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
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 15 Nov 2011 (Tuesday) 05:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

85L - why did you sell yours?

 
edge100
Goldmember
1,920 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 18, 2011 16:52 |  #106

malla1962 wrote in post #13419088 (external link)
After using mine in a studio stopped down to F8 I was finding my 24-70L was doing just as good a job and ouside wide open in bright lite the CA was bad when shooting wide open so it had to go.

My old 35-70 f/3.5-4.5 P.O.S. was great at f/8.

That's hardly why one buys an 85L.


Street and editorial photography in Toronto, Canada (external link)
Mirrorless: Fujifilm X-Pro1
Film: Leica MP | Leica M2 | CV Nokton 35/1.4 | CV Nokton 40 f/1.4 | Leitz Summitar 50 f/2 | Canon 50 f/1.2 LTM | Mamiya 7 | Mamiya 80 f/4.0 | Mamiya 150 f/4.5 | Mamiya 43 f/4.5
How to get good colour from C-41 film scans (external link)

Digitizing film with a digital camera (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Nov 18, 2011 16:59 |  #107

edge100 wrote in post #13419214 (external link)
My old 35-70 f/3.5-4.5 P.O.S. was great at f/8.

That's hardly why one buys an 85L.

And thats why I sold it and that was what the OP was asking.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s2kennyc
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Likes: 237
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Southern CA
     
Nov 18, 2011 17:14 |  #108

m.shalaby wrote in post #13418909 (external link)
no, no no.... I own both and the 70-200 is an AWSOME STELLAR lens!

You keep making this turn into a 70-200 vs. 85L topic.

It's clear your trying to convince yourself you don't need the 85L, but there's this little bug on your shoulder telling you that your wrong... that the 85L is the better portait lens, and you know what Alex - I think by now you know it.

Your trying to make an event/sports lens "better" then a pure prime magic 85mm PORTRAIT lens.

Its not. They are completely different beast.

Agree with this statement here. ^

The 70-200 is a great overall lens. No one is saying it's not. I own one. I love it. But I also own the 85L and the 85L is the better portrait lens. It really is that simple. Its awesome. You don't need 3 threads to find this out. The people that own both are telling you this.


-Ken
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Nov 18, 2011 22:02 |  #109

s2kennyc wrote in post #13419300 (external link)
Agree with this statement here. ^

The 70-200 is a great overall lens. No one is saying it's not. I own one. I love it. But I also own the 85L and the 85L is the better portrait lens. It really is that simple. Its awesome. You don't need 3 threads to find this out. The people that own both are telling you this.

Exactly! :) You and Shalaby have nailed it on the head! :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,520 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 593
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Nov 19, 2011 14:05 |  #110

s2kennyc wrote in post #13419300 (external link)
Agree with this statement here. ^

The 70-200 is a great overall lens. No one is saying it's not. I own one. I love it. But I also own the 85L and the 85L is the better portrait lens. It really is that simple. Its awesome. You don't need 3 threads to find this out. The people that own both are telling you this.

Check this link out. Portraits with longer lenses look a lot different. For me, the 70-200 is a better portrait lens than the 85L because it goes to 200mm.

http://perkesphotograp​hy.blogspot.com/2010/1​2/50mm-vs-200mm.html (external link)


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Nov 19, 2011 14:41 |  #111

There is enough difference in his framing and position relative to his subject (he seems to shoot down with the 50 and eye level with the longer lens) giving it a different perspective that is not related to the differences between the lenses. In some, the subjects are not the same size either.

I get a bit annoyed when someone makes an effort to show a point and doesn't do it right.

Personally I prefer 85, even 135 to 200 for those types of shots but, each to their own.

I find the compressed "look" too clinical and sterile or, rather, more clinical and sterile. I would even use the word, more boring. Then again, I don't like 50mm, either.


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
edge100
Goldmember
1,920 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Nov 20, 2011 08:12 |  #112

JeffreyG wrote in post #13422719 (external link)
Check this link out. Portraits with longer lenses look a lot different. For me, the 70-200 is a better portrait lens than the 85L because it goes to 200mm.

http://perkesphotograp​hy.blogspot.com/2010/1​2/50mm-vs-200mm.html (external link)

I actually dislike the compressed look you get on portraits shot with @ 200mm.

And, of course, the difference in perspective is caused by the photographer being further away from the subject with the 200mm vs the 50mm. It has nothing at all to do with focal length.


