Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM

grfft3r wrote in post #15383897
So is there not much difference between this lens and the 85mmL 1.2??

TREMENDOUS difference - the f/1.2 is far larger, heavier, will give you a shallower DOF and is much more expensive.

grfft3r wrote in post #15383897
So is there not much difference between this lens and the 85mmL 1.2??

85L has Better bokeh, better sharpness wide open (compared at f/1.8, center frame) and better contrast. Better build and it just looks so sexy. All that for 5x the cost.

grfft3r wrote in post #15383897
So is there not much difference between this lens and the 85mmL 1.2??

Yes, there is. The 85 1.8 focuses faster.

sapearl wrote in post #15383958
TREMENDOUS difference - the f/1.2 is far larger, heavier, will give you a shallower DOF and is much more expensive.

Rittrato wrote in post #15383974
85L has Better bokeh, better sharpness wide open (compared at f/1.8, center frame) and better contrast. Better build and it just looks so sexy. All that for 5x the cost.

TSchrief wrote in post #15384727
Yes, there is. The 85 1.8 focuses faster.

Thanks for the replies, though it doesn't sound like going for 1.2 L is worth the price. Contrast can be fixed in PP.

The 85 1.8 is very impressive for the money. I have owned the 85L II and the 1.8 is just as good from 1.8 on... AF is faster, much cheaper an similar IQ to the $2000 optic. Can't go wrong if you don't require the f/1.2.

grfft3r wrote in post #15384864
...it doesn't sound like going for 1.2 L is worth the price.

Au contraire...

85/1.2L is well worth the price... to those who need a premium quality, completely uncompromising, specialized portrait lens.

OTOH, 85/1.8 is plenty for most folks, excellent for portraits, plus more of a general purpose lens.

sapearl wrote in post #15383420
I must be lucky with my copy then - have not yet seen those characteristics. It's a wonderful, compact, sharp, lightweight and bright lens for the price; one of the best non-L lenses around.

It's there lurking. Take a look at this:

85 is such a beastly lens... and the 85L is much more clear and creamy similar to the 50 1.4 and 1.2

saaFOTO wrote in post #15385641
85 is such a beastly lens...

Why so?

saaFOTO wrote in post #15385641
and the 85L is much more clear and creamy similar to the 50 1.4 and 1.2

50 1.4, creamy? You must be referring to the halation when wide open

sandiskdvd wrote in post #15383608
I got my 85 1.8 today. Such a capable chunk of glass.

This lens has passion written all over it.

True about razor thin DOF.

You just have to love fast primes, the wiser choice.

PS, Some shots from my new Canon 85 1.8. I love it!!!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.imagebam.co​m/image/cd67e822661042​4

Warpath is my favorite transformers character.

paulkaye wrote in post #15385615
Oh, BTW, it's almost impossible to remove LOCA in PP. Local desaturation works, but not the usual CA fringe removal.

This is a two-click, two second fix in LR4. You can do better if you spend 5 or 6 seconds with it.
Left is original. Right is de-purpled.

lol I don't usually get involved in lens review stuff, but that picture is just horrible. And I don't mean that with respect to the 85 1.8. I mean that it's just a horrible photograph with any lens. What is the purpose of it? To prove that if you have crappy composition you'll have a crappy photo?

This lens is a little gem. It can produce great pictures when used correctly. Just like most lenses. It can also produce less than great results when used incorrectly. Just like most lenses.

That example is junk. It shows me nothing. Show me a real world example of fringing like that.

Unless you plan on using this lens to take close up photos of little silver balls with harsh lights shining directly on them, then this lens might not be for you.

Jason401 wrote in post #15386154
lol I don't usually get involved in lens review stuff, but that picture is just horrible. And I don't mean that with respect to the 85 1.8. I mean that it's just a horrible photograph with any lens. What is the purpose of it? To prove that if you have crappy composition you'll have a crappy photo?

This lens is a little gem. It can produce great pictures when used correctly. Just like most lenses. It can also produce less than great results when used incorrectly. Just like most lenses.

That example is junk. It shows me nothing. Show me a real world example of fringing like that.

Unless you plan on using this lens to take close up photos of little silver balls with harsh lights shining directly on them, then this lens might not be for you.

Jason401,
You are correct it is a horrible photo. It was meant to be horrible, to show the worst of what this lens can do. I have had ugly green and/or purple fringing show up in some of my photos. Yes, real photos. I think the problem is WAY overblown, especially with this lens. The 85 1.8 does have CA. So do most other lenses. Even some very good, highly respected lenses. My 15-85 can be made to cast this kind of color fringe. It is actually WORSE at it than my old 18-135. This problem is way too easy to fix for it to be an issue for any lens. See my 2-second fix above. The only drawback I see to LR4's way of doing this is that it will completely desaturate any similar color in your photo that happens to be on/near an edge. I have never had THAT happen in a real photo. I liked my 85 1.8 on my 60D. I like it a lot more on the 5D. CA/PF is simply not an issue.

TSchrief wrote in post #15386131
This is a two-click, two second fix in LR4. You can do better if you spend 5 or 6 seconds with it.
Left is original. Right is de-purpled.

Nice - would love to see details of what you did. Is it some desaturation trick?

paulkaye wrote in post #15386728
Nice - would love to see details of what you did. Is it some desaturation trick?

http://blogs.adobe.com …-correction-controls.html

TL;DR - In LR4 / Lens Corrections / Check 'Remove CA', and use the dropper tool.