Comparison 85L II vs Sigma 85mm

Hi PoTN, I just started to write reviews and comparisons between lenses, hoping to contribute a little to the photography community.

This morning I wrote a draft on blogspot and I am looking forward to receive criticism and suggestion on how to improve it.

Here's my blog

http://cjhfengphoto.bl​ogspot.com/

I know there has been many reviews about 85L II vs Sigma 85mm f1.4, but I feel the more is probably the better. And I think it's the opportunity to write the comparison while I have good copies of the two lenses.

There are probably some minor grammatical errors and I will fix them as soon as possible.
What I want to know is that what do you wish to know more about the two lenses? What are other aspects should I compare?

Thanks.

Test the lens at different distances. Virtually all sigmadud 50mm f/1.4 primes i've owned or tested seemed to have inaccurate focus as the distance grew from the subject.

I see, I guess I should take the two lenses out and shoot.

Try and get the comparison images side by side so one can see them at the same time.

For bokeh.... look for more difficult backgrounds like trees and other busy backgrounds and not just specular highlights.

One conclusion you draw is that people who can afford the 85L will go for it. I owned both the MKI and MKII versions and found neither sharp at 1.2.

I sold both and bought the sigma. I liked it but eventually sold it also as the new 70-200 is just so good I found I never used the 85.

MDJAK wrote in post #13295511
One conclusion you draw is that people who can afford the 85L will go for it. I owned both the MKI and MKII versions and found neither sharp at 1.2.

I sold both and bought the sigma. I liked it but eventually sold it also as the new 70-200 is just so good I found I never used the 85.

Was Sigma sharper than your previous two copies of 85L?

A lens that isn't sharp at f/1.2? One would think that when shooting at such apertures, sharpness isn't exactly the top priority, especially since almost nothing is in focus in the first place. The 85L and 70-200 are different tools for different jobs, no reason why someone can't have both.

In your comparison you wrote that the 85L is 1/2 a stop faster, but f/1.4 -> f/1.2 is 1/3rd a stop. However, as you pointed out correctly "What we can see is that Sigma has a higher contrast and image tends to look a bit darker than the other two...", the Sigma is actually slower than the rated f/1.4 (possibly f/1.6) as confirmed by various threads and comparisons in the past, so in practice there should be a 2/3rds stop difference between them if comparing exposure at max. aperture.

I actually managed to tell which was the Sigma picture immediately by the blur quality.

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #13296190
In your comparison you wrote that the 85L is 1/2 a stop faster, but f/1.4 -> f/1.2 is 1/3rd a stop.

In fact I did the math.
1.2 to 1.4 is 1/2 stop.
Let's use power of square root of 2 to calculate the f-stop number.
We start at sqrt(2)^0 power which is F1.0
Then sqrt(2)^1 power which is F1.4

If you sqrt(2)^0.5 power, you will get approximately F1.2 as a number.

for 4/3 = 1.333333... and 5/3 = 1.66666....
sqrt(2)^1.333 that is 1.6 and then sqrt(2)^1.6666 that is f1.8 and sqrt(2)^2 would just be 2.

Sqrt(2)^0.6666 f-stop lens doesn't exist, that is a F1.3 lens. (approximately)

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #13296190
However, as you pointed out correctly "What we can see is that Sigma has a higher contrast and image tends to look a bit darker than the other two...", the Sigma is actually slower than the rated f/1.4 (possibly f/1.6) as confirmed by various threads and comparisons in the past, so in practice there should be a 2/3rds stop difference between them if comparing exposure at max. aperture.

This is interesting. How about Canon's? 85L II is practically 1.2?

I am still deciding between the 2....been wanting to upgrade from my 85 1.8 to either one.

My wallet tells me to go with the Sigma yet my mind really want to own the Keg....:P

I think you need to have more representative shots I looks like you were using iPhone

MDJAK wrote in post #13295511
One conclusion you draw is that people who can afford the 85L will go for it. I owned both the MKI and MKII versions and found neither sharp at 1.2.

Never owned the MKI version but the MK2 was tack sharp right out of the box no focus adjustment necessary... hell there is even a thread just for 85l shots taken at 1.2.

85L @ 1.2 only thread

ArinX wrote in post #13296446
Never owned the MKI version but the MK2 was tack sharp right out of the box no focus adjustment necessary... hell there is even a thread just for 85l shots taken at 1.2.

85L @ 1.2 only thread

Yeah, my 85L is probably sharper wide-open than my Sigma 50 1.4 @ f/2. The 85L gets crazy sharp at F/2. Not only is it extremely sharp at f/1.2, it's very accurate AND consistent. It's almost worth the ultra-slow AF speed.

calvinjhfeng wrote in post #13296358
In fact I did the math.
1.2 to 1.4 is 1/2 stop.
Let's use power of square root of 2 to calculate the f-stop number.
We start at sqrt(2)^0 power which is F1.0
Then sqrt(2)^1 power which is F1.4

If you sqrt(2)^0.5 power, you will get approximately F1.2 as a number.

for 4/3 = 1.333333... and 5/3 = 1.66666....
sqrt(2)^1.333 that is 1.6 and then sqrt(2)^1.6666 that is f1.8 and sqrt(2)^2 would just be 2.

Sqrt(2)^0.6666 f-stop lens doesn't exist, that is a F1.3 lens. (approximately)

F-numbers are truncated, so f/1.2 can be either 1/2 or 1/3 stop faster than f/1.4. In practice, it's 1/3.

Ferrari_Alex wrote in post #13296392
I think you need to have more representative shots I looks like you were using iPhone

I think that's the idea, to use the lens with the most mediocre way to distinguish its characteristics.

If I were to shoot the "representative shots", those probably require post-process and precise timing, and many other things. That would take the idea of comparison away. Plus those representative shots can be easily found in the Lens Sample archive or flickr group page.

What I want to do here is just want to give people a brief idea on how does the two lenses render.

Earlier someone suggested I should go out and find some more complex backgrounds for the purpose of comparing bokeh. I think I will do that soon.

MOkoFOko wrote in post #13296465
Yeah, my 85L is probably sharper wide-open than my Sigma 50 1.4 @ f/2. The 85L gets crazy sharp at F/2. Not only is it extremely sharp at f/1.2, it's very accurate AND consistent. It's almost worth the ultra-slow AF speed.

I agreed that 85L II is crazy sharp.

I really think that sharpness should not be a deciding factor between Sigma 85 1.4 and 85L II.
Both lenses are tack sharp wide open because of their price tag.