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

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 02 Jan 2010 (Saturday) 21:14
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

85 1.8 seems not sharp

 
Absolutely ­ Fabulous
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,699 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
Jan 08, 2010 11:07 |  #91

bohdank wrote in post #9351665 (external link)
Good for you..... I would think, based on that info, you did have a problem with the 85/1.8

Let us know how it turns out.

thanks. I may be upgrading them the 135 will be on my list anyway:p we'll see

I think 50 on the crop is too short but maybe 85 on FF will grow on me.


http://www.belovedlove​photography.com (external link)my website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Jan 08, 2010 11:14 |  #92

Absolutely Fabulous wrote in post #9351796 (external link)
tI think 50 on the crop is too short but maybe 85 on FF will grow on me.

You do realize that a 50mm lens on a crop body will look very much like a 85mm lens on a full-frame body?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Absolutely ­ Fabulous
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,699 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
Jan 08, 2010 11:17 |  #93

egordon99 wrote in post #9351846 (external link)
You do realize that a 50mm lens on a crop body will look very much like a 85mm lens on a full-frame body?

yes that is why I made the comment. LOL I love my 85 on my crop, if I go to FF I will want a 135, so the 85 may not get as much use.

I've been told though that the 85 may seem different on the FF (less DOF I think I was told, can't remember, too early for me) So IDK anymore if it's my fav FL, if that makes sense.


http://www.belovedlove​photography.com (external link)my website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
anthony11
Goldmember
Avatar
2,148 posts
Joined Mar 2009
     
Jan 08, 2010 11:34 |  #94
bannedPermanently

short5 wrote in post #9348180 (external link)
It seems you have gotten lots of advice, some good some people just wanting to see their words on the web and of course the occasional person trying to make themselves feel big.

I've encountered a lot of that myself. Despite me not having shot film for 30 years and being grizzled, my results improved a lot when Canon serviced the AF module in my body, screwed up and then fixed my lenses, and when I ignored those telling me to use One-Shot AF.


5D2, 24-105L, 85mm f/1.8, MP960, HG21, crumbling G6+R72, Brownian toddler

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
anthony11
Goldmember
Avatar
2,148 posts
Joined Mar 2009
     
Jan 08, 2010 11:43 |  #95
bannedPermanently

artyH wrote in post #9350904 (external link)
When you order the tripod, pick up a Canon cable release as well. The cable release is not absolutely necessary, but it is inexpensive and convenient.

... or a Cleon Plato RF remote.

I don't think you realize how shallow the DOF is with that lens at typical portrait distances.

I picked up an app called PhotoBuddy for my phone that's great for DoF calculations.


5D2, 24-105L, 85mm f/1.8, MP960, HG21, crumbling G6+R72, Brownian toddler

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jan 08, 2010 13:29 |  #96

Absolutely Fabulous wrote in post #9351865 (external link)
yes that is why I made the comment. LOL I love my 85 on my crop, if I go to FF I will want a 135, so the 85 may not get as much use.

I've been told though that the 85 may seem different on the FF (less DOF I think I was told, can't remember, too early for me) So IDK anymore if it's my fav FL, if that makes sense.

I thought the same thing...loved the 85 on a crop and thought I was going to buy the 135 immediately after I got the 5D. Turned out the 85 got a lot of use but in a different way... I put off buying the 135 solely because I discovered a different way/style to shoot poeple with the 85 on a FF and didn't see a huge need for the 135. I did eventually get the 135 but I still use the 85 quite a lot.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elader
Goldmember
Avatar
2,374 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Maryland
     
Jan 08, 2010 15:49 |  #97

bohdank wrote in post #9352702 (external link)
I thought the same thing...loved the 85 on a crop and thought I was going to buy the 135 immediately after I got the 5D. Turned out the 85 got a lot of use but in a different way... I put off buying the 135 solely because I discovered a different way/style to shoot poeple with the 85 on a FF and didn't see a huge need for the 135. I did eventually get the 135 but I still use the 85 quite a lot.


yup, me too. I loved the 85 on both crop and FF cams. Bought and sold the 135 actually. I do use the 70-200 for headshots on FF. Never used it for that on the crop cam.


Eric
FJR1300 rider
5D mkIII and 1D MkIII

16-35L | 24-105L | 70-200L f/2.8IS | 85 f/1.8 / 50 f.1,4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Jan 08, 2010 16:00 |  #98

My 70-200 has been far more usefull on a FF than it was on crop for me.

I basically only used it for concerts on a crop... I do miss the reach for concerts. Contemplating a 300F4IS.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luizesg
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Feb 2010
     
Apr 27, 2010 20:26 |  #99

I'd like to revive this thread since I got the same problem repoted in the first post with the same lens.

I bougth a canon 85mm at B&H and received it 3 weeks ago. I like portraits a lot and that was the reason I've choosen it. The problem is that I couldn't get tack sharp pictures as the ones I used to see in many places including POTN. Firstly I thought it had something to do with my skills in handhelding the camera when using really wide apertures, but after a hundred blurred pictures I've decided to figure out what was the problem and thought of using the most precise way to test it I could figure.

The blue circle was the point where I carefully focused using center AF

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3241/4558852867_d3e4f4c878.jpg

I took this picture using f 1.8 at 1.58m distance (used a ruler), camera mounted on a tripod, mirror lock on, trigger cabled. The page was at ~45o inclination.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,406 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3425
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Apr 27, 2010 20:57 |  #100

Luizesg wrote in post #10078883 (external link)
I'd like to revive this thread since I got the same problem repoted in the first post with the same lens.

