50mm f/1.4 vs 85mm f/1.8 for 5D

Hey guys, this has been discussed a few times but from what I've searched, all of the threads were pointed towards cropped cameras and the 50mm f/1.4 was always chosen over the 85mm f/1.8...

I just finished a wedding and got a nice payment. I'll eventually get both of the primes but I want to get just one at the moment. I want something somewhat versatile. I shoot a lot of still life and people. I'm usually indoors because the lighting is more controlled but whenever the lighting looks manageable, I'll go outside whenever I can.

I'm working on a very small photography business and most of it is around taking pictures of people. I suppose the 85mm f/1.8 would shine in this part but I have the 24-105mm f/4 IS L USM for portraits. I suppose getting the 85mm first and then getting the 50mm would be a downgrade in terms of focal length...

So which prime should I get first?

I think you'll be pleased with both, but I'd go with 85mm - useful @ f2.8 for some nice outdoor portraits amongst other things.


Phil

philthejuggler wrote in post #5770471
I think you'll be pleased with both, but I'd go with 85mm - useful @ f2.8 for some nice outdoor portraits amongst other things.


Phil

How well does it perform indoors in terms of length? Sometimes I'll happen to be sitting with a group of friends and whip out my 5D for some fun shots, but I just don't want to be forced to get up and turn it into some photography session because my focal length is too long. I want to be casual with my hobby and when time is needed, it'll perform well in profession.

Get the 85 1.8 first, and wait for the new Sigma 50 1.4...from the test result at dpreview I see so far it is a MUCH better lens than the Canon 50 1.4. One thing I hated most with my Canon 50 1.4 was the inconsistant AF, it wasn't useable wide open either...it was very soft until I stopped it down to f/2.8.

I wouldn't personally choose the 50 for a crop body, I'd rather go with a 28 or 30mm (Sigma 30 1.4 perhaps). I like the "normal" focal length though, which would be roughly 30mm on a crop body, or 50ish mm on a full frame camera.

I've had no sharpness issues with my 50 1.4 wide open, however the corners do get softer and overall wide open it does lose a bit of sharpness, which is no surprise. My 50 1.4 is getting old now, and the AF has started to act up a little although fixing it is supposedly not too expensive. I'd like to check out the Sigma to compare it myself, but until then or until some IMO reliable reviews of the Sigma are available I wouldn't be able to say whether it's a better choice than the Canon. The ring-type motor though is promising, the Canon 50 has a different type of USM motor, unfortunately not a ring type. The price of the Sigma though, had better indicate some very good performance.

The thing I liked about the 50mm is the length isn't too long or too short and if I need any longer or shorter the 24-105mm can fill in until I get more primes. But how much slower is the 50mm's af speed over the 85mm's? I hear the 85mm's af speed is superb...

Even when my 50 was new and running smoothly, I wouldn't call if the fastest AF'ing lens (prime or otherwise) I've used. I have had limited experience with the 85 1.8 but I do recall it being quicker.

the 85 1.8 has very quick AF, i dont think you will be disappointed.

Both are excellent. The 50 is a little softer wide open, IMO.

I've heard about soft issues with the 50mm, I do use photoshop a lot to sharpen my pictures. Is the softness a big issue?

Hey, boi! (LOL! I loved the options in your poll).
I voted for the 85 because the focal length screams "Portrait!!" on full frame and film cameras.

I will play the devil's advocate here and say the 50mm is CERTAINLY no slouch, but the focal length is much different on FF than on a 1.6x, however both are certainly useful. Mine has been nothing but a joy and has given me sensational results, even at f/1.4, on my 40D as well as my good old EOS 3. No complaints here, although I may just have a really good copy! (i'm developing a roll of Portra taken with my 50mm so I can provide samples of that later). I would say get the 85 first, then the 50. Each has its place!

Wide open 50mm on 40D (my beautiful mother):

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

EOSBoy wrote in post #5770490
How well does it perform indoors in terms of length? Sometimes I'll happen to be sitting with a group of friends and whip out my 5D for some fun shots, but I just don't want to be forced to get up and turn it into some photography session because my focal length is too long. I want to be casual with my hobby and when time is needed, it'll perform well in profession.

fun shots is when you'll want to use your 24-105L, which is at best a mediocre portrait lens tho very versatile....which is why i assume you chose it over the 24-70L.

i'd probably get the 85 first, which is an excellent portrait lens.

ed rader

EOSBoy wrote in post #5770585
The thing I liked about the 50mm is the length isn't too long or too short and if I need any longer or shorter the 24-105mm can fill in until I get more primes. But how much slower is the 50mm's af speed over the 85mm's? I hear the 85mm's af speed is superb...

50mm is really a pretty neutral FOV on FF. when i had my 5d the 50 1.4 was my go to prime for low light.

the 85 focusses like your 24-105L ... instantly. the 50 isn't as good.

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #5770778
fun shots is when you'll want to use your 24-105L, which is at best a mediocre portrait lens tho very versatile....which is why i assume you chose it over the 24-70L.

i'd probably get the 85 first, which is an excellent portrait lens.

ed rader

haha, actually...It came with my 5D kit! I do enjoy shooting portraits but I love incorporating the people in their environment as well...Both lenses can shoot waist up and you have to step back further when using the 85mm. So that's why it's so hard choosing between both lenses...Sometimes I might not have a chance of backing up indoors...

I saw some awesome pictures on flickr with 5D+50mms I don't know if I want to check out what the 85 can do cause it'll send me into a spiraling indecisive pit of depression.

I never had any sharpness issues with my 50 1.4, even wide open it is still quite good with some moderate softness in the corners. Stop it down a bit and it's very good.

ed rader wrote in post #5770778
fun shots is when you'll want to use your 24-105L, which is at best a mediocre portrait lens tho very versatile....which is why i assume you chose it over the 24-70L.

i'd probably get the 85 first, which is an excellent portrait lens.

ed rader

The 24-105 would not be my choice for portraits, not to mention for the types of things the OP is interested in shooting the f/2.8 will be better IMO. If you shoot what I shoot, the 24-105 is the better choice, but if you're shooting people, if you want DOF control to separate the people from the background, the 2.8 will be more flexible.

If you're looking to do portraiture though, I'd agree that an 85mm FL is a better choice on a full frame camera than a 50mm lens.