Canon 24-? or 85mm

iPhoto

iPhoto

Suspended / Banned
Messages
741
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

OK so I have a dilema. I have had a 5D2 for a while and soon found my 7D and EFS lenses were my backup kit. I have sold the 7D along with EFS glass and purchased a 5D3 making the 5D2 the backup but at least they are both sharing the same glass.

That said I have a glass gap that I need to fill because so far I have;

Sigma 12-24
Canon EF 50
???????????????????????
Canon 100 (L) (macro)
Canon 300 (L)

So what do I slot in that gap for studio/street portrait work?

Should I go for the 24-70 II, the 24-105 or the 85mm prime?

Cheers

Mark
 
Nothing wrong with the 24-70mm f2.8 MKI, save some money buy 2nd hand for around £850, a very good studio lens

The 70-200mm f2.8 IS MKII another very good portrait lens, as well as the 85mm prime, think the 24-105mm f4 will struggle indoors, however, its an ideal walkaround lens.

I think the 24-70mm and 70-200mm combo would work well, but at the end of the day, what you have to ask yourself is what focal range do I work with most and would a prime or zoom be more suited, don't just fill gaps.
 
I have to agree, the 24-70mk1 is well worth the money...A sharp copy will more than do you justice....To be honest I cannot justify the cost of the MKII version.... I found the 24-105 to be a great outdoor general purpose lens... I even used it for studio shots too. Just make sure you get a sharp copy....

I think it really depends on what you predominantly shoot....If you need an indoor lens, then the fast 24-70 would be my choice. A fast prime would be great but if you are shooting from a fixed point, then a zoom is your best friend. I cannot recommend the 70-200mkii highly enough..It is really good.
 
IMO the 24-? Zoom and the 85 f? Are ver different options. The zoom is a good general purpose but not very fast lens. An 85 prime does not have quite the same general application but what it does eg portraits it does very well.. In a fit of extravagance I bought the 85 f1.2. This is superb at what it does. Very shallow depth of field isolating a subject with great bokeh and will give arm muscles like a stevedore.. I helped out a friend yesterday on a wedding shoot and some of the bride shots a great. They will be even better when I have had more practice using it superb in low light too.
 
I suppose I have not given the whole story in my OP :shrug:

I have a very nice micro four thirds setup with 3 lenses that is my carry around with me everywhere setup. My DSLR kit however is used either for a pre-planned location shoot, be it a function, event, model shoot etc or its used in the studio.

So I guess I am not looking for a general walk about lens. I can see this lens being used for mainly people/portrait photography.

Thanks to the replies so far, I am starting to build an idea of where to go in my head but welcome any more input with thanks.

Mark
 
Then it must be 85mm f1.2, I use mine frequently for street work (on a 1ds MkIII ), it's perfect for this when the background is busy and you can't control it, the ability to kick the bg oof is excellent, no other canon lens comes close. And of course, it's the ultimate portrait lens for studio work. And as mentioned its brilliant in low light.
The 24-105, being a relatively slow lens , I don't think would meet your needs, and the 24-70 probably not having the needed reach on a FF body.
 
I agree (not that I know much...lol) with the 85mm. I use it for portraits and find the results are always impressive. Sharp with a super bokeh!
 
There is always the Sigma 85mm f1.4. It can't match the Canon 85mm f1.2 for aperture but some reviews place the Sigma ahead of the more expensive Canon, especially for focus performance.

I have a 5D and the Siggy 85mm seems to perform very well on it and it's sharp at f1.4 and is IMVHO an even better lens than the very well regarded Siggy 50mm f1.4 that I also have.

Here's one of the reviews that helped me to make my decision...

http://hofferphotography.com/2010/11/16/my-sigma-85-f1-4-vs-canon-85l-review/
 
Due to the amount of glass in the 85mm 1.2, the focus is not the fastest. The 1.8 is much faster....Maybe a factor if you need quick focus aquisition.
 
One thing that put me off the Canon 85mm f1.8 is the angular blades and the rendering of deffuse highlights at certain apertures. That's a very important factor with wide aperture lenses IMVHO.
 
I hadn’t even considered the 85mm f1.8 ?

There is some serious difference in price, notwithstanding the fact the 1.8 isn’t an L quality lens, surely it can’t be of anything like comparable IQ to the 1.2 costing many times more... can it?

Mark
 
iPhoto said:
I hadn’t even considered the 85mm f1.8 ?

There is some serious difference in price, notwithstanding the fact the 1.8 isn’t an L quality lens, surely it can’t be of anything like comparable IQ to the 1.2 costing many times more... can it?

