 |
|
|
Peter Kirk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 25, 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 312
|
|
Review Date: Dec 7, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Light and sharp, inconspicuous.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
a wonderful portrait lens, not as good as an 85L, but good for the price
|
|
 Dec 7, 2008
|
|
Gilbert75photo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 7, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $360.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent image quality, fast AF, excellent quality/price ratio!
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive... see below what I mean by that...
|
|
|
I bought the lens 3 months ago, after reading all those good reviews... I had rented the well-reknowned 85 1.2L for weddings, and found that the 1.2 aperture wasn't easy to use, the DOF being so thin... Close portraits at f1.2 end up in keeping maybe 1 out of plenty since it's hard for the AF to differentiate the lashes from the iris, and many times the eye itself is out of focus... And you can't see where the focus is in the viewfinder anyway... So f1.8 was wide enough for me!
The lens is very good at f1.8, and "L" sharp at f2.8!
The only problem is that after buying this lens, I couldn't use my old 28-105 II USM anymore... You get used quite quickly to the nice contrast, the control on the DOF and superb definition of the 85mm... It's why I say it's an expensive lens because having it in your bag leaves you with no other choice than buying "L" zooms... Went out and got the 24-70 2.8L... Damn... Am I looking forward to get the 70-200 f,4L IS? Yes...
Highly recommended!
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2008
|
|
zshaft
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 31, 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Nov 18, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
VERY SHARP, lightweight, not expensive lens, USM, EF lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
not L built.
|
|
|
well, i have this lens with the hood attached (not incld.) for about 2months on my 400d & 40d, and i feel really happy n satisfied about how it works n produce very sharp images (once again, very sharp!) all the way.
i always use it for candid portrait on weddings/other parties.
the range is also suitable. not too far, not too close with the object.
in low light condition, putting the aperture to f/1.8 doesnt make me worried about the quality; not noisy.
the bokeh is also excellent.
so, i recommend this lens for medium-tele portrait (esp.candid) for anyone with (not-so-high)budget.
using this on FF will make things better!
no doubtful, just GO FOR IT !
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2008
|
|
skibum5
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 17305
|
|
Review Date: Oct 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
quite sharp, fast, fast AF
|
|
Cons:
|
AF accuracy a little bit weak for more distant subjects, extremely prone to PF
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2008
|
|
Aysha A.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 7, 2007
Location: United Arab Emirates
Posts: 139
|
|
Review Date: Sep 12, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $361.95
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Beautiful bokeh, amazing portraits images, quality pictures
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
I highly recommend this lens to all the portraits, products, macro lovers out there, it is a very nice lens, reasonably priced and everyone can afford it.
I've been using it for few years, done a lot of beauty shots and fashion with it and it always deliver an amazing indoors and outdoors, all my client were very pleased with their pictures, thanks to this baby 
Samples can be found on my flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aisama/
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2008
|
|
keatonandrew
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 29, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Aug 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $360.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, nice build, fast focus
|
|
Cons:
|
chromatic aberration
|
|
After shooting this lens on a 5D for a few shoots, I feel I can now comment on it.
It is a tremendous portrait lens. I definitely recommend it for that, no doubt. Super sharp.
The one drawback for me was a decent amount of chromatic aberration that I noticed, more than on any other lenses I've used. It didn't detract much from the image quality, and I could correct it, but it was an annoyance.
to see a sample image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/accidentalphotography/2805438748/sizes/o/
This is a smaller size than the original, but it still shows the incredible bokeh and amount of detail on can get with this lens.
I have not used it on my 20D yet, so I can't comment on how it performs on a crop body.
|
|
|
Aug 28, 2008
|
|
mihind24
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 24, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 536
|
|
Review Date: Aug 26, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, speed, focusing, size
|
|
Cons:
|
Chromatic aberrations
|
|
|
I've never been much of a pixel peeper. Today I took some shots at different apertures with this lens. They appeared very sharp when looking at them. Then I zoomed into 100% crops. HOLY COW! The 100% crop looks as sharp as a regular image. I would have absolutely no hesitation printing a 4x6 of a 100% crop from this lens. Realistically, not often that I need that much of a crop from a 85mm on a 1.6 camera, but nice to know that rare option is out there.
