# Canon 85L 1.2 vs Sigma 85 1.4... Has anyone tried both?



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 6, 2012)

Hi Everybody!

I just sell my 24-70L and get a 35L, I love the new lens  but I'm missing a fast prime between 35L and 135L...

Sigma 85 1.4 have stellar reviews, fast focus, excellent IQ... and the canon 85L... well, its the 85L , the only issues are price and focus speed (maybe weight, but I really don't mind that).

Has anyone tried both? 

The canon focus is really that slow?

How those lenses focus in the dark?

I already have searched a lot of reviews, but I want some experiences from people of this forum


----------



## Menace (Nov 7, 2012)

I've tried both; I found Sigma to be slightly faster focusing than Canon but the Sigma copy I tried was not as sharp wide open as the Canon (1.4 vs 1.2!)

Weight is not an issue for me either. 

If you can afford it, get the Canon 85 1.2L - magical ;D


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 7, 2012)

what body are you going to use it on
this is the most critical fator asside from the fact the canon f1.2 is 2.5 times more expensive than the sigma 85

if you are using a 1Dmk4 or 1Dx or 1Dsmk3 and have piles of cash get the canon 85 f1.2L II from F1.2 to F2 its sharper than the sigma

if you are using 5D series or lower with AFMA capability get the sigma 85 f1.4 from f2 onward i feel its sharper than the canon L its AF is significantly faster on non 1D bodies it doesnt have focus by wire
and its 2.5 times cheaper

if you have a body without AFMA then you probably cant afford the canon 85 f1.2 so get the canon 85 f1.8


----------



## Ben Taylor (Nov 7, 2012)

Have tried both, although not extensively with the Canon. 

But to answer your questions:

1. Yes, it is THAT slow

2. That depends a lot on the body you are using. The Sigma locks focus well in low light with the 5D3. 

I use the Sigma, it's pretty much the only Sigma lens I will trust. I dropped mine onto a cobblestone road while travelling through Europe last year and broke it (AF Motor died from the impact I believe). I missed having it so much that I bought another copy in Berlin a day later. 

It's a damn fine lens, I use it very often. Does have some purple fringing wide open but only in certain high contrast lighting situations - this doesn't bother me very much.


----------



## xopher (Nov 7, 2012)

It depends on what you're using it for and your style. As a street and portraiture photography, the 85L is fast enough for me. I tend to take my time to direct, compose, and making sure i nail the focus. Having a faster lens wouldn't help me in anyway and in this case, I'd lose magical 85L characteristics. I have also used the lens for events. As long as you're not zooming from end to end, you won't really notice it. 

With the sigma, you may be faced with multiple exchanges to get yourself a perfect copy. Save yourself the trouble and get the 85L!


----------



## Ben Taylor (Nov 7, 2012)

That's a valid point xopher. If fast autofocus isn't required for what you need to do, and if the price of the 85L isn't an issue then I would certainly grab the Canon. 

As for the Sigma, I've had two copies and both have been spot on. I may be lucky but so far so good for me.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 7, 2012)

Ben Taylor said:


> That's a valid point xopher. If fast autofocus isn't required for what you need to do, and if the price of the 85L isn't an issue then I would certainly grab the Canon.
> 
> As for the Sigma, I've had two copies and both have been spot on. I may be lucky but so far so good for me.



ditto on the canon

also with sigma if it is oof just send it in for a recalibration its only a firmware thing not physical tampering and they come back good as gold

mine is spot on now even on bodies with no AFMA


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 7, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> what body are you going to use it on
> this is the most critical fator asside from the fact the canon f1.2 is 2.5 times more expensive than the sigma 85
> 
> if you are using a 1Dmk4 or 1Dx or 1Dsmk3 and have piles of cash get the canon 85 f1.2L II from F1.2 to F2 its sharper than the sigma
> ...



I have a 5D mkIII and dont have piles of cash


----------



## Enrico (Nov 7, 2012)

Rent both. Or:

- Go to a camera/lenst store with your 5D3.
- Ask to try both.

I was in this dilemma a year ago (on my 5D2).

I went to the store:
The sigma was way faster in focusing.
But something magical happens with the Canon at f1.2 which you just can't get with the sigma. Is it worth the higher cost? Only you can decide.

I decided to for the Canon, since I know myself and that I would always think of the Canon everytime I would mount the sigma...

