Thanks - that's what I thought but I have seen so many references to it as a 85 1.8L I figured I was missing something. I'm a wall portrait guy who sells 50" and 60" portraits so sharpness is more important than speed or bokeh.
I'd be curious to know that myself. I shot some images at f/1.2 last weekend, here's some crop comparisons. Maybe someone can do the same with the 85 f/1.8.
I have had the 85mm f/1.8 for several years. Its not heavy, on a 20d and then a 40D it focuses quickly and surely, even in very low light. I shoot stagework with it and shoot at f/1.8 all night long without a care (except if i need more dof). I had three 50mm lenses and never got the hang of them. The lens makes nice portraits.
i just got a beautiful f/1.2L V1. It was $1100.00 - It is big and slow to focus. But at f/1.2 it is positively amazing. Sharp, contrasty, and the dof is amazing. Every picture becomes a portrait. I just sit and look at it.
if you shoot at f/2.8 save your money and get the f/1.8 lens. Its really a great lens. If you want dreamy bookeh and razor sharp dof, well, you know what to do.
thedigitalbean wrote:
I'll second everything Forrest said and add one more point. The 85mm f/1.8 represents exceptional value, it really is a fantastic lens for the price.
I'll third that, and also add the the 85/1.2 L also has CA wide open.
They are as sharp as each other. The 85L has "better" bokeh, but anyone who knows what they are doing can get spectacular bokeh from the 1.8.
The *only* advantage to the 85L is the speed difference. It is up to you to decide if it is worth all that money.
I liked my 85 1.8 but got rid of it due to really bad CA. Of course I didn't help it much shooting a bride's white dress with a bright sun coming in from behind, every edge on the right was bright purple.
SKYWESTR wrote:
I liked my 85 1.8 but got rid of it due to really bad CA. Of course I didn't help it much shooting a bride's white dress with a bright sun coming in from behind, every edge on the right was bright purple.
SKYWESTR wrote:
I liked my 85 1.8 but got rid of it due to really bad CA. Of course I didn't help it much shooting a bride's white dress with a bright sun coming in from behind, every edge on the right was bright purple.
Size/weight: 1.8 is much smaller and lighter
Build quality: 1.2L is much (much!) better build quality
Focusing speed: 1.8 is much faster focusing (good for indoor sports)
Sharpness: both are sharp, 1.2L is somewhat sharper up to f/3.2
bokeh: 1.2L is just incredible (unbeatable for thin DOF shots)
Contrast: 1.2L better
CA: 1.2L (MkII that is) has less CA wide open than 1.8
They are much different lenses really. I'd get the 1.2L for portraits and 1.8 for sports or moving objects.
Edited by Richard Nye on Nov 29, 2007 at 06:02 AM GMT
