tripod in time.
I look forward to experience the world more with this lens!...Show more →
Thanks for your thoughts. I'm really interested in this lens. If I can sell my 85 f/1.2II I'll be purchasing the new 85 right away.
p.2 #19 · TDP: Placeholder for The 85/1.4 L IS Review Is Up
If I understand EV charts right, and based on sunny 16 rule, if your minimum iso is 100 and you wanted to shoot wide open at 1.4, you couldn’t. F2 would the minimum aperture you could shoot at 1/8000. Is that right? I know that is the worst case scenario, I’m just thinking about a 3 stop ND filter just in case.
Some people here haven't given up this routine even now. 