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 News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions
Thread started 01 Jan 2017 (Sunday) 03:43
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Old lenses that Canon should probably replace

 
quickben
THREAD ­ STARTER
Fairy Gapped
quickben's Avatar
Joined Mar 2004
Whitley Bay, UK
Apr 02, 2017 18:05 |  #16

DaviSto wrote in post #18317821 (external link)
Actually, I think the 50 F/1.4 is a great lens ... although commonly, casually and easily maligned anywhere you care to look. Aside from being a little fragile, it is hard to fault it. It makes great images.

I've had it twice, firstly on crop (10D) I liked the focal length but it constantly missed focus at f1.4 when shooting anything that moved. Ring-type USM is rubbish, frankly. Tried it again on FF (6D) and found I just didn't like the focal length and it still felt badly put together. Pretty bad CA wide open as well. Upgraded to the 85 1.8 and I'm much happier.

There's just much better alternatives now if you like that focal length.


Fighting the war against the unnecessary use of the Book Worthy Smiley
My name is Gary, not Ben.
6D 24-70/2.8VC 85/1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
ma11rats
Senior Member
ma11rats's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Az
Apr 02, 2017 18:18 |  #17

I think the 85f1.8 flares terribly and loses way too much contrast when shooting near light(sunset sessions, receptions with OCF). I owned and sold both the 85f1.8 & 100f2 because of it. It's AF suuuuuucks in these circumstances. For as fast as they focus, they still couldn't lock on. And being as I shoot most of my family/engagement sessions at that time of day(leaving for one right after typing this in fact) I crave better flare control. Heck that was one of the reason(weight too) why I sold my 70-200f2.8IS mk1. Even though the 135L also flares/loses contrast too. My the 35f2IS, which is much more likely to get stray light into it, handles it worlds better!

I owned the 50f1.8, sold it after 3 months as my metal mount original 50f1.8 was sharper at f2.8.


www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)
5D, 6D, 80D, 35f2IS, 135L, T 85f1.8VC, T 24-70f2.8VC, Tok 12-28f4

LOG IN TO REPLY
quickben
THREAD ­ STARTER
Fairy Gapped
quickben's Avatar
Joined Mar 2004
Whitley Bay, UK
Apr 02, 2017 18:35 |  #18

ma11rats wrote in post #18317835 (external link)
I think the 85f1.8 flares terribly and loses way too much contrast when shooting near light(sunset sessions, receptions with OCF). I owned and sold both the 85f1.8 & 100f2 because of it. It's AF suuuuuucks in these circumstances. For as fast as they focus, they still couldn't lock on. And being as I shoot most of my family/engagement sessions at that time of day(leaving for one right after typing this in fact) I crave better flare control. Heck that was one of the reason(weight too) why I sold my 70-200f2.8IS mk1. Even though the 135L also flares/loses contrast too. My the 35f2IS, which is much more likely to get stray light into it, handles it worlds better!

I owned the 50f1.8, sold it after 3 months as my metal mount original 50f1.8 was sharper at f2.8.

I'll take your word for it. I've never had this problem that I recall, but then I rarely shoot into the sun with this lens. You're right about the 35/2 IS, though. It must be modern lens coatings and manufacturing techniques.


Fighting the war against the unnecessary use of the Book Worthy Smiley
My name is Gary, not Ben.
6D 24-70/2.8VC 85/1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
DaviSto
... sorry. I got carried away!
DaviSto's Avatar
Joined Nov 2016
Abuja Nigeria
Post has been edited 7 months ago by DaviSto.
Apr 02, 2017 18:37 |  #19

quickben wrote in post #18317824 (external link)
I've had it twice, firstly on crop (10D) I liked the focal length but it constantly missed focus at f1.4 when shooting anything that moved. Ring-type USM is rubbish, frankly. Tried it again on FF (6D) and found I just didn't like the focal length and it still felt badly put together. Pretty bad CA wide open as well. Upgraded to the 85 1.8 and I'm much happier.

There's just much better alternatives now if you like that focal length.

My copy is just totally spot on. It focuses fast and it focuses accurately. As long as I remember not to mess it around with unnecessary filters (why bother when the front element is so deeply recessed?), it scarcely vignettes. When I MFA'd my faster lenses, most of my 'L' lenses required hardly any adjustment ... but the 50 F/1.4 required none at all ... totally zilch.

It weighs hardly anything. It renders colour beautifully. It's as sharp as anybody realistically requires. It's a lens that just delivers.

Line me and my lenses up against the wall ... point something harmful in my direction ... most everything of what I own has been sacrificed, gone and long handed over, before I start pleading to be left with just the 50 F/1.4.


Comment and (constructive) criticism always welcome.

LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
FarmerTed1971's Avatar
Joined Sep 2013
Portland, OR
Post has been edited 7 months ago by FarmerTed1971.
Apr 02, 2017 18:48 |  #20

The key to the 85 1.8 is the hood... which is optional... and I don't think people tend to buy it since it is so expensive ($30 retail).