I've used this lens before to construct a big stitched image, and no doubt will continue to do so. Amazingly sharp!
Oh, and the focusing. Wow is it fast. With a 40D and this lens it still focuses well except in absolute darkness. I almost feel guilty paying less than $1500 for the combo. It feels like I have pro level AF!
|
|
|
Aug 26, 2008
|
|
S4LTM4N
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 19, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Aug 19, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, good color and contrast, usable large aperture, useful FL, decent build quality, fast/accurate AF, affordable
|
|
Cons:
|
the only bad thing I have to say is that it makes you second guess the quality of your other lenses
|
|
I bought this lens as a replacement for my Canon 70-200 f/4L, and I haven't looked back...not too much anyway
I only have good things to say about this lens, but I'm sure everyone else has already said it all.
The 70-200 I had was great, but I preferred the compactness of this lens. I do most of my shooting indoors, so I rarely used the longer focal lengths of the 70-200 anyway, and f/4 just wasn't fast enough.
If you do mostly indoor shooting, I would recommend to pass up the 70-200s, even the 2.8 IS, for this lens. It will save you a lot of money and give you almost everything they have and more. I have used the 70-200 2.8 IS, but I found myself reaching for my 85 too often to justify owning one myself. If you MUST spend over $1000 and you MUST have L, then go for the 85 1.2, otherwise, enjoy the money you've saved and the beautiful lens you've gained.
|
|
|
Aug 19, 2008
|
|
John Korduner
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 5, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 973
|
|
Review Date: Aug 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
It consistently takes solid quality pictures. Its autofocus is quick, and it is well built and compact (and heavy...which to some people seems to be an important factor).
|
|
Cons:
|
None, it's a solid lens for any average user.
|
|
|
I don't find the focal length very useful. I think the $90-50mm f/1.8 is far mor practical without any significant loss in picture quality.
If I didn't enjoy shooting basketball in the winter, this would never come out of the closet. Consequently, I think this lens is a must for any hobbiest who enjoys indoor sporting events.
All factors considered, due to the random manner in which I accumulated my lenses...but, I'd imagine hobbiests that possess any modicum of foresight for building their lens collections, would ultimately find this lens falls into a gap, and consequently, the $350 price-tag is ultimatly unjustifiable.
Other than its lack of utility for my interests, I have nothing negative to say about its functionality or price v. value.
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2008
|
|
bluefox9er
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 10, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 361
|
|
Review Date: Aug 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great image quality, super bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
none...seriously...none.
|
|
|
This is a cracking lens that should be in everyones kit bag...in my opinion, the very best bang for the canon buck.
Granted, I tend not to use this lens very offten as I have a 400d and with the crop factor i makes it effectivly a 135 mm lens, but the images I have managed tog et with it have been absloutley amazing, and I simply cannot wait to use it on a FF camera soon.
I have tried it indoors and had excellent results, but had to crank up the ISO to get a deceent shutter speed. thank goodness for canon's excellent noise reduction, but PP in noise ninja,neat image etc will do the trick very nicely.
ok, its not 'L' build quality, but it certianly is very well made and really...buy this lens.
|
|
|
Aug 14, 2008
|
|
Andrew Welsh
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 19, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 5000
|
|
Review Date: Jul 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $300.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good portrait focal length, lightweight, accurate USM Focusing, sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
None really, unless you're bugged by primes. Not f/1.4 like the Nikon version. Not good for astro unless stopped down to f/2.8. Prone to some purple fringing at high contrast boundaries below f/2.8.
|
|
|
Excellent dollar value. I wanted this lens for some time, and I wasn't disappointed when I picked one up used. The focal length is really great for portraits-- on a crop and full frame camera. It's like a 135mm on a crop camera, which, as many know, is a well-liked portrait focal length anyway.
Build is similar to the 50/1.4 and 70-300.. plastic + metal, but solid. It reeks of "middle class".. not the magnesium alloy of L lenses, nor the plasticy feel of the 50/1.8 or 35/2 or cheap kit lenses.
The extra focal length over the 50/1.8 means you have to be cautious about camera shake with slow shutter speeds (1/50 sec and slower). Sometimes I forget when I am shooting in dark reception halls this is the case-- and end up with slightly blurry photos. No fault of the lens though.