Now that I have the 5D3 the Canon is significantly faster in focusing than on the 5D2.

The way I use my Canon (portraits and some street shots) the focusing is not a problem at all.


----------



## Bosman (Nov 7, 2012)

I just got an 85LII, have the Version 1 a few years ago and im back in the saddle. It one of those lenses you ask yourself why havent i had this all along. I researched the 85's to death before walking into Norman Camera. I had them hold both the 85L and the Sigma 85. First let me address your question with this. You may have already decided you want the LII, am i right? Saying you don't have piles of cash after asking which one is best is asking for permission isn't it? 
In my testing both i didn't find sharpness of the sigma as pleasing at f1.4 as Canons F1.2. At F1.2 folks, dead sharp and in focus where you put the focus point! The color on the Canon was better too. On the other hand the sigma was pretty fast comparatively. The chroma on text when exposed for black text on a white display was out of hand on the sigma, the canon does show some but you have to push it much more to get it. If I didn't see much difference the Sigma would have been the choice. While cash for me is tight, I still spent double for the Canon, especially since it is currently $200 off. I purchase with a mindset of best with no regrets i didn't get best for something lesser. Granted this is way more important if it is a main lens. I shot the heck out of it this past saturday on my 5dm3 and loved it. Even shooting a wedding and in servo mode it even did quite well. I was slightly panicked I would be shooting with this as my main since it was slow but didn't find it gave me any issues all day. I will say however at Iso 10,000 and F1.4 1/60th sec with poor lighting the accuracy took a dive. I was shooting some still subjects at the table and had difficulty at times. I think when i was closer however the accuracy increased a lot. I think that is more a 5dm3 focus system thing. I wonder about how the 6D would handle it with -3 exposure focussing.
All that said if you need an 85 and can stop it down a bit with the right price the Sigma is pretty good. I scoped out hundreds of gallery images on photography on the net and found that lens did quite well.


----------



## Bosman (Nov 7, 2012)

Enrico said:


> Rent both. Or:
> 
> - Go to a camera/lenst store with your 5D3.
> - Ask to try both.
> ...


you need to update your signature 
Canon 5D2, Canon 5DM3, 85/1.2L II , 35/1.4L, 24-105/4L IS, S100


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 7, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> if you are using a 1Dmk4 or 1Dx or 1Dsmk3 and have piles of cash get the *canon 85 f1.2L II from F1.2 to F2 its sharper than the sigma
> *
> if you are using 5D series or lower with AFMA capability *get the sigma 85 f1.4 from f2 onward i feel its sharper than the canon L* its AF is significantly faster on non 1D bodies it doesnt have focus by wire
> and its 2.5 times cheaper



Why on a 1D camera one lens is sharper and on a 5D is the opposite?


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 7, 2012)

Bosman said:


> First let me address your question with this. You may have already decided you want the LII, am i right? Saying you don't have piles of cash after asking which one is best is asking for permission isn't it?


LOL ;D

"Bosman told me to buy it" :

Maybe my doubt is the focus speed, and that the 135L is kind of similar


----------



## Bosman (Nov 7, 2012)

85L users have a trick for focus speed and you should test it in the store. If you pre-focus meaning shoot something in a similar area to your subjects focus is plenty fast for pretty much anything including sports. It's the infinity to near focus thats slow. Also if you focus on something 10 ft away then go to something 15 ft away its still pretty fast. Is it whip fast? No. This lens needs a finer focus thread due to its dof capability. Again, I just shot a wedding with around 2000 images with the 85LII on the 5dm3 and focus or focus speed never became an issue. I used the 85LI back in like 2007/8 and i shot dancing with flash and didn't have issues. Expect to shoot a lot when shooting F2 and larger without flash so i do as a habit. I don't care if i throw away redundant images I just want at least a couple to be perfect. I mainly do it because people look around and blink and make funny faces. I did try some natural light dancing and well at 10,000 iso F1.4 1/60 - 1/100 it was dodgy but the few that work look really cool.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 7, 2012)

Cptn Rigo said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > if you are using a 1Dmk4 or 1Dx or 1Dsmk3 and have piles of cash get the *canon 85 f1.2L II from F1.2 to F2 its sharper than the sigma
> ...