Mark
Click to expand...

I think it all depends on what you are using it for, if you are doing studio work on a professional basis (i.e. getting paid for), then for me it is a no-brainer, 85mm F1.2. If not, then it's a tougher decision?

I did a review of the 85mm F1.2 here if you interested :

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=394786
 
woof woof said:
There is always the Sigma 85mm f1.4. It can't match the Canon 85mm f1.2 for aperture but some reviews place the Sigma ahead of the more expensive Canon, especially for focus performance.

I have a 5D and the Siggy 85mm seems to perform very well on it and it's sharp at f1.4 and is IMVHO an even better lens than the very well regarded Siggy 50mm f1.4 that I also have.

Here's one of the reviews that helped me to make my decision...

http://hofferphotography.com/2010/11/16/my-sigma-85-f1-4-vs-canon-85l-review/
Click to expand...

After that write-up the Sigma is a contender :bang:

Mark
 
iPhoto said:
I hadn’t even considered the 85mm f1.8 ?

There is some serious difference in price, notwithstanding the fact the 1.8 isn’t an L quality lens, surely it can’t be of anything like comparable IQ to the 1.2 costing many times more... can it?

Mark
Click to expand...

The canon 85mm f1.8 as great lens for the $$, especially the fast auto focusing, which is why not only is it used for portraits, but the indoor sports togs love it as well. That's a disadvantage of the sigma, not as quick.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
 
Thanks to all who replied today. I soon became decided upon an 85mm and there were then 3 contenders.

Canon 85mm 1.2
Canon 85mm 1.8
Sigma 85mm 1.4

Having read the linked reviews and others the Canon 1.2 is the slowest focus whilst the Canon 1.8 is fastest focus of the three.

The Sigma however appears to come out on top for sharpness.

Price wise the Sigma seems to come in at roughly half the price of the Canon 1.2 but some way above the Canon 1.8.

It’s looking like I will go for the Sigma.


:thumbs: Mark
 
iPhoto said:
Thanks to all who replied today. I soon became decided upon an 85mm and there were then 3 contenders.

Canon 85mm 1.2
Canon 85mm 1.8
Sigma 85mm 1.4

Having read the linked reviews and others the Canon 1.2 is the slowest focus whilst the Canon 1.8 is fastest focus of the three.

The Sigma however appears to come out on top for sharpness.

Price wise the Sigma seems to come in at roughly half the price of the Canon 1.2 but some way above the Canon 1.8.

It’s looking like I will go for the Sigma.


:thumbs: Mark
Click to expand...

Looking at the rewview of the Siggy 85mm F1.4, it's a good choice :thumbs:

My other lens I use for portraits/street portraits is the 135mm F2 L lens, it's so sharp you cut yourself on it, lightening fast focus and a dreamy bokeh (but not quite as good as the 85mm F1.2).

Notice how good we are at spending your money :)
 
The beauty of the Canon F1.8 is great quality,but at an affordable price.. Honestly I wont part with mine..
Of course you could probably swing the 24-70 and the 85 1.8 :)

Here's a couple of highish ISO shots (800) taken indoors in winter (natural light) and hand held with a lowly 500D, the shots were not posed either.. just snapped off when the niece visited..

I hope they help you..

Both shot @F2.5, ISO 800 and if I remember rightly 1/320th sec

VC1.jpg


VC.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sorry to possibly throw a spanner in the works, but isn't an 85mm prime very close to the 100mm prime you already have?
 
Craikeybaby said:
Sorry to possibly throw a spanner in the works, but isn't an 85mm prime very close to the 100mm prime you already have?
Click to expand...

Funny enough thats a conversation I had late on yesterday with a couple of Tog mates :bang:

I have now started to lean very heavily towards the 24-70 but who knows how I will feel in an hour or so :bonk:

Mark
 
Rather than staying fixated on Canon, I'd give serious consideration to getting a Sigma 24-70 HSM and an 85/1.4. Both of those together (even new) would come in at almost 50% of the cost of the newly released 24-70, whilst the quality of output from both lenses is excellent.
 
Like others have said I'd look at a 24-70 2.8L or even a 28-70 2.8L if you can find one. I have one and it's very very sharp and a great lens. Also agreed on the 85mm not being much shorter than the 100mm you already have. That said, I've used the canon 85 1.8 on numerous occasions and it is fabulous.
 
DemiLion said:
Rather than staying fixated on Canon, I'd give serious consideration to getting a Sigma 24-70 HSM and an 85/1.4. Both of those together (even new) would come in at almost 50% of the cost of the newly released 24-70, whilst the quality of output from both lenses is excellent.
Click to expand...

