Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 05 Jan 2012 (Thursday) 12:45
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

For portraits mostly, would 70-200 /f4 IS be that much better than 85 /1.8 ?

 
jwp721
Senior Member
771 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Raleigh, NC
Jan 05, 2012 14:45 |  #16

sambarino wrote in post #13652440external link
On a crop-body Canon at 15 feet:
85mm @ f/1.8 DOF = .63 feet
200mm @ f/4 DOF = .25 feet
Light is light. Physics is physics. Math is math.

I may just sell my 85 1.8 and acquire the 70-200L IS USM.

85mm at 15 feet gives you a field of view of about 3 feet by 4 feet..so you can get a 1/2 to 3/4 body shot while 200mm at 15 feet will give you a field of view of 1 foot by 2 feet... just enough for a head shot.

Every lens has a purpose and the 85mm 1.8 and all of the 70-200's are great lenses. Pick the lens that works the best for you.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Joined Mar 2008
Montreal, Quebec
Jan 05, 2012 14:52 |  #17

I have both the 85 and the 70-200 f4 IS, and the latter is by far the more useful lens. If I had to sell one, I'd have no hesitation in selling the 85. As for the utility of IS on longer zooms, I used to have a 70-200 f2.8 non-IS, and sold it to get the f4 IS version. One reason was the difference in weight, but the other, equally important reason for making the change was the lack of IS on my f2.8. The IS on the f4 version I now have more than makes up for the additional stop, and I get far more keepers in low light portrait situations using IS than shooting at f2.8 without IS. The f4 IS is an outstanding lens in every respect, and you're unlikely to regret buying it.


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Websiteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
T2i4me
Goldmember
T2i4me's Avatar
2,902 posts
Joined Jun 2011
Surf City, CA
Jan 05, 2012 15:12 |  #18

Talley wrote in post #13652147external link
I bought a F4 non IS 3 months ago for full price 709+ tax and tomorrow I'll be putting it up for sale. but now I have an IS version I got from a guy on this site.

I'll do some tripod testing this weekend for me to determine which one is sharper but my initial tests show that the nonIS may have the advantage. and yes they go for ~525/950 respectively. I also think when the IS is on the image suffers.

Would like to see that test as I'm contemplating switching over to the F4 IS myself.


-- Eric --
5DC - T2i - 100-400 L IS - 70-200 F4 L - 17-40 L - EF 85 1.8 - EF-S 10-22 - EF-S 15-85 IS - EF-S 60 macro - 430EX II

LOG IN TO REPLY
steveathome
Goldmember
steveathome's Avatar
2,174 posts
Joined Mar 2006
UK
Jan 05, 2012 15:16 |  #19

The 85mm 1.8 is a good lens for the price but it does suffer badly from purple fringing, plus its not often you would take at portrait at f1.8.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Talley's Avatar
10,121 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Dec 2011
Houston
Jan 05, 2012 15:22 |  #20

T2i4me wrote in post #13652637external link
Would like to see that test as I'm contemplating switching over to the F4 IS myself.

Ya I'll do it, I'll make a seperate thread about it.


5D4 |12mm 2.8 FE | 16-35L 2.8 III | Σ 35A | Σ 50A | Σ 85A | 200 F2 IS | 1.4xIII
X-T20 | X-E3 | 18/2 | 35/1.4 | 56/1.2 | 18-135
My Gear Archive

LOG IN TO REPLY
Andy_Cam
Senior Member
Andy_Cam's Avatar
385 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Netherlands
Jan 05, 2012 15:45 |  #21

I've got a 70-200 f2.8IS MKII and just treated myself to the 85 f1.8 as I miss having a smaller lens for indoor use as well at parties. I love my 70-200 but the 85mm has earn a place in my bag too.

If I could only choose one, then the 85mm would go again.


Gear | flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Amamba
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Amamba's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
SE MI
Jan 05, 2012 15:48 |  #22

steveathome wrote in post #13652661external link
The 85mm 1.8 is a good lens for the price but it does suffer badly from purple fringing, plus its not often you would take at portrait at f1.8.

I don't have PF issues with it. My only complaint is that it's not very versatile. I am not a big prime lover. Or rather, I really like tele's. Of all my three lenses, 55-250 gets used the most, especially on the outside. And I have quite a few great portraits with this lens.

If Canon had a 55-250 f/4 IS with the IQ of 70-200 /F4 IS, I'd snatch it in a heartbeat, as it would provide me with focal range I would use probably 70% of time. However at 70mm it's getting too tight for many in-house shots, and too close to 85.


Ex-Canon shooter. Now Sony Nex.
Life Lessons: KISS. RTFM. Don't sweat the small stuff.
My Gear Listexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
mtimber
Cream of the Crop
mtimber's Avatar
5,011 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Cambs, UK
Jan 05, 2012 15:52 |  #23

Amamba wrote in post #13652851external link
I don't have PF issues with it. My only complaint is that it's not very versatile. I am not a big prime lover. Or rather, I really like tele's. Of all my three lenses, 55-250 gets used the most, especially on the outside. And I have quite a few great portraits with this lens.

If Canon had a 55-250 f/4 IS with the IQ of 70-200 /F4 IS, I'd snatch it in a heartbeat, as it would provide me with focal range I would use probably 70% of time. However at 70mm it's getting too tight for many in-house shots, and too close to 85.