For portraits, the focal length is good.. it's a good working distance-- not so far that it's "distant" and not so close as to make a stranger / unfamiliar subject uncomfortable. I especially like the close focus distance, and I sometimes use this lens for detail photos at weddings. The focus speed is excellent as well, good for sports. So, for close focus distance and focus speed, this lens is superior to the far more expensive 85L.
For astrophotos, this focal length is a bit awkward-- wide but not wide enough. About the only subject that fits this lens on a crop camera is the north america nebula (NGC 7000 in Cygnus) + surrounding region. Perhaps the california nebula / pleiades and surrounding region, especially if you're able to go really really deep with your exposures to bring out to the dust lanes in the area.. but not much use beyond that. The lens is not optimized for infinity focus and requires stopping down to f/2.8 to get 'acceptable' sharpness (further down for better corner sharpness). Even the 85L needs stopping down to f/3.5 for a flat field on a 5D-- but this is for astrophotos only. However, for $300 I'm not complaining much-- if I'd bought the 85L I'd complain a bit more-- and I complain loudly for the 200/2 IS having this same problem... however this is a highly specialized application that most won't do or care about.
Overall I do recommend this lens for those looking for a nice thin DOF producing portrait lens. It really is an excellent value, especially when bought used. Indoor sports photographers with close access (think volleyball, basketball etc) can use this lens, as well as budget-minded portrait photographers.
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2008
|
|
inkle
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 24, 2008
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Jul 24, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $415.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
The DOF for this lens is good, it really adds the atmosphere to your photos. Photo is sharp, and the f/1.8 allow for low light photo taking.
|
|
Cons:
|
Fringing is apparent in high contrast light situation,
|
|
|
Potential users must take into consideration the crop area for a 85mm. It requires quite a fair distance for full body shots, & tight area is not quite suitable.
Overall i'm very very happy with this lens, i manage to take photos that are beyond my expectations with this lens.
|
|
|
Jul 24, 2008
|
|
edwardzeltser
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 21, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 21, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, light, sharp at F1.8, excellent bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
Price and quality does not come very often together. With this lens –this is a case.
To see some samples on 20D f-stop 1.8 please go to
http://edzeltserphoto.com, Clients, Lenses, Canon 85mm
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2008
|
|
SebR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 16, 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $790.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great bokeh, fast and accurate autofocus, knife sharp, never noticed any vignetting. Well worth the money.
|
|
Cons:
|
Filters not possible - At least not without any special products. Not weather sealed. Sometimes it just feels too tight on a crop camera. Especially indoors. Once you have bought this lens, you just want to get the F/1.2 version.
|
|
|
Truly a great lens for portrait use. I have gotten lovely results from this lens, and especially when you think about the price. Highly recommended product.
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2008
|
|
Cyclefitness
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 20, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 8
|
|
Review Date: Jul 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
Not a review. Just a question. I do portrait work in a small studio that gives me about 14.5 feet from wall to wall to work with. I currently have the wonderful 50mm 1.8 and the 100mm. The 100 mm is way too long and the 50 requires about 8 feet of distance of subject to prevent distortion.
I wonder if this lens wouldn't be a nice addition to my stable? I see one on sale here on this forum for $305.
|
|
|
Jul 5, 2008
|
|
nickobank
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 3, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
fantastic value for money, good corner sharpness, quick af
|
|
Cons:
|
CA, having to purchase hood, build quality excellent for money not quite up there compared to others
|
|
|
I have done some testing compared to my 70-200 and this wins hands down (but then what do you expect from a prime!) Corner sharpness excellent, quick af, fantastic colour
Though I do feel canon could make a few improvements having shot nikon up until 4-5 years ago. I do feel there 85mm 1.8 was of better build quality and was supplied with a nice metal hood though the focus was never to match. Also i never remember getting purple fringing at 1.8 although with the canon version it goes at 2.8 but then again I want to be able to shoot at 1.8 in high contrast and not get it. Apart from that gripe it is a fantastic lens to have in your kit bag and i would recommend
it.
|
|
|
Jul 3, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
320
|
537611
|
Dec 30, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$350.43
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.90
|
9.43
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