I was only refering to the AF not sharpness the 1D bodies use a higher voltage which drives the AF faster on the 85L so on a 5D the 85L is quite a bit slower whereas the sigma is still very fast at focusing


----------



## gmrza (Nov 7, 2012)

Bosman said:


> 85L users have a trick for focus speed and you should test it in the store. If you pre-focus meaning shoot something in a similar area to your subjects focus is plenty fast for pretty much anything including sports. It's the infinity to near focus thats slow. Also if you focus on something 10 ft away then go to something 15 ft away its still pretty fast. Is it whip fast? No. This lens needs a finer focus thread due to its dof capability. Again, I just shot a wedding with around 2000 images with the 85LII on the 5dm3 and focus or focus speed never became an issue. I used the 85LI back in like 2007/8 and i shot dancing with flash and didn't have issues. Expect to shoot a lot when shooting F2 and larger without flash so i do as a habit. I don't care if i throw away redundant images I just want at least a couple to be perfect. I mainly do it because people look around and blink and make funny faces. I did try some natural light dancing and well at 10,000 iso F1.4 1/60 - 1/100 it was dodgy but the few that work look really cool.



What I have found is that, subjectively, the 85 f/1.2L II seems to focus faster on a 5DIII than on a 5DII.

While this lens does have the downside of slower focusing, there seems to be very little debate about the quality of its out of focus blur. Where this lens also stands out is in the smoothness of foreground blur - lots of lenses only achieve a smooth background blur while their foreground blur is not nearly as smooth. (Admittedly in a lot of situations, foreground blur is less of an issue than background blue.)


----------



## turtle (Nov 8, 2012)

AF speed is not an issue for the portraits I do with my 85 1.2L II. For quick work, where the lens is switching from close to distant focus, this lens would not be recommended... but unless shooting sport, how often do you do this? Or animals perhaps, kids playing...


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 8, 2012)

I've owned the 85 L II and sold it for the Sigma. My advice is to buy the Sigma. I'm not sure there is any real difference in image quality. Focusing on the Sigma is so much faster. Also, with a filter on the Sigma, it's more sealed than the Canon if you are worried about dust.

So, for less than half the cost you get faster AF, better build quality, tie image quality, but lose half a stop.


----------



## Bosman (Nov 8, 2012)

Have the local camera store you go to hold both lenses for your reviewing, the experience you have will tell you what you need to do.


----------



## K-amps (Nov 8, 2012)

bchernicoff said:


> I've owned the 85 L II and sold it for the Sigma. My advice is to buy the Sigma. I'm not sure there is any real difference in image quality. Focusing on the Sigma is so much faster. Also, with a filter on the Sigma, it's more sealed than the Canon if you are worried about dust.
> 
> So, for less than half the cost you get faster AF, better build quality, tie image quality, but lose half a stop.



With high ISO performance available ( with e.g. 5dii, 5diii, 1Dsiii, 1Dx) , the effect of large aperture lenses (i.e. half to 1 stop difference of light allowance) has diminished or even been eradicated to a large extent.

That leaves Quantity and Quality of OOF Blur as still one of the major advantages large aperture Primes provide (apart from sharpness etc).

While I have not worked with the Siggy 1.4, I have compared images of it on TDP: and the difference is pretty clear between the 2. If you go here http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx about 1/3 of the way down you see a Picture of a Girl taken at different apertures with the 85L and the Siggy 1.4 against a forest/ green background next to a Black cast iron Fence.

I find the Bokeh of the 85L to be better.... but your mileage may vary since Boken is subjective... however

Even the *Quantity* of OOF blur is more with the 85L at the *same* aperture. e.g. Compare the tree trunk blur behind the girl with both lenses at f1.4, the 85L melts it so much more... in fact the 85L at F2 has as much subjective blur as the Siggy does at F1.4... this is where the 85 L shines. I don't know of many lenses that can melt away the background like the 85L.... but you Pay for it


----------



## Zv (Nov 8, 2012)

Buy the first lens you think about when you wake up in the morning. 

;D


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 8, 2012)

The Digital Picture review with it mouse over comparison images is really useful. If you look at those subtle differences and decide the Canon is worth 2x the cost, then by all means, go for it.

Personally, I would buy the Sigma AND a nice used 135mm f/2L for the same money.


