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 23 Aug 2014 (Saturday) 16:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why is Photozone so severe on the 85L II on FF?

 
CanonYouCan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,481 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 22
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
     
Aug 23, 2014 16:47 |  #1

http://www.photozone.d​e …502-canon_85f12ff?start=2 (external link)

"The Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 USM L II showed a great performance in our previous APS-C test. Unsurprisingly it's not quite as good on a full format DSLR but if you're looking for a portrait lens this could be "the one"

Almost everyone says it's the one.
Optical quality is even a star less than the 85 1.8!
http://www.photozone.d​e …19-canon_85_18_5d?start=1 (external link)


Sony A7 III | Metabones V | Canon 17-40 F4 L | 24-70 2.8 L | 70-200 2.8L II
Sigma 50 1.4 Art | Sigma 85 1.4 Art

Lighting : Godox AD600B TTL + Godox V860II-S + X1T-S
Modifiers: 60cm Collapsible Silver Beautydish + grid | Godox 120cm Octagon softbox + grid
Tripod: Vanguard Alta 253CT carbon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 136
Joined Jun 2013
Location: oakland, ca
     
Aug 23, 2014 17:18 |  #2

My guess is because its great center frame, but like most of Canons fast (1.2, 1.4) glass, it pretty much blows in the corners (edit* when wide open). Thats not to say its a bad lens, but they tend to look at things from an objective position, and when you do that the Canon 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2 are overpriced, underperforming lenses compared to what else is out there. Thats my guess at least. I think the 85mm 1.2 has an important role to play, and corner sharpness is not everything.


Tumblr (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1051
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Aug 23, 2014 17:21 |  #3
bannedPermanent ban

Performance in the corners seems to be the major issue. APS-C users will of course not see this.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,271 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 7881
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Aug 23, 2014 17:58 |  #4

gnome chompski wrote in post #17113662 (external link)
My guess is because its great center frame, but like most of Canons fast (1.2, 1.4) glass, it pretty much blows in the corners. Thats not to say its a bad lens, but they tend to look at things from an objective position, and when you do that the Canon 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2 are overpriced, underperforming lenses compared to what else is out there. Thats my guess at least. I think the 85mm 1.2 has an important role to play, and corner sharpness is not everything.

That would be my guess as well. Based on the numbers, the f/1.8 looks substantially sharper in the edges and corners, but do you really care about razor sharp borders on an ultimate portrait lens?

Also I have a little theory about Photozone's summary statements and ratings: There seems to be a touch- just a teeny tiny touch mind you - of Ken Rockwell in their ratings. They seem to ding especially expensive lenses if they aren't insanely great and they overly laud cheaper lenses if they compare favorably to more expensive ones. In other words, I think they do a little editorializing about cost in their summaries. I don't like it. Lenses should be rated and compared solely on performance and let the consumer use the review results to decide if a more expensive lens is worth the exorbitantly greater cost.

To Photozone's credit, though, they publish their performance analysis, so you can glean all the technical analysis without needing to take their word for it regarding their rating/review summary.


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, CV 40mm, FE 50mm ZA, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GregDunn
Goldmember
Avatar
1,287 posts
Likes: 128
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Indiana
     
Aug 23, 2014 18:24 |  #5

At least they do publish MTF, CA and distortion values in addition to the pictures. Very few reviews give the buyer all the info from their tests, and it's quite possible to glean all you need to know from the combination of data + photos if they're thorough.

But I like to hear what the reviewers think, too. That adds a subtle layer of context to the review, without negating the value of the objective tests. Face it - the very best lenses aren't that much better than the next best ones unless you're printing billboard sized, and even then it's more down to focus and stability than ultimate resolution/acutance. If the reviewer thinks a lens is overpriced, I'm glad to hear it - far too many reviews praise all their products for fear of losing advertisers.


Canon 1Dx | 5D3 | 7D2 | 6D | 70-200L f/2.8IS | 70-200L f/4 | 24-70L f/2.8 | 24-105L f/4IS | 100-400L f/4.5-5.6IS | 17-55 f/2.8IS | 50 f/1.8 | 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 | 4x Godox AD360

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Aug 23, 2014 20:53 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

I think it is the corner issue, too. They also ding the 50 1.4 for that. I really don't understand that, though. When I shoot at f/1.n, I am really hoping to isolate a subject from the background. The corners are way OOF because of the razor thin DOF. How much does low resolution in the corners that are out of focus anyway affect my shot? For me, not one bit.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
Aug 23, 2014 21:21 |  #7

Alveric wrote in post #17113668 (external link)
Performance in the corners seems to be the major issue. APS-C users will of course not see this.

Here could be your answer.


Jurgen
50D~700D~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frankchn
Senior Member
458 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Jun 2009
     
Aug 24, 2014 02:49 |  #8

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17113933 (external link)
I think it is the corner issue, too. They also ding the 50 1.4 for that. I really don't understand that, though. When I shoot at f/1.n, I am really hoping to isolate a subject from the background. The corners are way OOF because of the razor thin DOF. How much does low resolution in the corners that are out of focus anyway affect my shot? For me, not one bit.

They need a single standard they measure all lenses against I guess. If they discount parts of the test results because "it's irrelevant" then they will just be accused of bias (i.e. "you obviously have a bias towards the Canon -- the Sigma 50A is so much sharper than the 50L in the corners but you ignored that?!").




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Aug 24, 2014 04:11 |  #9

Because photo zone is measuring sharpness wide open at the edges .... Not important for how this lens is used.
This is a portrait lens, what really matters is the quality of bokeh and the centre sharpness.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

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

1,570 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why is Photozone so severe on the 85L II on FF?
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 feelmat
861 guests, 220 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.