# Should I sell my 70-200L vii for the 85mm 1.2?



## treyconnally (Oct 19, 2012)

I know that these lenses are completely different, but I have the 35L and it almost never comes off of my body. I love it. 

I shoot wedding, portraits, street photography... etc. etc. The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it... 

Should I sell it and get the 85mm 1.2 and then have the 35L, 85L & 24-70mm? 

I'm open minded. Just looking for some opinions 

I'm shooting a 5DMKii & 1vHS.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 19, 2012)

I use my 70-200 II more than my 85L II. But....



treyconnally said:


> The 70-200 is great and all, *I just never use it...*



Few things make less sense than hanging onto a lens you don't ever use. If that's the case, I'd say swap it for the 85L II.


----------



## heptagon (Oct 19, 2012)

Then the 85 probably wouldn't get used. Maybe invest the money otherwise.


----------



## dhofmann (Oct 19, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> I shoot wedding, portraits, street photography... etc. etc. The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it... Should I sell it and get the 85mm 1.2 and then have the 35L, 85L & 24-70mm? I'm shooting a 5DMKii & 1vHS.



Of the 35L, 24-70mm, or 70-200mm, which is the one you use for portraits now?

Maybe you would prefer the 135mm f/2.0L for portraits.


----------



## PackLight (Oct 19, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it...



I think you should hold on to it. In my opinion you can't find a nicer looking paper weight. 
Plus, do not forget the pride in ownership. It is just cool to be able to say "my 70-200 does this or is good at that" to your photo buddies. But my photo buddies are more in to wildlife and such so that might not be a good perspective.

But let's weight the 85mm, it is a really cool lens. I think you could get the exact same benefit out of it that you do the 70-200mm, even more so if your buddies are more in to portrait type work they will be far more impressed.

Any way, good luck with your decision.


----------



## IIIHobbs (Oct 19, 2012)

dhofmann said:


> Maybe you would prefer the 135mm f/2.0L for portraits.



This!

I think you will find that the 135 f2L is a very good prime to put in place of (any) 70-200. It is fast, sharp and much more practical in many applications than the 85 f1.2L.


----------



## AlicoatePhotography (Oct 19, 2012)

I love the 85mm 1.2L It has magical properties. It is slow to focus though. I would wager that if you are shooting portraits and you have a large enough space, you can get better photos with the 70-200L. That is if you want shallow depth of field. I think you can use 200MM and F2.8 and get a shallower depth of field than 85mm at 1.2. Of course it depends on how you frame it, and what distance you want from your subject. The versatility is there with the Zoom. I would say focus speed and sharpness are on the side of the zoom. I think at 1.2 the soft edges add to the look and feel though. Both are heavy. If the 70-200 isn't on your camera due to weight, then I would say look at the 135L as previously mentioned. I love that lens, and if you have the room to shoot it, it has a similar look to the 70-200L, just at 135MM, you can get better bokeh and it is F2.0. Which does help at plays, music performances, etc... Well, just my two cents. Good luck, I wish I was in your predicament.

Tom

www.alicoatephotography.com


----------



## sheedoe (Oct 19, 2012)

I have both and find myself using the 85 a lot more. Not only because its smaller and lighter, but the bokeh at 1.2 is amazing. Its very sharp wide open, unlike, say... the 50mm 1.2. If I were to keep one, I would definitely keep the 85mm. Now if you are a working professional who needs the versatility and range of a zoom then I would choose the 70-200mm.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 19, 2012)

Rent/borrow the 85L II and see if it will satisfy your needs before making that decision. An unused lens has no value to you, but you might as well figure out which FL would suit you best before plunking down all that cash.


----------



## treyconnally (Oct 19, 2012)

dhofmann said:


> Of the 35L, 24-70mm, or 70-200mm, which is the one you use for portraits now?
> 
> Maybe you would prefer the 135mm f/2.0L for portraits.



It's funny you ask. I use the 70-200 for portraits it drives me batty wanting that lovely bokeh. I just reviewed 3 of my shoots that I've edited and the pictures were all predominately shot between 80mm - 130mm haha 

I definitely see the value of the 135mm as a great replacement for the 70-200mm now.... 

So what would you do with the extra $1,000? 



