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 Lenses 
Thread started 31 May 2013 (Friday) 23:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 Mk II Vs 85 1.2

 
JeremyBlake
Senior Member
Avatar
532 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
     
May 31, 2013 23:19 |  #1

For portraiture, if I eventually buy the 70-200, is there any real reason to buy the 85 1.2 if I don't shoot in low light? I'm thinking no, but I've never owned either lens, so I figured I'd ask for some perspective from people that have owned both. I know I'm definitely buying the 70-200, just not sure if I'll have any real reason to purchase the 85 at some point.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Gear | Facebook (external link) | Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Apr 2012
     
May 31, 2013 23:23 |  #2

the 85 1.2 is an amazing portrait lens. Owning both will be ideal :P. 70-200 is also an amazing portrait lens but can never replicate what the 85 1.2 produces. I have not owned both.... but I am using the 70-200 to earn money for the keg :)


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyBlake
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
532 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
     
May 31, 2013 23:29 |  #3

Ratjack wrote in post #15987971 (external link)
the 85 1.2 is an amazing portrait lens. Owning both will be ideal :P. 70-200 is also an amazing portrait lens but can never replicate what the 85 1.2 produces. I have not owned both.... but I am using the 70-200 to earn money for the keg :)

I was kind of thinking, "I've seen a ton of portraits done with the 70-200, and none really have that 85L look to them." I guess it wasn't just in my head. lol.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Gear | Facebook (external link) | Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Apr 2012
     
May 31, 2013 23:43 |  #4

JeremyBlake wrote in post #15987985 (external link)
I was kind of thinking, "I've seen a ton of portraits done with the 70-200, and none really have that 85L look to them." I guess it wasn't just in my head. lol.

Yeah, the 85L produces an amazingly thin DOF that really makes portraits pop. You can see a picture and almost know for sure if it was done using the 85L. The Sigma 85 1.4 seems to be a good lens as well, although will not give the same look as the 85L.

When I was looking to purchase a lens I was trying to decide between the 70-200 2.8 IS II and the 85L 1.2. It was a really tough decision.... but the 70-200 will do a lot more for you. It focuses MUCH faster and offers a lot more versatility. The 85L is a VERY specialized lens and I do not think I would use it for anything other than portraiture due to the very slow focus and razor thin DOF at 1.2.

As it is now, I absolutely LOVE my 70-200 2.8 IS II for portraits but if I had the chance I would not hesitate picking up the 85L in addition. Just need to use the 70-200 as a workhorse to build up funds for the 85 lol :).


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyBlake
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
532 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
     
May 31, 2013 23:45 |  #5

Well.. looks like I'm probably adding ANOTHER lens to my list. lol. I hate this forum sometimes, haha.


flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Gear | Facebook (external link) | Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Doc ­ Fluty
Goldmember
Avatar
1,762 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Gulfport, Ms
     
Jun 01, 2013 00:35 |  #6

I recently had the 70-200 2.8 IS II and got rid of it to repurchase the 85 1.2..

Low light isnt the only spot were you can use 1.2-2.0... I put my kids under trees in shadows and other darker spots and come back with tremendous results.

The 70-200 is a great lens and will get you GREAT, OUTSTANDING, WONDERFUL results... but the 85mm 1.2 will get you the WOW and OMG shots.

that was enough for me.


My Facebook Fan Page (external link) - My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jun 01, 2013 00:49 |  #7

JeremyBlake wrote in post #15988024 (external link)
Well.. looks like I'm probably adding ANOTHER lens to my list. lol. I hate this forum sometimes, haha.

lol me too. I have a wish list that makes my wife want to kill me XD.


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mashimaro
Senior Member
Avatar
818 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver
     
Jun 01, 2013 01:42 |  #8

85L definitely has a special look when shooting wide open compared to the 70-200 II wide open.

They're both different tools and the 85L is also a joy to use even if you don't shoot only portraits with it.

If you can afford it, go for it. :)


Canon 5D4 / Sony A7R2 / Leica M240

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bonbridge
Goldmember
Avatar
1,265 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 423
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Netherlands
     
Jun 01, 2013 05:30 |  #9

I have both lenses. I have got the 70-200LII a week now. The 85LII is a little longer than 1 year in my collection.