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - 18-55 - 35 f2 WR - 50-140 - 6D - 135L - 70-200 f4L IS - 600EX-RT x2 - ST-E3-RT - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
quickben
THREAD ­ STARTER
Fairy Gapped
quickben's Avatar
Joined Mar 2004
Whitley Bay, UK
Apr 02, 2017 19:14 |  #21

DaviSto wrote in post #18317850 (external link)
My copy is just totally spot on. It focuses fast and it focuses accurately. As long as I remember not to mess it around with unnecessary filters (why bother when the front element is so deeply recessed?), it scarcely vignettes. When I MFA'd my faster lenses, most of my 'L' lenses required hardly any adjustment ... but the 50 F/1.4 required none at all ... totally zilch.

It weighs hardly anything. It renders colour beautifully. It's as sharp as anybody realistically requires. It's a lens that just delivers.

Line me and my lenses up against the wall ... point something harmful in my direction ... most everything of what I own has been sacrificed, gone and long handed over, before I start pleading to be left with just the 50 F/1.4.

Okay.... Davisto likes his 50 1.4.

A lot.

I think it's performance is about on par with it's price tag. Although it's build quality is not.

By anyone's measure it's due an update, anyhow. I doubt they're selling many these days.

However, I'm more interested in an update to the wider primes, as previously said.


Fighting the war against the unnecessary use of the Book Worthy Smiley
My name is Gary, not Ben.
6D 24-70/2.8VC 85/1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
quickben
THREAD ­ STARTER
Fairy Gapped
quickben's Avatar
Joined Mar 2004
Whitley Bay, UK
Apr 02, 2017 19:15 |  #22

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18317857 (external link)
The key to the 85 1.8 is the hood... which is optional... and I don't think people tend to buy it since it is so expensive ($30 retail).

Canon's pricing policy for non-L lens hoods is hilarious.


Fighting the war against the unnecessary use of the Book Worthy Smiley
My name is Gary, not Ben.
6D 24-70/2.8VC 85/1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
ma11rats
Senior Member
ma11rats's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Az
Post has been edited 7 months ago by ma11rats.
Apr 02, 2017 21:44 |  #23

quickben wrote in post #18317881 (external link)
Canon's pricing policy for non-L lens hoods is hilarious.

My 35F2 IS is a generic from ebay, I think JJC? $15 or so I think.


www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)
5D, 6D, 80D, 35f2IS, 135L, T 85f1.8VC, T 24-70f2.8VC, Tok 12-28f4

LOG IN TO REPLY
quickben
THREAD ­ STARTER
Fairy Gapped
quickben's Avatar
Joined Mar 2004
Whitley Bay, UK
Apr 02, 2017 21:48 |  #24

Yes, I've heard that they fit really well and look nice and discrete, almost OEM.

I rarely use hoods, though. Only if flare becomes an issue.


Fighting the war against the unnecessary use of the Book Worthy Smiley
My name is Gary, not Ben.
6D 24-70/2.8VC 85/1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
ma11rats
Senior Member
ma11rats's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Az
Post has been edited 7 months ago by ma11rats.
Apr 02, 2017 21:51 |  #25

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18317857 (external link)
The key to the 85 1.8 is the hood... which is optional... and I don't think people tend to buy it since it is so expensive ($30 retail).

I agree with you! At my family session today, there was a photog with a 70-200f2.8(some version) with the lens hood on...reversed. It was sunny where she was shooting, definitely had light hitting that front element. I don't know... why even pack it along? I always use my lens hood, even if there's no sun out. I use a black rapid strap and I like the extra protection for the front element. It's the main reason why I hesitate to use my variable ND filter, always flare/ghosting to worry about. So I only use it mid-day, not near sunset.


www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)
5D, 6D, 80D, 35f2IS, 135L, T 85f1.8VC, T 24-70f2.8VC, Tok 12-28f4

LOG IN TO REPLY
ma11rats
Senior Member
ma11rats's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Az
Apr 03, 2017 10:58 |  #26

I want an 85mm replacement, preferably f1.8 IS, that holds as much contrast with as little flaring as the 35f2IS. This is a SOOC -> web sized jpeg(no edits) from yesterday's session. The only flare (that's near his shin) could easily be taken out and there's a very very small bit of ghosting near the water coming out of the fountain. But if the rumored (CR) 85mm f1.4L IS is the only version coming out it's going to be way too expensive for me to afford any time soon.

I would love to have a light weight 35/85 IS combo. Add a 50 f1.4 replacement for those that like that focal length. Come on Canon we want to give you our money!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

www.matthewbeutelphoto​graphy.com (external link)
5D, 6D, 80D, 35f2IS, 135L, T 85f1.8VC, T 24-70f2.8VC, Tok 12-28f4

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

2,805 views & 10 likes for this thread
Old lenses that Canon should probably replace
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions


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 0.00114 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is locketlover13
757 guests, 291 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016