I will say it again. :-)

Add the nifty fifty to the 70-200 f4is and you are good to go..


"I have applied for jobs at National Geographic, Sports Illustrated and Playboy. The phone should start ringing any minute now" (Curtis N)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Talley's Avatar
10,121 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Dec 2011
Houston
Jan 05, 2012 16:09 |  #24

Amamba wrote in post #13652851external link
I However at 70mm it's getting too tight for many in-house shots, and too close to 85.

Another big reason for me going FF. I feel I could keep that lens on alot more!


5D4 |12mm 2.8 FE | 16-35L 2.8 III | Σ 35A | Σ 50A | Σ 85A | 200 F2 IS | 1.4xIII
X-T20 | X-E3 | 18/2 | 35/1.4 | 56/1.2 | 18-135
My Gear Archive

LOG IN TO REPLY
nonick
Goldmember
1,587 posts
Joined Jun 2009
NYC
Jan 05, 2012 16:11 |  #25

Get the 70-200 4L IS. This lens provides versatile portrait range. It's sharpness is okay sharp but not impressively sharp at f/4 (when compares to 70-200 2.8L IS MkII,17-55 2.8IS and 35/1.4L) and it AF is fast when light is good.

85mm on FF will be more ideal for portrait. 135 to me is a little too long unless shooting outdoor and you want to keep an distance from the subject. My 85/1.8 was very very sharp even at f/1.8 but the purple fringe at wide apretures was severe and this is a known characteristic (issue) of the lens and most of the fast lenses.

So for me, 70-200 4L IS will be the choice if I have to pick from these two lenses.

Also get a good flash if you dont already have one. The 70-200 4L IS AF sucks in low light and indoor.


Gear|Searching for 7DII, Buying 5DIII 35L II, 24-70 2.8L IS

LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
FEChariot's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
Jan 05, 2012 16:31 as a reply to post 13651966 |  #26

There is not always space to use 200mm though. A lot depends on subject to background distance too. If you have stuff in the background just outside the DOF, the 85 will give more blur at f2 than 200mm @f4, but with much further removed backgrounds the 200 will do better at f4.

I have both of these and I would not give up either to trade for another. I say save up for the f4 IS and keep the 85/1.8. Or keep the 85 and just get the f4 non IS now.

Just an FYI I recently was doing MFA and test shots with the 24-105, 85/1.8 and 70-200/4 IS and at 85mm f4 and 5.6, my three copies are indistinguisable from one another so I wouldn't use sharpness as a deciding factor.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Amamba
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Amamba's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
SE MI
Jan 05, 2012 16:58 |  #27

mtimber wrote in post #13652888external link
I will say it again. :-)

Add the nifty fifty to the 70-200 f4is and you are good to go..

I had the Nifty and sold it. It's got very good optics but the focusing mechanism does it's best to negate this. For the fast prime it was too unreliable in poor lighting, and I don't think it was just my copy.


Ex-Canon shooter. Now Sony Nex.
Life Lessons: KISS. RTFM. Don't sweat the small stuff.
My Gear Listexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Amamba
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Amamba's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
SE MI
Jan 07, 2012 18:28 |  #28

FEChariot wrote in post #13653126external link
There is not always space to use 200mm though. A lot depends on subject to background distance too. If you have stuff in the background just outside the DOF, the 85 will give more blur at f2 than 200mm @f4, but with much further removed backgrounds the 200 will do better at f4.

I have both of these and I would not give up either to trade for another. I say save up for the f4 IS and keep the 85/1.8. Or keep the 85 and just get the f4 non IS now.

Just an FYI I recently was doing MFA and test shots with the 24-105, 85/1.8 and 70-200/4 IS and at 85mm f4 and 5.6, my three copies are indistinguisable from one another so I wouldn't use sharpness as a deciding factor.


Well, "if in doubt take it out"... just took 85 for a spin in the zoo and now I want to keep it.

I may just rent the 70-200 & see if I want to do the switch.


Ex-Canon shooter. Now Sony Nex.
Life Lessons: KISS. RTFM. Don't sweat the small stuff.
My Gear Listexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
ben805
Goldmember
1,192 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Jan 07, 2012 19:05 |  #29

better versatility yes, but the prime is better in low light when you need more speed, if I were you I'd keep the 85 1.8 and get the 70-200 4.0 IS to replace the 55-250 instead.


5D Mark III, Samyang 14mm, 35LII, 85L II, 100L IS Macro, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II. 580EX, AB400, AB800.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Amamba
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Amamba's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
SE MI
Jan 07, 2012 20:30 |  #30

ben805 wrote in post #13664967external link
better versatility yes, but the prime is better in low light when you need more speed, if I were you I'd keep the 85 1.8 and get the 70-200 4.0 IS to replace the 55-250 instead.

That's what I may end up doing. It's not even more speed but simply the sheer quality of portraits it produces. Both the sharpness of the subject and bokeh. I have so many keepers from just one session it's unreal (for me at least). I need to take it out more often.


Ex-Canon shooter. Now Sony Nex.
Life Lessons: KISS. RTFM. Don't sweat the small stuff.
My Gear Listexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

5,643 views & 0 likes for this thread
For portraits mostly, would 70-200 /f4 IS be that much better than 85 /1.8 ?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00237 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is J4T4lyfe
778 guests, 317 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016