I bougth a canon 85mm at B&H and received it 3 weeks ago. I like portraits a lot and that was the reason I've choosen it. The problem is that I couldn't get tack sharp pictures as the ones I used to see in many places including POTN. Firstly I thought it had something to do with my skills in handhelding the camera when using really wide apertures, but after a hundred blurred pictures I've decided to figure out what was the problem and thought of using the most precise way to test it I could figure.

The blue circle was the point where I carefully focused using center AF
QUOTED IMAGE

I took this picture using f 1.8 at 1.58m distance (used a ruler), camera mounted on a tripod, mirror lock on, trigger cabled. The page was at ~45o inclination.


if the blue circle(the one below "escoles de moda") is what you focused on i don't see how you used the center point for focus....unless this is a crop...but if it is, i don't know why you wouldn't have gone tighter...assuming you're on a crop camera the dof would only be about 2.2cm...

either way i might suggest to start a new thread...i'm guessing you'll get a whole bunch of responses to this one about the o.p. not posting shots about their kid...blah, blah, blah...people sometimes miss when something is revisited down the road


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luizesg
Hatchling
5 posts
Joined Feb 2010
     
Apr 28, 2010 07:46 |  #101

DreDaze wrote in post #10079079 (external link)
if the blue circle(the one below "escoles de moda") is what you focused on i don't see how you used the center point for focus....unless this is a crop...but if it is, i don't know why you wouldn't have gone tighter...assuming you're on a crop camera the dof would only be about 2.2cm...

either way i might suggest to start a new thread...i'm guessing you'll get a whole bunch of responses to this one about the o.p. not posting shots about their kid...blah, blah, blah...people sometimes miss when something is revisited down the road

Yes, I've focused in the blue circle as you said. The picture is a crop because I thought it wouldn't be possible to post a 6mb image in this forum. As for posting it in a new thread, I just used this because I thought the issue was related to the initial post. I own a canon T1i (1x6).

I've expected to get a thin dof, that's not the question. My doubt is why the blue circle area was not at the center of focus. In the picture is possible to see that it is at the back of the focus field. Yesterday, after posting my first message I shot again, but this time the camera was at about 12 feets (4m) distance.
In this case I noticed that the problem was not so critical.

Any suggestion?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Methodical
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,886 posts
Gallery: 238 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3647
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Where ever I lay my hat is my home
     
Apr 28, 2010 08:17 |  #102

Just an FYI. Chuck Westfall (Canon guy) suggest not shooting at an angle to judge focus accuracy. He talks about this when doing the micro AF adjustment but it might apply for all focus related tests...just something to think about.

http://digitaljournali​st.org/issue0812/tech-tips.html (external link)


Gear
MethodicalImages (external link)
Flickr (external link)
"Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alpha_1976
Goldmember
Avatar
3,961 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2009
Location: USA
     
Apr 28, 2010 08:24 |  #103

It's revived but with pics which is good.


I know more about gear than I know about photography :p
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott_Quier
Senior Member
888 posts
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Newport News, VA
     
Apr 28, 2010 09:42 |  #104

Methodical wrote in post #10081431 (external link)
Just an FYI. Chuck Westfall (Canon guy) suggest not shooting at an angle to judge focus accuracy. He talks about this when doing the micro AF adjustment but it might apply for all focus related tests...just something to think about.

http://digitaljournali​st.org/issue0812/tech-tips.html (external link)

I've read/heard this as well (though I've not yet read the indicated link). My own experience has shown that a target that is on an angle to the camera does not produce consistant, repeatable results. It's an especially poor choice in less than brilliant light.

The above should not be taken as a jab at Luizesg (or anyone else), just a general comment.

I tested this, using one camera and one lens and in good light (direct sun on a high contrast target). Process was to mount the camera on tripod, manually un-focus the lens then use "back-button" focus to bring the target into focus, then trigger with cable release. Repeat. Out of five shots, no two had exactly the same focus.

I got much more consistant results when I performed the same test but used a high-contrast target that was mounted (approximately) parallel to the plane of the sensor. Unfocus the lens. "Back-button" focus the lens and trigger the shutter.

The thought here is that the focus point may (or may not) exactly co-incide with the "red box" in the viewfinder. With the target parallel to the sensor, a lot of that approximation/guess-work is taken out of the equation.


Scott
Operation: Love Reunited (external link)
Check out my blog (external link) Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,406 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3425
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Apr 28, 2010 09:59 |  #105

Luizesg wrote in post #10081298 (external link)
Yes, I've focused in the blue circle as you said. The picture is a crop because I thought it wouldn't be possible to post a 6mb image in this forum. As for posting it in a new thread, I just used this because I thought the issue was related to the initial post. I own a canon T1i (1x6).

I've expected to get a thin dof, that's not the question. My doubt is why the blue circle area was not at the center of focus. In the picture is possible to see that it is at the back of the focus field. Yesterday, after posting my first message I shot again, but this time the camera was at about 12 feets (4m) distance.
In this case I noticed that the problem was not so critical.

Any suggestion?


you could try shooting batteries on a diagonal...see if it's really front focusing like it seems


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

12,583 views & 0 likes for this thread, 48 members have posted to it and it is followed by 2 members.
85 1.8 seems not sharp
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is monmon
373 guests, 121 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.