Random Orbits said:


> Rent/borrow the 85L II and see if it will satisfy your needs before making that decision. An unused lens has no value to you, but you might as well figure out which FL would suit you best before plunking down all that cash.



I think I will definitely do this before I purchase either lens. I never think to rent items.


----------



## drjlo (Oct 19, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> I know that these lenses are completely different, but I have the 35L and it almost never comes off of my body. I love it.
> 
> I shoot wedding, portraits, street photography... etc. etc. The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it...
> 
> ...



As much as I love my 85L, I wouldn't sell my 70-200 II to get it. They just have too-different uses, especially since the image-stablized 400 mm (with the excellent Canon 2x TC III) is super nice to have. 

Perhaps keeping the 70-200 and buying a used Sigma 85 f/1.4 would be an option. That is Sigma's very strong effort.


----------



## dirtcastle (Oct 19, 2012)

If you already have the 35mm f/1.4 L, and it stays on your camera, then a "holy trinity" quiver might be considered:

35mm f/1.4 L
85mm f/1.2 L
135mm f/2 L

You could get either the 85mm or the 135mm and see how it works for you. Of course, if we are talking about a prime lens "replacement" for the 70-200mm f/2.8 L, I would recommend the 135mm f/2.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 19, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> I know that these lenses are completely different, but I have the 35L and it almost never comes off of my body. I love it.
> 
> I shoot wedding, portraits, street photography... etc. etc. The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it...
> 
> ...



You may want to read my mini-article on the 85L II.

http://ramonlperez.tumblr.com/post/33253428138/fast-prime-shoot-out-pt-1-85mm-1-2l-ii-mini-review

I prefer my 135L. Its more practical.


----------



## IIIHobbs (Oct 20, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> So what would you do with the extra $1,000?



Consider the 100 f2.8L Macro


----------



## hammy (Oct 20, 2012)

i have the 70-200 v2 and bought the 85 1.8 returned it and just received the 85 1.2 L today . i would recommend renting it to see if you like it. It's slow to focus in low light even with my 1Dx. The 85 1.8 would focus much faster and cheaper and lighter. Like the 70-200 L2, this thing is heavy. Thinking about returning it and get the 24-70 V2


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 20, 2012)

hammy said:


> i have the 70-200 v2 and bought the 85 1.8 returned it  and just received the 85 1.2 L today . i would recommend renting it to see if you like it. It's slow to focus in low light even with my 1Dx. The 85 1.8 would focus much faster and cheaper and lighter. Like the 70-200 L2, this thing is heavy. Thinking about returning it and get the 24-70 V2



What is the reason made you return the 1.8? thx


----------



## dirtcastle (Oct 20, 2012)

hammy said:


> i have the 70-200 v2 and bought the 85 1.8 returned it and just received the 85 1.2 L today . i would recommend renting it to see if you like it. It's slow to focus in low light even with my 1Dx. The 85 1.8 would focus much faster and cheaper and lighter. Like the 70-200 L2, this thing is heavy. Thinking about returning it and get the 24-70 V2



I also find the 85mm f/1.2 AF to be slow. But what I noticed is that if I "pre-focus" before I compose, it is much quicker to achieve the final focus when I need it. And now that I pre-focus habitually, I almost never notice how slow the AF is. But that's just me. And I tend to compose rather carefully and I'm not shooting sports and trying to focus back-and-forth between all sorts of distant a close-up objects.


----------



## treyconnally (Oct 20, 2012)

I've looked nonstop at portraits for the past 3 days from the 85 1.2 & the 70-200 and I'm always drawn to the 85mm. I think I'll ditch my 24-70 as well, and get the 135mm with that.

Thanks my friends!


----------



## birtembuk (Oct 20, 2012)

Got both and use both but obviously for pretty different photo styles. I'll sure keep 'em both but I admit that this 85/1.2 is too good to be true. So, if I really had to make a choice, it would be utterly Cornelian but in the end I'd give back the 70-200. Sigh ... :'(


----------



## treyconnally (Oct 20, 2012)

birtembuk said:


> Got both and use both but obviously for pretty different photo styles. I'll sure keep 'em both but I admit that this 85/1.2 is too good to be true. So, if I really had to make a choice, it would be utterly Cornelian but in the end I'd give back the 70-200. Sigh ... :'(



I put an add up for my 70-200mm. After looking at photo after photo... After photo... I'm convinced that even though it's slow focusing, I'll love the way the pictures turn out.