I am not a Canon only buyer by any stretch of the imagination :cool: My wide angle 'toy' is a Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 and I have recently sold by EF-s stuff due to going FF and that had none canon lenses in it. Likewise my carry around kit isn't even canon it's a micro four thirds setup.

I have dismissed the Sigma 24-70 on the grounds of IQ compared to the Canong 24-70. Thats the mark I not the Canon 24-70 II.

Mark
 
Personally I'd be happy with that set of lenses, although my 17-40mm is much closer to my 50mm than your 14-24mm. The gaps I see are a normal zoom, say 24-70 and to some extent a tele zoom such as 70-200, but your tele primes kind of have that covered.
 
DemiLion said:
There's nothing wrong with the IQ of the Sigma HSM version:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=4580586&postcount=16

I prefer it over the Canon tbh!
Click to expand...

Hi Mark, I’m sorry but a one off throw away one liner above 2 images of average quality (possibly due to compression) are hardly a basis upon which to judge a lens.

A quick Google of “Sigma 24-70 v Canon 24-70” will throw up several proper assessments like this one..
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-24-70mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-Lens-Review.aspx
Based upon which I stand by my reasons for discounting the Sigma, but each to their own mate.

Mark
 
iPhoto said:
Hi Mark, I’m sorry but a one off throw away one liner above 2 images of average quality (possibly due to compression) are hardly a basis upon which to judge a lens.

A quick Google of “Sigma 24-70 v Canon 24-70” will throw up several proper assessments like this one..
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-24-70mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-Lens-Review.aspx
Based upon which I stand by my reasons for discounting the Sigma, but each to their own mate.

Mark
Click to expand...

Which rather proves my point. That's a review of a completely different (and two generations older) lens.

I've used both lenses, and the Sigma in particular for work, but hey, what do I know?
 
DemiLion said:
Which rather proves my point. That's a review of a completely different (and two generations older) lens.

I've used both lenses, and the Sigma in particular for work, but hey, what do I know?
Click to expand...

Chill :cool: its not life and death stuff you know. :shrug: I didn’t even read that particular review, I was using it by way of example of the type detailed review that is available compared to one off images and one sided POV :rules:

You like the Sigma, great, I am happy for you :clap: but as I said at the outset its not for me, not going to stress about it :thankyou:

Mark
 
I think 24-70 is a bigger gap in you line up. Id fill that first. Canon mk1 is great, maybe get new, as they tend to wear out just in a couple of years due to their front heavy weight. Mine is off to canon tomorrow for the same reason.

85mm f/1.2 is a specialist lens, and has a very special look. If you fancy one, why not swapping the inferior 50mm? 1.8 version is very affordable if you want to try out, but with 100 L I can hardly see a reason.
 
I think if you are looking to fill a gap in your line up, then the 24-70 f2.8L is an excellent choice, but if you are looking for a lens to cover street/studio portrait work (i.e. your original reason), then this lens won't hack it (unless on a crop body), it just hasn't got the reach, ideal for group shots though. And your 100mm macro, while has the reach for portraits, is really a specialised macro lens, hence the bokeh will be a disappointment against a more relevant 'portrait' type lens.

I think we all go through these thought processes/dilemmas when looking to extend our lens line up , it's not easy making the right choice, it's oh so easy making the wrong one.
 
Now theres also a new player in the game with the Tamron SP 24-70 f2.8VC, said to be very sharp and the tamron VC is known to exceed the canon IS in performance on the SP70-300.
 
The 85L is a lens that takes some getting used to the DOF is so shallow very quickly you can get area's out of focus which you did not want LOL

on the other hand I have never used a Lens that has so much light gathering capabilities - it is quite unbelievable getting shutter speeds where F1.8 does not cut the mustard

and Bokeh to die for.. the only minor negative about the Lens is the autofocus slow but I must add it is not so slow that it makes it unusable (far from it) I shot a night car event where my F1.8 Lenses could not cope with the low light yet the 85mm L got some very pleaseing results

the Sigma 85mm F1.4 does look a nice lens but if money was not an issue I would never get it over the 85L its just so good.... the top of the food chain of Canon top quality Lenses with none of the did I get a good copy questions etc
certain Lenses exude quality and the 85L is one of those Like the high priced primes when you know you are paying for top quality and you get it

the other Lenses mentioned 24-70mm F2.8 is my workhorse Lens its pretty much on the camera the whole time it has great autofocus built like a tank and a very sharp lens
my 2p
Chris
 
Well I sort of went for the middle ground, 24-70 and the 85mm 1.8 ;-)

Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top