• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Canon 85 1.8

S

SAWYER

Lifer
I bought one of these in a bundle and was planning on selling it but damn I dont know, it takes really good pics. I used it last night at my kid's basketball game and it worked out well since it was on a crop, I think I like this better than the 50 1.4 I had before.
 
Samples?

Why do you like it - sharper, bokeh, or something else?

I'd always wanted the 50 1.4 for low light, and the 85 1.8 for portraits, but not sure I could get better pictures just by buying more lenses. I need to really use the ones I have first.
 
dude, i totally agree. when i took my 1st pic w/ an 85mm f/1.8 (after having used 18-55, tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC, sigma 30mm f/1.4, canon 50mm f/1.8+f/1.4), the picture just POPPED at me. colors were great and it was actually the 1st lens that made me say wow.

i'm definitely keeping the 85mm, but debating on selling either the 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8. hmmm...
 
When I had the 5D it was my favorite lens. Great AF and very good IQ and build quality for the price. The only bad thing was the bokeh fringing, but that can be taken care of in LR 4.
 
for me I enjoy zooms better, but I bought the 85 along with a 24-70 when I bought my camera. I constantly have people who comment on the pictures I took with the 85 that are on my cafes wall. Mixed in with these pics are the 24-70. No one comments on the 24-70 as they do the 85. And they don't know what lens took what pic. For the price its a fantastic lense. And I think in the canon lineup they all have purple fringing which like another said is easy to get rid of
 
radhak said:
Thanks, those are exquisite shots. But only exquisite shots are posted on pixel-peeper; even the ones with the 50mm/1.4 are fabulous...

Since so many here seem to prefer the 85mm over the 50mm, I was curious to see a comparative - where the 50mm did not deliver as good as the 85mm.
Click to expand...

Both are quite capable. Personally, I think the difference is in the DoF and bokeh. The 50mm f/1.4 is very soft at 1.4 but sharpens up by f/2.0. The problem is that 50mm f/2.0 doesn't squash the background that well at f/2.0, since it's a wider lens.

The 85mm is very sharp right out to f/1.8 AND can kill the background to very pleasant watercolours down to f/2.2 or further and remains perfectly sharp throughout this range.

This is the difference.

My 80-200 f/2.8 (which I use in the 85 focal range) is tack sharp at 2.8 and also has has that "something" that isn't there with the 50mm f/1.4 and it's a full stop and a third slower than the 85 and isn't nearly as sharp...
 
SecurityTheatre said:
Both are quite capable. Personally, I think the difference is in the DoF and bokeh. The 50mm f/1.4 is very soft at 1.4 but sharpens up by f/2.0. The problem is that 50mm f/2.0 doesn't squash the background that well at f/2.0, since it's a wider lens.

The 85mm is very sharp right out to f/1.8 AND can kill the background to very pleasant watercolours down to f/2.2 or further and remains perfectly sharp throughout this range.

This is the difference.

My 80-200 f/2.8 (which I use in the 85 focal range) is tack sharp at 2.8 and also has has that "something" that isn't there with the 50mm f/1.4 and it's a full stop and a third slower than the 85 and isn't nearly as sharp...
Click to expand...
Great analysis - makes sense now, thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top