I just hope I don't lose too much money selling my 70-200. I bought it when it was released for $2499. (At the time a good deal) because of the price spikes after the earthquake reached the upwards of $2,999 for the lens.


----------



## tphillips63 (Oct 20, 2012)

Since you have decided what to do, just don;t sell it for the first low ball offer, take your time with it and get what you want determine is a good fair price.

It does sound like you prefer the primes so I am sure you be be delighted when you get them.


----------



## Bosman (Oct 21, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> I know that these lenses are completely different, but I have the 35L and it almost never comes off of my body. I love it.
> 
> I shoot wedding, portraits, street photography... etc. etc. The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it...
> 
> ...


It sounds like you figured it out but id like to weigh in on my thinking. First i have owned all lenses mentioned, the 24-70, the 50L, the 70-200L and LII, the 35, the 135, the 85LI. My style has changed over time i'd say. Some time ago i have sold all of them, sold the 85LI for the 50L to have the F1.2 and the focus speed. I have had the 24-70 and it was my go to workhorse lens for weddings. I rarely used the 35 because of the 24-70. The 135 is a headshot lens, while the lens was incredible in every way i never had the desire to find places to shoot where i could back up enough for the full body work. The 70-200 image rendering was amazing and it had that quick focus and flexibility i enjoyed about the 24-70. I sold the 135. For some time with weddings when trying to shoot primes and having way too many lenses i was swapping lenses out left and right at weddings meaning more chances to drop something or get a dirty sensor. The 24-70 on my 1dm3 and the 70-200 or 50L on my 5d handled my wedding work for a few years. I got many many great images with the combo. Before this season started I got it in my head that i want dreamier images and im going to shoot wide apertures. I looked at my data and a large percentage of my shots on the 24-70 were at 24 on my 1dm3. So i bought a 24. Then i thought man, i want 2 5dm3's which would mean the effective focal range of the 1dm3 at 24 was almost 35. I was thinking, what did i do, i shoulda got the 35. Since i couldn't afford another $3500 to be dropped on another 5dm3 I decided the 24L should go on the 1dm3 and the 50 on the 5DM3 and I shot that way all this year. On occassion i shot the 70-200 for the bokeh and focal length, 200mm at F2.8 is pretty darn nice! For me the 70-200 was never meant to be a wedding lens it was my sports lens. By far focus reliability among all lenses goes to the 70-200 either version. Well I unloaded a 5D, my 24-70, 50L, 1.4x extender for the 70-200, the 15mm fisheye this week and i have been looking at 85LII images for the past couple months and I decided to go to the store the other day and look at the 85 sigma and the 85 Canon version. I knew of course focus would be slower but like someone mentioned and like my version ! of the lens if you prefocus or you subjects are all within a 5ft range of each other focus is decently fast. Although i have read so much about the Sigma and have seen samples when in the store i didnt judge my decision on price i decided on how my test images were looking and the 85 ruled the sigma in my opinion. the sigma had tons of purple fringing on black text the canon not so much. I understand there will be, thats the nature that this type of lens has. 
All that to say the 5dm3 gets the 85LII and the 1dm3 gets the 24L and the 70-200 when needed. This means things are super simplified. I think my experience has allowed me to shoot more prime work these days. I will miss the 24-70 most so maybe that is a future purchase, because the 24-70 is very good for shooting marathon finishline work.
Ok that's a lot but philosophy and having things played out tends to help people maybe consider what works best for them. I vote go with the 85LII. I am thinking since you don't use the 70-200 much i agree with Nuero, sell it. I for one find mine to be indispensable for wedding ceremonies where i have ot stay back and yet get a better look at the ring exchange and the kiss. I also find it useful at toast so i can get out of peoples way. Perhaps you can get most of those things with the 85 but a crop body may help with that. I could probabaly go on and on but would love to hear about what you land on and when you get it.  I am stoked because my 85LII locked on the focus everytime even at F1.2. Love it!


----------



## Zv (Oct 21, 2012)

If the 85 1.2 gives u the images you desire then go for it. With the extra wonga left from the sale buy th 135L, most people on this forum would kill to have the holy trinity. Me included! ;D


----------



## Act444 (Oct 21, 2012)

As far as I'm concerned you'd have to pry the 70-200 out of my cold, dead hands. lol

I did try the 85 1.2 at the store and found it delivered amazing quality with little effort. However, the focusing was sloooow.

