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 22 Sep 2014 (Monday) 19:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Talk to me: Canon 85 1.8 for weddings

 
GooseberryVisuals
Goldmember
Avatar
1,045 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2010
     
Sep 22, 2014 19:16 |  #1

Thinking about buying a Canon 85 1.8 for weddings only, as a backup to my 70-200 2.8 II.

I don't have any real interest in the 85 1.2 due to the price and slow focus. I use to own the 135L too, but sold it has is was too hard to hand hold in churches.

Biggest points I care about are fast (and accurate) focus and good micro contrast.

Any reason I shouldn't buy it?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,002 posts
Gallery: 1460 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 9433
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Sep 22, 2014 19:52 |  #2

Heya,

Great lens for $300 used. Do it.

I have two fast autofocus primes. The EF 85 F1.8 (lighting fast, small, sharp, F1.8). And the EF 200 F2.8L (lighting fast, light weight for 200 F2.8, black, sharp wide open, F2.8). Inexpensive. I paid more for my 85! I caught my 200 on a slick deal.

I use my 85 F1.4 more than my 85 F1.8, but I use that 85 F1.8 for things where I want focus speed. I'm pretty fast with my 85 F1.4 (manual focus), but the 85 F1.8's speed is so fast that sometimes it's just the right tool. Like when I shoot kids soccer, I love that lens, it keeps up with running kids. So it should be fast enough for a slow wedding.

The other beauty is, the wider the aperture, the more light it can grab for autofocus purposes, even if you're stopping down to F4...

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
carpenter
Goldmember
2,605 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 293
Joined Jul 2006
Location: Green Bay, WI
     
Sep 22, 2014 19:58 |  #3

Only real issue could be CA especially if you shoot the bride outdoors. Correctable though and the rest of the lens's positives IMO severely outweigh that. It's a fantastic lens and one I still keep because of it's versatility and lightning fast AF.


5D Mk IV | 24-105L | 85 1.8 | 70-200L 2.8 IS MkII | 100-400L MkII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,422 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3356
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Sep 22, 2014 20:24 |  #4

It's a great lens, especially for the price. I'd also consider the 100/2. If it weren't for the price difference I'd have ended up with the 100/2 over my Rokinon 85mm probably.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
farmer1957
Senior Member
Avatar
901 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 60
Joined Jul 2012
Location: nevada
     
Sep 22, 2014 20:36 |  #5

ZachOly wrote in post #17171840 (external link)
Thinking about buying a Canon 85 1.8 for weddings only, as a backup to my 70-200 2.8 II.

I don't have any real interest in the 85 1.2 due to the price and slow focus. I use to own the 135L too, but sold it has is was too hard to hand hold in churches.

Biggest points I care about are fast (and accurate) focus and good micro contrast.

Any reason I shouldn't buy it?

One lens I wouldn't ever want to be without if I was photographing people or pets.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1110.photobuck​et.com …/IMG_0011_zps16​35d5a0.jpg (external link)


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i1110.photobuck​et.com …/IMG_0181_zps32​7d628c.jpg (external link)

Farmer



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Sep 22, 2014 20:42 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17171976 (external link)
It's a great lens, especially for the price. I'd also consider the 100/2. If it weren't for the price difference I'd have ended up with the 100/2 over my Rokinon 85mm probably.

I had the 85 1.8 (CA) and 135L ($$). I sold them both and got the 100 f/2. I'm happy. I do wish the 100 f/2 were IS, but I'm not willing to pay $1000 for it.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,293 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4861
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Sep 22, 2014 20:45 |  #7

The only thing I would warn you is to really watch your DOF if you get the lens. It is a great lens, but when I shot a wedding this weekend, I noticed that with my 70-200 II, even when not wide oepn (down to f3.5 to f4), I still had cases where there were more than a couple of people and some fell outside the DOF. I am sure I was past 85mm though, which would reduce the DOF. I would expect the 85 1.8 would be used at f1.8 to f2.8 in a very controlled manner for individual subjects.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,628 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1033
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Sep 22, 2014 23:30 |  #8

I use this lens for weddings on my 2nd body (70D). My main camera is 5DIII + 24-70 2.8 II and the 70D + 85 1.8 compliments it nicely. AF is fast, DoF is thin, so like TeamSpeed said you have to be cautious regarding what you shoot with the 85. It works great for separating one person or maybe a couple (if they are both on the focal plane) from the crowd and the background. I like working with it.
But as mentioned, CA is a moderate problem under certain conditions. Most of the time it's an easy fix, but sometimes the thickness of the purple lining can cause problems (but maybe 1% of the time.)

