Shooting 85mm with 70-200 2.8 vs 85mm 1.4 - Same or different?

M

mrk123

Suspended / Banned
Messages
290
Name
kane
Edit My Images
No
I am planning a portrait session soon. And know the look I want to achive.

I have been after the 85mm 1.4 for some time, but been putting it off as it's more of a luxury lens to have.

I have the 70-200 2.8 is ii and as anyone who has used it can say, it's phenomenal!

If I decide to use this at say 85mm and 2.8, apart from the aperture / DOP effects, would the focal style be pretty much the same, as in the face won't look wither more 'scrunched and flat' for example?

I have shot portraits on th 70-200 but not on the 85mm prime, so I can't compare it to the lens I want personally.
 
The focal length and field of view would be exactly the same.

Only thing to be aware of is at 200mm and minimum focus distance (mfd) you will get a field of view of 135mm on some nikkor 70-200, I believe the same holds true for other lenses of this design
 
acrobatic_Citron said:
The focal length and field of view would be exactly the same.

Only thing to be aware of is at 200mm and minimum focus distance (mfd) you will get a field of view of 135mm on some nikkor 70-200, I believe the same holds true for other lenses of this design
Click to expand...

I'd not shoot at 200mm, I'd want to shoot at around 85mm, as i hav seen examples of how focal length can really flatten a face at extreme focal lengths (200mm).
 
As others have said 85mm is 85mm and so will have the same look as far as the shape of the face goes.
Out of focus rendering even with both lenses at f/2.8 will most likely be different as the iris shape and optical construction will be very different between the two lenses.
Reduced weight, size and complexity of the fixed 85mm may help making the image quicker and easier, less things to adjust and experiment with and more time with the subject is always a good thing.
 
As above shoot with the 70-200mm f2.8 at 85mm and it will look the same as an 85mm shot at f2.8, the only thing to bear in mind is the minimum focus distance and already mentioned. Also be aware that some lenses suffer more focus breathing than others.
 
snerkler said:
As above shoot with the 70-200mm f2.8 at 85mm and it will look the same as an 85mm shot at f2.8, the only thing to bear in mind is the minimum focus distance and already mentioned. Also be aware that some lenses suffer more focus breathing than others.
Click to expand...
What is focus breathing?
 
mrk123 said:
What is focus breathing?
Click to expand...
The simple version is that the focal length of the lens changes as the point of focus changes.
So a 200mm lens will be 200mm when focused at infinity (which is how focal length is measured), but when focused much closer it will have the appearance of a shorter focal length.
It is a side effect of internal focus lenses, where the focussing is achieved my moving a set of lens elements within the body of the lens.
The degree of focus breathing is a property of a specific lens design.

Note: This actually means that if your subject is, for example, 4m away, the exact field of view from three different lenses, all 85mm (85mm prime or a zoom at 85mm) may be different!
 
Last edited:
I would have said the 85mm would produce sharper images than the 70-200, and the advantage of a fast prime is to shoot wide open / larger aperture than 2.8. To me this is chalk and cheese, I'd never use the 70-200 as a substitute for the 85 F1.4

With that all said, the final product - will the end user really be that bothered or even notice (if they are not a photographer)
 
The prime is probably going to give you a "better" image.

The zoom will give you a really good image that Joe Public will still like and enjoy. The prime will give you a really good image that photographers will like and enjoy :)

I wouldn't worry about focus breathing etc. It's going to be a minimal difference for single shooting.
 
mrk123 said:
What is focus breathing?
Click to expand...
As above it's where the focal length (or more correctly field of view) is different to what it states. It's due to lenses being internal focussing these days and therefore not changing length when focussing. The focal length listed is the focal length given when focussed at infinite, when focussing closer the field of view can change giving the appearance of a shorter focal length lens. Most of the time it's not an issue, however some lenses have particularly bad focus breathing. The Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRII for example gives an equivalent field of view of a 135mm lens when focussed at the minimum focus distance
MarkWalker said:
I would have said the 85mm would produce sharper images than the 70-200, and the advantage of a fast prime is to shoot wide open / larger aperture than 2.8. To me this is chalk and cheese, I'd never use the 70-200 as a substitute for the 85 F1.4

With that all said, the final product - will the end user really be that bothered or even notice (if they are not a photographer)
Click to expand...
I agree, the only thing I would say is that if it's a studio setting you may well be stopping down to f8 or so in which case both will be sharp and give similar images.
LeeRatters said:
The prime is probably going to give you a "better" image.

The zoom will give you a really good image that Joe Public will still like and enjoy. The prime will give you a really good image that photographers will like and enjoy :)

I wouldn't worry about focus breathing etc. It's going to be a minimal difference for single shooting.
Click to expand...
Agreed, except in specific circumstances such as that I mention above. I'd always choose an 85mm too just for the size and weight difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top