----------



## MK5GTI (Nov 8, 2012)

K-amps said:


> While I have not worked with the Siggy 1.4, I have compared images of it on TDP: and the difference is pretty clear between the 2. If you go here http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-85mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx about 1/3 of the way down you see a Picture of a Girl taken at different apertures with the 85L and the Siggy 1.4 against a forst/ green background next to a Black cast iron Fence.
> 
> I find the Bokeh of the 85L to be better.... but your mileage may vary since Boken is subjective... however



thanks for the link, i find it useful as it compare to other 85mm prime, but, from the Canon L, i can't see any difference between 1.2 vs 1.4.


----------



## Chris Geiger (Nov 8, 2012)

Wedding photographer here. I normally do coverage with zooms (24-105, 24-70, 17-40 and 70-200) but am trying to work more with primes for the look. I've tried both the Canon and Sigma 85's and settled on the Sigma. I like the results and mine is just as sharp at f/1.4 as the Canon version I tried with my 5D3's. It's the only non Canon lens I own right now. I am so happy with it, I am considering the 35 1.4 that will be out in November. 

In the past I have owned the Canon 50L, 50 f/1.4 and 50 f/1.8. I was not happy with any of those lenses for sharpness reasons. I borrowed a 50 1.4 Sigma and liked the results. I almost purchased one but have decided I want to use a 35mm/85mm combo for shooting weddings.

One thing I don't like is the filter size. I really wish all my pro lenses would use the same filter size. I like to use ND and Pol filters and it is PITA to deal with the different sizes while shooting.


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 8, 2012)

Chris Geiger said:


> One thing I don't like is the filter size. I really wish all my pro lenses would use the same filter size. I like to use ND and Pol filters and it is PITA to deal with the different sizes while shooting.



I don't understand. The Sigma 85 uses a 77mm filter, the same as your other lenses. Or are you referring to the smaller filter on the new 35mm?


----------



## Enthusiast (Nov 8, 2012)

I did a wedding with a rented 85 1.2 and bought the Sigma after that. The comparision is easy:
The 85L has a very nice special look but you have a lot of shrap behause the AF is so slow that your subject is leaving Deep of Field at 1.2 before the AF finished. You get only really good pics and a lot of scrap nothing in between.

The Sigma is much sharper, do have a quick AF and you get much much more pics really good and I get only 10% scrap instead of 60-70% scrap. The look is 90-95% as with the Canon an you need a 1:1 comparison to see a difference. 
For wining a a concours I would prefer the Canon, for a wedding or Kids I will always take the Sigma. 

I like your approach about filter size. The Sigma 50 1,4 I chosed only to have the same 77mm than all my other lenses. It's very practical while shooting primes to remove the caps from one lens and put it on the removed one immediately. I would use an adapter for the 67>77mm filter for the 35mm Sigma.


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 8, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Even the *Quantity* of OOF blur is more with the 85L at the *same* aperture. e.g. Compare the tree trunk blur behind the girl with both lenses at f1.4, the 85L melts it so much more... in fact the 85L at F2 has as much subjective blur as the Siggy does at F1.4... this is where the 85 L shines. I don't know of many lenses that can melt away the background like the 85L.... but you Pay for it



+ 1 I already have noticed that.


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 8, 2012)

Zv said:


> Buy the first lens you think about when you wake up in the morning.
> 
> ;D



: I know!


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 8, 2012)

bchernicoff said:


> The Digital Picture review with it mouse over comparison images is really useful. If you look at those subtle differences and decide the Canon is worth 2x the cost, then by all means, go for it.
> 
> Personally, I would buy the Sigma AND a nice used 135mm f/2L for the same money.



I already have the 135L, that's part of my dilemma :-\


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 8, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> I did a wedding with a rented 85 1.2 and bought the Sigma after that. The comparision is easy:
> The 85L has a very nice special look but you have a lot of shrap behause the AF is so slow that your subject is leaving Deep of Field at 1.2 before the AF finished. You get only really good pics and a lot of scrap nothing in between.



Interesting... A little of movement and the pic is focused in the ears :S with all the eyes blurry. 

Thanks for pointing this out


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 8, 2012)

Chromatic Aberration @ 1.4

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=397&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=756&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 8, 2012)

I will be happy to post some RAW images taken with the Sigma and 5D Mk III when I get home from work...maybe 2 hours.


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 8, 2012)

bchernicoff said:


> I will be happy to post some RAW images taken with the Sigma and 5D Mk III when I get home from work...maybe 2 hours.