Street and editorial photography in Toronto, Canada (external link)
Mirrorless: Fujifilm X-Pro1
Film: Leica MP | Leica M2 | CV Nokton 35/1.4 | CV Nokton 40 f/1.4 | Leitz Summitar 50 f/2 | Canon 50 f/1.2 LTM | Mamiya 7 | Mamiya 80 f/4.0 | Mamiya 150 f/4.5 | Mamiya 43 f/4.5
How to get good colour from C-41 film scans (external link)

Digitizing film with a digital camera (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeeTee
Goldmember
Avatar
1,286 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: London, UK
     
Nov 20, 2011 08:26 |  #113

s2kennyc wrote in post #13419300 (external link)
Agree with this statement here. ^

The 70-200 is a great overall lens. No one is saying it's not. I own one. I love it. But I also own the 85L and the 85L is the better portrait lens. It really is that simple. Its awesome. You don't need 3 threads to find this out. The people that own both are telling you this.

Own both, and as others that do, share the sentiment above.

Horses for courses, doesn't mean either can't run both races though.



5DmkII & 85L
and a bunch of other glass that rarely sees the light

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SOX ­ 404
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2006
Location: I'm a nomad
     
Nov 20, 2011 09:10 |  #114

Sold my 85L? No way. No reason for that.


AJ
1 x Canon 5DSR | 2 x Canon 5D2 | 8-15L | 16-35L | 17-40L (dead) | 50L | 85L | 100L | 135L | 180L | 70-200 2.8L IS
Aquatica UW Housing | INON Z240 | Ikelite DS-161 | Sola 600 | 2 x Sola 2000
My Flickr  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s2kennyc
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Likes: 237
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Southern CA
     
Nov 20, 2011 19:26 |  #115

JeffreyG wrote in post #13422719 (external link)
Check this link out. Portraits with longer lenses look a lot different. For me, the 70-200 is a better portrait lens than the 85L because it goes to 200mm.

http://perkesphotograp​hy.blogspot.com/2010/1​2/50mm-vs-200mm.html (external link)

I took a look at the site you linked. I've seen similar comparisons regarding focal length and compression that longer forcal length offers. But the samples that he provided had different composition altogether. Especially the first few sets.

I think the site confirms my reasoning for selling my 50mm awhile ago. :)

Both the 70-200 and 85L serve their purposes. I just prefer the 85L. And you prefer the 200mm which is perfectly great as well. If we all liked the same thing, then photography would be pretty boring.


-Ken
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jdizzle
Darth Noink
Avatar
69,419 posts
Likes: 56
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Harvesting Nano crystals
     
Nov 20, 2011 19:31 |  #116

s2kennyc wrote in post #13427992 (external link)
I took a look at the site you linked. I've seen similar comparisons regarding focal length and compression that longer forcal length offers. But the samples that he provided had different composition altogether. Especially the first few sets.

I think the site confirms my reasoning for selling my 50mm awhile ago. :)

Both the 70-200 and 85L serve their purposes. I just prefer the 85L. And you prefer the 200mm which is perfectly great as well. If we all liked the same thing, then photography would be pretty boring.

Trudat! :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xhack
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Edinburgh, Lothian
     
Nov 24, 2011 04:17 |  #117

Here's heresy: I got sucked in by the hype and bought one at the same time as my 70-200 2.8 IS. Used it a few times at weddings and for portraiture, but found I was rarely using it at the USP aperture. On analysis, it was going on the body as default, but I was quickly switching to the 70-200 which stayed on for the rest of the day. So I sold it, dropping a minimal amount in the process. Now, with the 100mm macro as my prime portraiture lens, I don't miss it at all.

But, oh boy, it did LOOK GOOD bolted on the front of a 5D . . .


~ Wallace
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ferrari_Alex
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,787 posts
Joined Nov 2007
     
Nov 24, 2011 11:19 |  #118

I know it might be a heresy, but did actually anybody tried how Zeiss 100 MP compares to 85L?


Alex || www.dylikowski.com (external link)
_______________
Canon 5D MKII | 24-105 f/4 IS L | 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L |Zeiss 35 f/1.4 ZE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MDJAK
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
24,722 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Nov 2004
Location: New York
     
Nov 24, 2011 11:26 |  #119

Not heresy. But you gotta be willing to manually focus, and in my brief experience trying, a split focus screen or tethered shooting is almost a must.

However, the real reason I returned to this thread is to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.

I suck, and that's probably why I sold both my 85L's. That lens will mercilessly show how bad one sucks. And it showed me in spades.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xhack
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Edinburgh, Lothian
     
Nov 24, 2011 11:44 |  #120

Amen. A steep learning curve - it took me three months' intensive to get on top of it. Even at 2-3 metres, DOF was razor-thin wide open, and keeper rate was abysmal. In high pressure situations it was blooming hard work and not very satisfying. The lens was probably beyond my capabilities


~ Wallace
Gear List

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

39,477 views & 0 likes for this thread
85L - why did you sell yours?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

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

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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Panzer90
1137 guests, 334 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, 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.