Questions about 70-200mm & 85mm

First question how much sharper is the Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS than the Canon 70-200mmL 4.0 non IS?


I am trying to decide if I should sell my Canon 70-200L 4.0 Non IS and buy the Canon 70-200L 2.8 or the Canon 85mm 1.8

What do you think?

What are your goals here?. I ask because of your other thread with the fake bokeh. Having had a 70-200 with and without IS I wouldn't buy a lens in that length without IS.

If you want to do portrait work with it then the 70-200 f/2.8L IS MkII is really what you want, if you can afford it.

I bought that lens when I bought my Canon 20D years ago before I had any knowledge of photography or lenses. I know most of the issues I have with photography is not the equipment its actually me but on the other hand I don't want to own equipment that will never benefit me. I want to create tack sharp images with the blurred backgrounds and not have to do it in PS.

I would add the 85 before upgrading your 70-200.

so portraits, full length? kids running and playing? sports? Do you feel your 70-200 isn't coming close to what you want to achieve? If not the 2.8 might not really help you that much.

I just wonder how the 2.8 compares to my 4.0 as sharpness goes...

mdaddyrabbit wrote in post #17229526
I just wonder how the 2.8 compares to my 4.0 as sharpness goes...

wide open on both ( 2.8 vs f4) there will be virtually no difference in sharpness in real world photos unless you spring for the MkII version or the new Tamon VC

Which will give me the better blurred background 70-200 or 85?

mdaddyrabbit wrote in post #17229533
Which will give me the better blurred background 70-200 or 85?

Hard to say.
The 70-200 has got quite different bokeh at 70 than at 200mm.
At 85mm full open I would say the 85 at F1.8 nicer than 70-200 at F4.

mdaddyrabbit wrote in post #17229514
I bought that lens when I bought my Canon 20D years ago before I had any knowledge of photography or lenses. I know most of the issues I have with photography is not the equipment its actually me but on the other hand I don't want to own equipment that will never benefit me. I want to create tack sharp images with the blurred backgrounds and not have to do it in PS.

That lens didn't exist when the 20D was out....it's only a few years old.

The 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mk II is hands-down one of the best and most versatile portrait lenses Canon makes. It is one of the sharpest lenses and will blur backgrounds very well, especially at 200mm.

mdaddyrabbit wrote in post #17229533
Which will give me the better blurred background 70-200 or 85?

85L

hennie wrote in post #17229545
Hard to say.
The 70-200 has got quite different bokeh at 70 than at 200mm.
At 85mm full open I would say the 85 at F1.8 nicer than 70-200 at F4.

The thing with this is if you are doing group photos then shooting a 1.8 is a bad idea.

carpenter wrote in post #17229552
85L

He's talking about the 1.8 not the L.

Numenorean wrote in post #17229551
That lens didn't exist when the 20D was out....it's only a few years old.

The 70-200 f/2.8L IS Mk II is hands-down one of the best and most versatile portrait lenses Canon makes. It is one of the sharpest lenses and will blur backgrounds very well, especially at 200mm.

I bought that lens 3 months after I bought the camera. I bought it at B&H.