A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Canon EOS > EOS Lenses > Sigma 85 f1.4 vs Canon 85 f1.2...

Featured Equipment Deals

Introduction to Lightroom Tabs: Develop (Video Tutorial) Read More

Introduction to Lightroom Tabs: Develop (Video Tutorial)

Learn how to use the Lightroom Develop Tab to ensure your image is just as you want it to be, including presents, tone curve, lens correction, and more!

Latest Equipment Articles

Sun Position Tracking Apps Read More

Sun Position Tracking Apps

These 5 apps, ranging in price from free to $8.99, are our top picks for tracking sun (and moon) light. Also ranging in complexity, some help you keep tabs on the ideal lighting of the day while...

Latest Learning Articles

State of the ART: Rag Mama Rag! Read More

State of the ART: Rag Mama Rag!

In his latest exploration, fine art photographer Pete Myers reviews and compares some of the highest quality rag-based photographic papers on the market today.


Sigma 85 f1.4 vs Canon 85 f1.2 L II

Bhavesh Mandalia , Oct 27, 2010; 06:42 p.m.

hi,
i'm confused between sigma and canon... 85 1.4 sigma or 85 1.2 II canon... canon one is far more expensive. but is it worth buying?
i own a sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO DG MACRO HSM II, which is half the price of canon 70-200 2.8 and equally good (i'm not going by the reviews, i personally tested both the lenses at canon center) may be i have a really good copy of sigma.
what are your thoughts on this new sigma prime? has anyone tested it against canon?
i'm using a 7d body.

Responses


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Ilya E , Oct 27, 2010; 07:21 p.m.

Well, I have just received the Sigma and took it for a spin. I am going to cut to the chase. I understand now what others meant when talking about Sigma AF. IT SUCKS. Wide open at MFD and near, it needed +20 MA (maximum on 5DII) and at infinity an near, it needed +13. I am going to post a few test shots later tonight where you will be able to clearly see how bad it's AF is. Tomorrow I am going to test both Sigma and Canon 85L together. But from what I saw so far t looks like 85L has much better bokeh as well.

Mark Sanderson , Oct 27, 2010; 07:25 p.m.

I have the Canon 85mm 1.8 (from ebay) and its a great portrait lens with nice bokeh. Save some bucks and stay with Canon if you have a Canon camera.

John Crowe , Oct 27, 2010; 07:27 p.m.

You could also consider a used Canon 85mm f1.2 L original.

Ilya E , Oct 27, 2010; 07:38 p.m.

Guys, lets stay on topic. If you want to open a new thread about 1.8 feel free to do so. I agree with John about original 1.2. You can find them not really much more expensive than Sigma

JDM von Weinberg , Oct 27, 2010; 07:46 p.m.

As I've often said before about 'normal' f/1.2 lenses, and it applies to the 85mm as well, this is a specialized lens. If you need that f/1.2 aperture, the shallow depth of field, then there is no getting around the real thing.

Many of us who have earlier versions of these lenses, fully recognize that a corresponding 50mm f/2 or f/1.8 may very well be a 'better' lens across the middle of the range. Indeed, we own less exaggerated, less technologically stressed lenses for everyday use.

But when you need f/1.2 (and if you don't know why, then you don't need an f/1.2 lens), there's no substitute. I honestly do think there was more point to it in slow film days, but it still gives a little edge just where it is needed the most, often right out there at the edge of available darkness.
People who buy an f/1.2 lens because it is an L lens or because it's a status symbol, would nearly always be better off with an f/1.4 or even f/1.8.

Bhavesh Mandalia , Oct 27, 2010; 07:55 p.m.

@ Ilya : please.. please do upload your test pics of canon vs sigma on this thread.. and one more thing do you mean that if i do those Micro Adjustment for AF on my 7d.. the lens would be perfect for me? Apart from AF how are the other aspects of sigma 85 1.4? IQ equally as good as canon?

@ JDM : i didn't get your point.. 'I honestly do think there was more point to it in slow film days, but it still gives a little edge just where it is needed the most, often right out there at the edge of available darkness.'

can you elaborate a little more on that... and if you can be little less technical... ;)

Bhavesh Mandalia , Oct 27, 2010; 07:57 p.m.

@ JDM : on after thoughts, now that i think of it... i really don't know why i want to buy a 1.2 lens.. only may be because its a status symbol and best in the market... i really need to see the difference between 1.2 and 1.8...

Shawn Gibson , Oct 27, 2010; 08:23 p.m.

85/1.2Lii is the best lens I've ever had. Zeiss 85/1.4 wasn't special, and that's the case with many of them. The Canon REALLY is awesome.And I try hard not to like Canon:)

Wide open it's so beautiful. And that's against a lot of first-party competition over decades...I can't comment on the Sigma, but I can only imagine the best case is that is does well but has no character, like many third party lenses which also 'perform' very well.

Daniel Lee Taylor , Oct 27, 2010; 10:24 p.m.

Guys, lets stay on topic. If you want to open a new thread about 1.8 feel free to do so.

Bhavesh is looking for an 85mm lens and is concerned about cost. Mentioning the 85 f/1.8 is on topic. Note he later said: i really don't know why i want to buy a 1.2 lens.. only may be because its a status symbol and best in the market... i really need to see the difference between 1.2 and 1.8...

And on that point, here's a link to Castleman's review of the 85 f/1.2L I and II, and 85 f/1.8, with test images so you can judge the differences directly.

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/85mm/index.htm


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses