85L vs 85L II...

Hi long story short have I made a mistake purchasing a 85L I instead of II??? I know the I is even slower in focusing but apart from that is there any other pros and cons between them?

Also, how much is the difference in price of a mint condition mk I verus a II?

Thanks for the advice...

Quote:

Version II has:
1.8x faster autofocus.
New lens coatings: Flare is markedly reduced which results in better image contrast in unusual lighting situations.
Round aperture diaphragm to f/2.5: Results in smoothed out of focus aperture diaphragm patterns at apertures from f/1.4 to f/2.5.
Electronics changes to support E-TTL II flash function.

I had both. Started with the version 1 and autofocus was too slow. Got the mark 2 and it was still too slow. Hardly noticed a difference. IQ wise I couldn't tell the difference between the two.

So would would the slowness of this lens be theoretically the same as a slower lens in low-light, say an f2.8 or f4? In other words, the theoretical speed advantage of a 1.2 would outperform a slower lens in low-light, but as this lens is slow as reported, it focusses with the same speed as a slower lens, losing all advantages in focussing speeds?

the primary reason the AF is slow is it takes a lot of power to move around such a huge chunk of glass. All af speed increases due to 1.2 is negated by the fact that this thing like like twice as heavy as say the 1.4 50mm.

I have the MKII and the focus could be a little slow on the 5D classic but with the IDMKIII I can't say that I've ever noticed slowness- granted I don't use it for sports. It does make a differenc which body uou use. Use it for a while and see if you fall in love with it. On the 1.3 crop IDMKIII I really like shooting at f1.6-2.5 when doing environmental head shots or semi candid shooting, not because of sharpness but because it holds enough depth of field for a face most of the time when that close. If you fall in love with the lens you will get used to the way I works. Be sure to set your microadjust in the camera because at 1.2 there is zip for depth of field.

Ebwly wrote in post #12550878
the primary reason the AF is slow is it takes a lot of power to move around such a huge chunk of glass. All af speed increases due to 1.2 is negated by the fact that this thing like like twice as heavy as say the 1.4 50mm.

That's exactly my point, the advantage of a 1.2 lens is 1) Focussing speed 2) Dof 3) Gathers more light. But in the 50mm case, it loses the focussing speed so you only get DoF and more light. For me, I'd be losing a number of shots during the Israeli dancing processions (I do a lot of Jewish weddings) and need something faster than this, but for portraits would be magical!

No, you didn't make a mistake. They are both great lenses and capable of doing amazing stuffs. It now depends to unlock that potential. I used both and they are both great!

Just go shoot with it and you will stop worrying once you saw the results.

btw, this image was shot with either a MKII or MKI

As long as you paid an appropriate MK I price you are fine.

I have only used the Mk1 for about 15 minutes, but in that 15 minutes I took this un-posed photo:

Ebwly wrote in post #12550878
the primary reason the AF is slow is it takes a lot of power to move around such a huge chunk of glass. All af speed increases due to 1.2 is negated by the fact that this thing like like twice as heavy as say the 1.4 50mm.

.. I don't think it's slow because amount of glass !! what do you think of the amount of glass of a 400L2.8 or even a 300L2.8 , 85L feels like a feather comparing with those lenses or even a 70-200L2.8ISII..

85L is just slow between 0.9cm to 3 meters because DOF is ultra thin, thinner than any other lens on the market, as if you are shooting with a macro lens. So focusing needs to be totally accurate, and moving really slowly to focus in one time and almost never hunting.

Between 3m to infinity, 85L is as fast as any other lenses (at least comparing 135L2.0, 300L2.8) .. and of course as fast as 85F1.8 .. but 85L is totally reliable and accurate (it seems not to be sigma 85F1.4 which AF is unpredictable) ..

I imagine MKI is almost like MKII version, => slow between MFD to 3 meters, that's all

4x4rock wrote in post #12551812
btw, this image was shot with either a MKII or MKI

http://www.jumpset.com​/img/v15/p669829444-3.jpg

Amazing pic!

newworld666 wrote in post #12552315
.. I don't think it's slow because amount of glass !! what do you think of the amount of glass of a 400L2.8 or even a 300L2.8 , 85L feels like a feather comparing with those lenses or even a 70-200L2.8ISII..

85L is just slow between 0.9cm to 3 meters because DOF is ultra thin, thinner than any other lens on the market, as if you are shooting with a macro lens. So focusing needs to be totally accurate, and moving really slowly to focus in one time and almost never hunting.

Between 3m to infinity, 85L is as fast as any other lenses (at least comparing 135L2.0, 300L2.8) .. and of course as fast as 85F1.8 .. but 85L is totally reliable and accurate (it seems not to be sigma 85F1.4 which AF is unpredictable) ..

I imagine MKI is almost like MKII version, => slow between MFD to 3 meters, that's all

Yes I agree, its not based totally upon the glass, but for all the lenses you mentioned the length of the actual lens does not extend during focusing, this means it is internal focus, there is a little piece of glass at the back of the lens which moves to achieve focus. The 1.2 lens all use the front element to achieve focus, they extend a bit, thats why that massive front element is way heavier than the small piece of glass at the rear end of the longer telephoto primes.

edit: but in essence you are right. depth of field plays a big part in speed of AF.