Given a personal choice the 70-200, to me, is MUCH more versatile. The 85 strikes me as a specialty lens (excels at studio/posed portraits, forget about anything moving), but then again, some people need that kind of performance.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 21, 2012)

treyconnally said:


> I've looked nonstop at portraits for the past 3 days from the 85 1.2 & the 70-200 and I'm always drawn to the 85mm. I think I'll ditch my 24-70 as well, and get the 135mm with that.
> 
> Thanks my friends!



I was going to suggest the same.... ditch the 24-70 and get a 135 f2 before you ditch the 70-200mk.ii

Try the f1.2 out first (rent borrow etc) it is a studio lens and needs time to work with in the open/ handheld. you will get some nice shots, but some that you will need to chuck due to slow AF and razor sharp doF.

Try is first!


----------



## Zv (Oct 21, 2012)

Maybe its just me - but wouldnt it be extremely difficult to take a portrait with an 85mm @ f/1.2? I find f/2 tough - only the eyes and a few strands of hair are ever in focus and if the subject is angled even a bit, one eye will be oof. 

Surely the 70-200 @ 85mm and f/2.8 gives shallow enough dof and excellent bokeh?? I havent used it only speculating.

I find the 85mm f/1.8 is quite good between f/2-2.8 if you want to consider it as an alt?? it focuses super fast too. Then u could keep the 70-200 too!


----------



## dirtcastle (Oct 21, 2012)

Zv said:


> Maybe its just me - but wouldnt it be extremely difficult to take a portrait with an 85mm @ f/1.2? I find f/2 tough - only the eyes and a few strands of hair are ever in focus and if the subject is angled even a bit, one eye will be oof.
> 
> Surely the 70-200 @ 85mm and f/2.8 gives shallow enough dof and excellent bokeh?? I havent used it only speculating.



Yes, but here are a few techniques for getting focused with the 85mm f/1.2.

1. Autofocus Microadjustments can help when lens AF is not properly calibrated.
2. Shoot multiple shots, pick the best ones. 
3. Set a high shutter speed to reduce subject motion.
4. Bump the aperture a bit (f/1.4 to f/2). You will get better sharpness and more blur than you'd get at f/2.8 on a 70-200mm.


----------



## drjlo (Oct 21, 2012)

dirtcastle said:


> 3. Set a high shutter speed to reduce subject motion.



Agreed with the suggestions. I do often get much sharper results with 85L if I set the ISO a bit higher than auto would. Although f/1.8-2.8 is easier to shoot, I do find the paritcular magic at f/1.2 difficult to abandon, something not reproducible with any other lens, so I try to brace my body parts on something if possible, i.e. an elbow on table, a shoulder on wall, etc.


----------



## mhvogel.de (Oct 21, 2012)

no. of cause not.


----------



## Zv (Oct 22, 2012)

drjlo said:


> dirtcastle said:
> 
> 
> > 3. Set a high shutter speed to reduce subject motion.
> ...



If your gonna shoot at f1.8 - 2.8 then whats the point in getting the 85L? I reckon you should only buy it if you absolutely need f/1.2 - 2 othewise your wasting your money.


----------



## Bosman (Oct 22, 2012)

In weddings you would shoot F1.2 in controlled scenarios anyway. shooting F1.2 in Servo is asking for trouble. I don't find too often that i need servo at weddings other than when they walk down the isles and dancing or the occasional fun group shots that have motion but then who would shoot F1.2 with groups unless you can line them up on the same plan of focus which you often don't have time to do. I just got mine so i can't comment based on experience but i have read the 85LII is very good tracking subject when in servo. On the other hand i will never recommend always being in servo mode as many people do. Fast Primes struggle taking images of static subjects in servo. You should only shoot servo if there is movement. I cannot express that enough. Ive been preaching that message for some time. If you don't believe me just do some tests shooting servo/ then single shot around the house, typically what you get is a prime going in and out back and forth if in servo. The 5dm3 has calmed this down a bit over my other cameras and no doubt the 1dx has also but lern this property about primes and you will get more consistent quality in focus shots.


----------

