So i recently sold my 1DmarkIIN and have some extra cash left over from the sell and want to get a new piece of glass. the 85 and 135 are to lenses i have my eye set on.. just curious to what some of you guys and girls think? can you post images with both if you have some? thanks!
never used the 135, but I will say this about my 85 1.8
Never had issue with it, takes really nice pics and I even owned a 85 1.2 at one point, sold it.
But I did shoot with 85 1.8 the other night at my store, using my 580 flash to bounce and I noticed anything with white, or anything with near blown highlights had really bad purple edges (fringing??). I had never noticed this before, but then again never shot in such non-optimal lighting.
Otherwise, that 85 is great, not expensive, light and silky smooth images.
the 135 DEFINATELY had better IQ. In fact, the 135 has some of the best IQ of a lens that i have ever used. the problem for me and the reason i dont currently have one is that the focal lenght is kinda long.
I haven't owned the 135L (one of the few I haven't owned) but I do own the 85 1.2 and 1.8. I use the f/1.8 ALL the time, but in a studio environment, so I never experience CA. Come to think of it, I don't recall ever noticing CA with the lens, but I can make the 85L produce it in 2 seconds... Just look for any high contrast, back lit situation and the 85L is off to the races with CA...
I'd suggest you look at William Castleman's site and see what he has to say about the f/1.8. I think you'll find it's a pretty good lens.
thanks for the replies so far... few questions( whats IQ and CA?) haha sorry if its a dumb question but i dont really know what they mean. and thanks for posting photos canerino.. stunning images
Image quality and chromatic Abberations. CA's are the purple, red, green edges that show up on high contrast images. Some lenses show it really bad and it usually shots up in bright highlights.
Having had both, I will say that the 135 has better IQ (particularly bokeh), but really, I think, it's all about focal length. 135 is awesome for portraits on a FF body. But on a 1.6 crop, it's more of a tele.
I use both these lenses on either a 10D or 30D. The 135 is bigger and more expensive, but it's sharper when used wide open (or at the comparable f/2) and it produces wonderful color and out-of focus blur. The 85 is quite nice for the price -- I really like the small size and speedy AF. I prefer it over the 135 for indoor events (e.g., stage or club shows) because it is easier to carry for long periods of time, even if it does produce more purple fringing (especially when used wide open). I like using the 85 stopped down a bit, but don't hesitate to use it wide open indoors in low light although I don't necessarily expect a super sharp image in these conditions.
If forced to choose, it wouldn't be much of a choice for me due to the great image quality, right out of the camera when used wide open: the 135L.
135 is a top performer with excellent build quality, will last a lifetime. The 85 costs less than half of the 135 if that is of concern, but there is a reason for that. For me, the 85 1.2 is 100% amazing and will always have a place in the bag, the 135 as well. 135 can be a bit long indoors but I mostly use it for indoor sports and when closeups are called for. Canerio's photos posted here should be plenty to see the quality of the 135.
In small, dark indoor spaces, the 85/1.8 is a great, unobtrusive lens. And, it's really not that expensive to give it a try. This the type of photography that I like to do with the 85/1.8:
In sum, I don't think you can go wrong with either. The biggest "issue" I have with these lenses is that they get me thinking about the 85/1.2 every now and then.
I also had owned both of these lenses, and overall 135L is a better lens. However, I eventually sold my 135 for these reasons:
1. too long on the 1.6 crop camera,
2. when I use FF camera, it is still too long of a lens for me without IS that it was hard for me to get a sharp photo. My hand shake too much for the lens. But when I do can have control condition, this lens is one of the very best lens in terms of focus (super fast), color, bokehhh (sooo smooth), and sharpness
Thus, like others have said, consider the FL that you like, and hopefully you don't have problem that needs IS.
And, if you plan to use it in various occasions (outdoor, indoor etc), the 85 f1.8 probably a better choice. This is also really sharp, fast focus, bokeh is great etc.
A couple of example of 85mm, you could see the bokeh.
I love the 135L but for all-around shooting I'd take the 85/1.8 in a heartbeat. Castleman's dead-on, imho. It's my most used prime underneath 100mm. It does everything: court sports, candids, portraits, you name it. Sure it displays CA, but then so does my 85/1.2 (which mostly stays at home and might be up for sale).
Overall, the 85/1.8 is a great indoor B-ball, volleyball, gymnastics lense but won't compare to the bokeh of a 135L. It really does come down to personal choice and what you want the lense for.
A couple of 85/1.8 flower shots below as I don't do sports.
I own both but could get by happily with either. The CA from the 85 1.8 is pretty much gone by F2, but it looses the 1/3 stop advantage then. The 135 is sharp wide open and better in the corners on FF.
