Which lens? 24-70 2.8L or 85mm 1.2L (CANON)

AshleyKent

AshleyKent

Suspended / Banned
Messages
400
Name
Ashley
Edit My Images
Yes
right so i have a 5DII with 70-200 F2.8 IS II which is my main lens,

doing quite abit of portraits and weddings now so need to invest in a new lens... or the fact i want to treat myself.

with the 24-70 2.8 it would be a good match with the 70-200 2.8

but i can save money for another month or two and get the 85 1.2L

what do you think is better and why?
 
I read somewhere a while back if you dont know what framing you're going to need take a zoom. I have the 24/70 and an 85 1.8, as much as I love the 85 (5Ds and 85s seem to be made for each other) the zoom gets the most use.
I also looked hard at getting the 3 versions of the 85 and by far and away the best value for money in terms of speed of focusing and IQ was the 1.8, much as I recognise the dof difference the 1.4 and the 1.2 offer they are quite slow focusing by comparison to the 1.8, just too much glass to throw backwards and forwards.
 
MatBin said:
I read somewhere a while back if you dont know what framing you're going to need take a zoom. I have the 24/70 and an 85 1.8, as much as I love the 85 (5Ds and 85s seem to be made for each other) the zoom gets the most use.
I also looked hard at getting the 3 versions of the 85 and by far and away the best value for money in terms of speed of focusing and IQ was the 1.8, much as I recognise the dof difference the 1.4 and the 1.2 offer they are quite slow focusing by comparison to the 1.8, just too much glass to throw backwards and forwards.
Click to expand...

yeah i have read about the speed on the 1.2 compared to 1.8... but the differenence in DOF would be so good! i think the safe bet would be getting the 24-70
 
I am in the same dilemma but with the Nikon bodies. 85mm will be great but the versatility and flexibility of the 24-70 will probably win the day even if they are heavy!
 
I would have thought the 24-70 would be more flexible, but it's really how and what you want to shoot. Both are great lenses. The 24-70 is heavy, that and the range is why I went with the 24-105, which could be another to think of.
 
They're two different lenses really.

If you went for the 85mm what would your wide lens be for weddings?
 
jimbobc said:
I am in the same dilemma but with the Nikon bodies. 85mm will be great but the versatility and flexibility of the 24-70 will probably win the day even if they are heavy!
Click to expand...

i dont mind a lens being heavey, i have the 70-200 and that is a heavy one to carry around most of the day.

Byker28i said:
I would have thought the 24-70 would be more flexible, but it's really how and what you want to shoot. Both are great lenses. The 24-70 is heavy, that and the range is why I went with the 24-105, which could be another to think of.
Click to expand...

i can use a 24-105 but there is alot of distortion at the 24mm end and its F4, thereas the 24-70 2.8 has less distorsion and is 2.8. although the 24-105 is IS, its a hard one.

Craikeybaby said:
They're two different lenses really.

If you went for the 85mm what would your wide lens be for weddings?
Click to expand...

yeah i need something wide although i have a 17-40 F4L the 24-70 2.8 would be ideal for weddings along with 70-200 2.8 but the bokeh on the 85L is amazing!
 
For weddings I would definitely go for the 24-70 - I used to have both lenses and hardly ever used the 85 at weddings (it is nice for portraits though), slow focus and wafer thing DOF make it a risky lens in my opinion. Weddings are a one shot job so I prefer using a safer lens. For shallow DOF shots at weddings I now use the 135 f2, the focus is faster and much more accurate and the bokeh is still stunning. I have recently sold my 85L and replaced it with the Sigma 85 f1.4, and so far I'm pleased with the results. The AF is faster than the Canon, the image quality is excellent (it's plenty sharp enough wide open) and the bokeh at f1.4 is still really nice. You could get the 24-70 and the Sigma 85 for the price of the Canon 85.
 
I don't get it? your choosing between 24-70 and 85mm when you have a 70-200??? surely your decisions should be between the 24-70 and the 50mm 1.2. (which the 50mm would win hands down
 
24-70 is lovely lens. Suitable for a lot of uses: landscape, portraits etc. Sharp, wide aperature etc. Okay, it's a bit heavy, but I like that and feels well built.
 
Hmmm Weddings the zoom along with your 70-200, portraits the 85. Personally theres no way I would choose a 24-70 over a 85 1.2, but in your position the 24-70 makes more sense, as others have said, itll give you more flexibility.
 
For the price of an 85mm f/1.2, you could get the 24-70 and an 85mm f/1.8 - that'd be my choice tbh.
 
Ashley,

Have you considered the slightly cheaper 50L.

You can sell your 50 1.8 on to help with your budget too!

I have the 85L mk1 which I will never sell unless I move to Nikon. But if the 50L was available when I got my 85L then I may consider the 50L instead to give me better close up range.

Google them both and check out the images, I think it's a great alternative to the 85L
 
postcardcv said:
For weddings I would definitely go for the 24-70 - I used to have both lenses and hardly ever used the 85 at weddings (it is nice for portraits though), slow focus and wafer thing DOF make it a risky lens in my opinion. Weddings are a one shot job so I prefer using a safer lens. For shallow DOF shots at weddings I now use the 135 f2, the focus is faster and much more accurate and the bokeh is still stunning. I have recently sold my 85L and replaced it with the Sigma 85 f1.4, and so far I'm pleased with the results. The AF is faster than the Canon, the image quality is excellent (it's plenty sharp enough wide open) and the bokeh at f1.4 is still really nice. You could get the 24-70 and the Sigma 85 for the price of the Canon 85.
Click to expand...