If I want to shoot portraits only the 85LII is the lens I would pick. But it is a really though choice. Even when you own both it is hard to take the right (or wrong) one. I think I will prefer the 85LII in most situations because it has a nice FL, and is a lot smaller. The 70-200 can create nice background blur too, 2.8 at 200mm gives a nice blur and everything is really sharp. The 85LII is a little better in sharpness at 2.8. The IS on the 70-200 is just awesome. I can get everything sharp at 1/15th or 1/20th of a second.

If I had to choose one. It would probably be the 85LII. There is simply no lens that can create such great background blur at such nice FL. But if you have the space the 70-200LII can create a nice background as well. I will keep both for sure. One is the best zoom on earth and one is the best prime on earth (in my opinion).

When you don't want to shoot anything between f/1.2 and f/2.0 there is no reason about buying a 85LII. Then you are better of with the zoom.


5DII + 6D | 16-35/4.0L IS | Σ35/1.4A | 40/2.8 | Σ85/1.4A | 70-200/2.8L IS II
iMac Retina 5k | i7 | 24Gb RAM | 512GB Flash | 4GB M295X

Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,533 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
Jun 01, 2013 07:01 |  #10

If you question was comparing the 50mm 1.2 or the 135mm f2 with the 85mm 1.2, I would understand it better. All 3 of these lenses give you that very thin depth of field. But the 70-200mm 2.8 and 85mm 1.2 are VERY different lenses. Certainly you could own both. As others have said, the look you'll get from the 85mm 1.2 cannot be duplicated with the zoom.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,017 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 12168
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Jun 01, 2013 07:07 |  #11

I own both. They are very different lenses with very different uses.

For controlled portrait sessions, the 85L is where its at. Shot at the wider apertures, the 85L creates a sense of dimension that could never be replicated on the 70-200. Granted, the 70-200 can nuke the background to a blur of color in a way the 85L never could if that's your thing. I prefer to keep the background elements in tact, as it gives a portrait context.

The larger apertures on the 85L allows you to keep the background elements in the frame, while blurring them out and isolating the subject enough that the background does not become distracting....creates a beautiful sense of dimension and pop.

The 70-200 is more of an event lens for me. Great lens optically, but its most useful for me because of its flexibility.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀIV - α7ʀIII
Sigma 14-24 f2.8 ART - Zeiss Loxia 21 - Sigma 35 f1.2 ART - Sony 35 1.8 - Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 - Sony 85GM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,745 posts
Gallery: 93 photos
Likes: 394
Joined May 2005
     
Jun 01, 2013 07:25 as a reply to  @ mystik610's post |  #12

^^^
Nice response. Can you provide some examples where you mentioned the 70-200 "nuked" the background? I am not familiar with that terminology. Thanks!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SeattleSpeedster
Goldmember
Avatar
3,743 posts
Gallery: 814 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 14954
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Jun 01, 2013 16:25 |  #13

85L and 80-200 magic drainpipe


Fuji GFX100s and A7R II | Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Otus and 28mm f1.4 Otus | Fuji GF23mm, GF45-100mm and GF32-64mm | Canon 200mm f1.8 Canon 70-200mm 2.8 ii | Zeiss 100-300mm | Zeiss 16-35mm f4 | Zeiss 135mm f2 | Zeiss and Sony 50mm f1.4 | Autel Evo 2 and Inspire 2 drones | https://mikereidphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sicarius82
Member
Avatar
35 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Jun 01, 2013 18:22 |  #14

Why not simply rent both of them and decide for yourself? I had the same predicament, but also was thinking about the 135 f/2 and 24-70 f/2.8. The 70-200 IS is a great lens, but I found myself not really using 100-200. So I decided that the 85L II was the one for me. $0.02.


Long Vu
Kids in the backseats cause accidents. Accidents in the backseat cause kids.
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jun 01, 2013 18:33 |  #15

Take a look at Lisa's 500px. She is a member on this forum and her images are amazing. She uses the 85L and the 70-200 2.8. Her exif info is there so you can see which lens she used. Just to give you some examples.

Although the 85L is smaller... it still weights almost the same as the 70-200 I believe.


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

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

3,219 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 Mk II Vs 85 1.2
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon 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 cjp42
545 guests, 143 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.