I just picked up a nice shape 5Dc and will try that with my 70-200 2.8 OS Sigma lens as an experiment during my next indoor event and compare the results to my 70D + 85 1.8 combo.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lenty007
Member
220 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 21
Joined May 2006
Location: Ghent, Belgium
     
Sep 23, 2014 02:40 as a reply to  @ gabebalazs's post |  #9

I don't understand!
In your signature I can see you have three lenses that come close to the 85mm F/1.8, beeing the 50, the 24-70 and 70-200mm.
For me the prime 85mm is great for certain phases in a marriage but its my thought that it will make your choises even harder "what when to use".
Sure the 85mm is magical in terms of bokeh but so are the three lenses that you have now.
In case you have money to burn I would suggest spending it on a good strobe (with a remote trigger) which I find very useful during weddings.
Good luck!
Greetings, Alain




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonYouCan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,480 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 22
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
     
Sep 23, 2014 05:41 |  #10

I agree, I would use the 50 1.4 or 24-70 II
I sold the 85 1.8 twice for the CA, yes the purples are correctable but it's not so nice having to correct every picture with bright lights, if the purple is in the faces you can't correct it anymore as you lose too much detail, stopping down is better in this case, but you buy a 1.8 to use it as much as possible wide open.

Lenty007 wrote in post #17172455 (external link)
I don't understand!
In your signature I can see you have three lenses that come close to the 85mm F/1.8, beeing the 50, the 24-70 and 70-200mm.
For me the prime 85mm is great for certain phases in a marriage but its my thought that it will make your choises even harder "what when to use".
Sure the 85mm is magical in terms of bokeh but so are the three lenses that you have now.
In case you have money to burn I would suggest spending it on a good strobe (with a remote trigger) which I find very useful during weddings.
Good luck!
Greetings, Alain


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
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,293 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4861
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Sep 23, 2014 07:21 |  #11

Here was a flop of a photo because I thought I had enough DOF, and the camera latched onto the flowers instead of the couple. This edit was the only thing I could do really to try to salvage the shot. I would expect 85 at 1.8 would yield alot of these if the scenes are dynamic enough. This is one of the reasons I chuckle a bit when people talk about how much more DOF control you have with a FF, sure it is handy in very controlled artistic situations, but it can be a curse if not used correctly.

IMAGE: http://gerberphotos.smugmug.com/Engagements-and-Weddings/Tim-and-Jessica-Gross/i-SzzZsdz/0/X2/5P1B1021-X2.jpg

Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jnadz
Senior Member
279 posts
Joined Feb 2012
     
Sep 23, 2014 16:14 |  #12

But why not focus on the people? Surely you're choosing your focus point yourself 99.9% of the time.


5D Mark III | SL1 | EOS-M | S100
Rokinon 14 f2.8 | Σ35 f1.4 Art | Canon 40 f2.8 | Canon 50 f1.8 mark I | Canon 100L | Canon 135L | Canon 70-300L
Canon EF-M 11-22 | Canon EF-M 22 f2 | Canon EF-M 55-200

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,293 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4861
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Sep 23, 2014 18:09 |  #13

jnadz wrote in post #17173739 (external link)
But why not focus on the people? Surely you're choosing your focus point yourself 99.9% of the time.

Yes, I did have a focus point selected, but it still focused on the flowers. That is also a crop from a larger frame, so the point I had selected might have straddled material. Out of of roughly 500 pics, about 20 were OOF, so I figured that wasn't so bad.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2ndviolinman
Senior Member
345 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2011
     
Sep 23, 2014 18:54 |  #14

That's the worst purple fringing I ever saw.


David
5Dc, 5Dii, Canon 16-35 f/4L IS, 40/2.8 Pancake, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 Macro, 135/2.0L, 200/2.8L, converted 35mm TS, Sigma 50/2.8 Macro, 70/2.8 Macro, Zeiss ZE 21/2.8, Zeiss Contax 28/2.8, 50/1.7 & 85/2.8, Jena 135/3.5, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 APO, Canon 28-135.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bubbygator
I can't tell the difference
Avatar
1,477 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 63
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Sarasota, sunlight, butterflies, fish, Gators, and Seminoles
     
Sep 23, 2014 19:33 as a reply to  @ 2ndviolinman's post |  #15

Using Tv and Center-spot AF, I've never had any problem catching action pics in-focus. Any lack of focus has always been my own inaccuracy in pointing that spot.


Gear List
The avatar is my middle grandson. (the TF can't tell the difference, but the fish is frowning and the kid is grinning)
Sarasota, sunlight, butterflies, fish, Gators, and Seminoles

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

3,710 views & 0 likes for this thread
Talk to me: Canon 85 1.8 for weddings
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 adamking
837 guests, 342 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.