yeah i do more portraits than weddings, although when using my 70-200 i always shoot at the 150 to 200 as the dof is good at 2.8, ill have a look at the 1.4

charleyboy14 said:
I don't get it? your choosing between 24-70 and 85mm when you have a 70-200??? surely your decisions should be between the 24-70 and the 50mm 1.2. (which the 50mm would win hands down
Click to expand...

i have looked at the 50L but the 50 1.8 just doenst appeal to me and never gets used.

jpwild said:
24-70 is lovely lens. Suitable for a lot of uses: landscape, portraits etc. Sharp, wide aperature etc. Okay, it's a bit heavy, but I like that and feels well built.
Click to expand...

a well built lens is a must, feel like you have got something for the money! if you know what i mean. 2.8 :P

twist said:
Hmmm Weddings the zoom along with your 70-200, portraits the 85. Personally theres no way I would choose a 24-70 over a 85 1.2, but in your position the 24-70 makes more sense, as others have said, itll give you more flexibility.
Click to expand...

yeah i guess my set up will then be so good. 24-200mm with 2.8 :)

Vertigo1 said:
For the price of an 85mm f/1.2, you could get the 24-70 and an 85mm f/1.8 - that'd be my choice tbh.
Click to expand...

ive heard the 85 1.8 is so much quicker than the AF on 85L.

Ricky said:
Ashley,

Have you considered the slightly cheaper 50L.

You can sell your 50 1.8 on to help with your budget too!

I have the 85L mk1 which I will never sell unless I move to Nikon. But if the 50L was available when I got my 85L then I may consider the 50L instead to give me better close up range.

Google them both and check out the images, I think it's a great alternative to the 85L
Click to expand...

i have looked into the 50L havnt seen to many examples of how good they are though, it is L lens after all so cant be all too bad
 
AshleyKent said:
ive heard the 85 1.8 is so much quicker than the AF on 85L.
Click to expand...

Indeed it is. The AF on the 85L is rather slow (although much better on the mk2) as there's just so much glass to move around. With such a shallow depth of field this can make it rather tricky to shoot moving targets. I think the 85L is a very specialised lens tbh - awesome when used right but tricky to get the hang of and not the perfect tool for all situations.
 
The 85/1.2 is a bit of a one trick pony. Given you have a 70-200/2.8 all you are really gaining is the thin depth of field effect. It is superb at this obviously, but that is all it does. The 24-70 gives you the wide range of focal lengths which will let you take completely different shots in many circumstances. For that reason I'd go with the zoom.

Having said all that, there is good reason to master a lens or two rather than buying all sorts of gear but not really knowing what to do with them. I guess it kind of depends on whether you are the sort of person that likes to know the deep intricate details of how a lens performs (optical performance, I mean, not just the mechanics) or whether you want to have variety.
 
24-70 is a great all round lens, could be more useful for what you want to do. But the 85 is gorgeous. So sharp and lovely for portraits.
 
Someone made a cracking comment in getting the 24/70 plus an 85 1.8. I have both and the 1.8 still does a cracking job on full frame
 
I have the 24-70mm and its my most used Lens without doubt its a real workhorse and goes everywhere with me
I am also a bit of a prime junkie primes are a tad sharper than the zooms
I am in the fortunate position of having a brother who has a lot of Canon prime glass etc and he had the 85mm L and lets me use a lot so I was lucky enough to use it for extended periods whenever I wanted
and I have never seen or used a better light gathering Lens than the 85mm
its one of those Lenses you must use and see with your own eyes just to see how 'stellar' it really is
others have pointed out that it is a heavy little beast and the autofocus is slow compared to the other Canon L lineup but seeing how bright the viewfinder looks and getting usable shutter speeds when other togs have given up the ghost in terrible light really brings to the table its usefulness

having said that the 85mm non L is also a great lens for the money and I can highly recommend that lens as well

Freefall's above contribution is an excellent option and is one that a lot of people have got by getting the 24-70mm and the 85mm F1.8 two really outstanding Lenses
 
The smoothness of the bokeh from a 50L is unsurpassed by anything in the same focal length. The same goes for contrast and colour reproduction. None of these things are what you can see from numbers and graphs on DxO mark etc.

It's a lovely lens, if a bit of a pain to use occasionally. Later copies are better for the back focussing issues, but it's still there. Anyone who owns one is willing to work around that as the results can be superb.

If it's advantages are greater than it's disadvantages and you can personally justify the cost of it over a 50mm f/1.4, I don't think you'd be disappointed with it.
 
AshleyKent said:
i dont mind a lens being heavey, i have the 70-200 and that is a heavy one to carry around most of the day.

i can use a 24-105 but there is alot of distortion at the 24mm end and its F4, thereas the 24-70 2.8 has less distorsion and is 2.8. although the 24-105 is IS, its a hard one.

yeah i need something wide although i have a 17-40 F4L the 24-70 2.8 would be ideal for weddings along with 70-200 2.8 but the bokeh on the 85L is amazing!
Click to expand...

I carry my 70-200 f2.8 is, my 100-400, 10-22, 24-105 and 50mm plus 1.4 and 2x tc, so weights not really an issue :)
Never heard of a 24-105 distorting at 24mm. Does the 24-70 rotate the barrel as it zooms. The one I rented for a week did, which was annoying with a CPL.
Having had both I went for light weight and range, but for weddings I can see the attraction of the extra stop of f2.8, plus when I was shooting sports I loved the f2.8 for isolating players. If you stayed long, how do you do group shots without a wide lens? Stand well back?
 
Do you really think that you will be able to get the right focus with a 1.2 when you are out and about, unless you are damn good, that's ain't gonna happen.

Echoing what's above, 85 1.8, and 24-70 and think about composition rather than getting half of someones face in focus.
 
Prime for weddings I'd rather go for the 24 or 35 f1.4 with a 24-70 and 70-200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top