That will be Awesome!! Thanks a Lot! ;D


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 8, 2012)

Cptn Rigo said:


> Chromatic Aberration @ 1.4
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=397&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=756&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0



the CA is so mild it takes only a tweak of 3 to 5 on the color fringe correction in LR4 to completely correct


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 9, 2012)

Here's a natural light portrait at f/2. Notice the detail in her face. Incredibly sharp:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2.CR2

Here's a shot from a concert at f/1.4 under stage lighting (also shows off 5D Mk 3 ISO 6400 performance):
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk3-Sidma-f1.4.CR2

Here's a shot at f/2 showing nice circular bokeh of lights in the background:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk3-Sigma-f2.dng

Here's a shot at f/1.4 showing smoothly rendered out of focus areas:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f1.4.CR2

Finally for the Sigma, here's a f/2 shot showing great color and contrast rendering in natural light:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2-kid.CR2

Here's one from the Canon 85mm f/1.2L II:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/7d-CanonMk2-f1.2.CR2


----------



## Cptn Rigo (Nov 9, 2012)

bchernicoff said:


> Here's a natural light portrait at f/2. Notice the detail in her face. Incredibly sharp:
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/32275661/5dMk2-Sigma-f2.CR2
> 
> Here's a shot from a concert at f/1.4 under stage lighting (also shows off 5D Mk 3 ISO 6400 performance):
> ...



Thanks a lot!!! those sigma files looks pretty well!!

Btw. I already have seen the photo of the redhead girl making the funny face elsewhere, did you make an review of the lens?? or post it on flickr???


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 10, 2012)

Cptn Rigo said:


> Thanks a lot!!! those sigma files looks pretty well!!
> 
> Btw. I already have seen the photo of the redhead girl making the funny face elsewhere, did you make an review of the lens?? or post it on flickr???



She's my fiance and I've probably posted that picture on here before. Speaking of that picture, we were walking on the beach and spun around and made that face. You can see that I didn't get the focus perfect, but at least it was usable. If I had the Canon there is no way it would have focused in time to catch the moment.

There is one factor regarding the Canon that you might consider...the warm, special feeling of knowing and being able to say that you own one of the most highly regarded lenses in the world.


----------



## Juliuslepetit (Nov 10, 2012)

Ben Taylor said:


> As for the Sigma, I've had two copies and both have been spot on. I may be lucky but so far so good for me.



To remeber it is not about getting a good copy or not, it's about getting the fitting tolerance body/lens. And you'll certainly have to micro adjust the focus on any of the two to set the best focus it can deliver for your body.

See: http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths/


----------



## Ben Taylor (Nov 14, 2012)

I did have to micro adjust on the 5D2 to +2 from memory. 

On the 5D3 - plug and play. I haven't needed to microadjust at all.


----------



## K-amps (Nov 14, 2012)

bchernicoff said:


> She's my fiance



You lucky Bastard...


----------



## PavelR (Nov 14, 2012)

K-amps said:


> bchernicoff said:
> 
> 
> > She's my fiance
> ...


+1


----------



## Bosman (Nov 16, 2012)

Cptn Rigo said:


> Chromatic Aberration @ 1.4
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=397&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=756&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


Funny thing being that i could visibly see chroma on the sigma images when i tested it on text in the store yet very little on the canon 85. Def strange to me that this testing shows the direct opposite of what i found to be true.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 16, 2012)

heres a 100% crop of the sigma 85 @ f2 on the 5Dmk3


----------



## RVB (Nov 21, 2012)

bchernicoff said:


> Cptn Rigo said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks a lot!!! those sigma files looks pretty well!!
> ...


----------



## switters (Nov 24, 2012)

I had the Sigma 85/1.4 first. The IQ and AF speed were great, but the focus was inconsistent. I sent it in to Sigma along with my 5D3 for them to calibrate it, but it still wasn't right, so I returned it and bought the 85L. That is a nearly perfect lens. I have no complaints, including AF speed, which I find to be perfectly adequate for shots of my 16-month old daughter who never stops moving. 

However, I'm now considering trying another copy of the Sigma. Why? Because, as others have pointed out, if it's 95% as good as the 85L then I can use the $1,000 or so I'll net on the transaction to buy another lens, or perhaps an OM-D for travel, which I've been considering. The other thing I preferred about the Sigma was the lower weight and smaller size relative to the 85L.

Although... I could easily imagine selling the 85L and regretting it afterward. It really is a magical lens.


----------

