# Canon Announces the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 29, 2017)

```
<em>New Canon EF Lenses Support a Variety of Photography Applications including Architecture, Portrait, Food and Landscape</em></p>
<p><strong>MELVILLE, N.Y., August 29, 2017 –</strong> Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the new Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM lens as an addition to the Company’s existing 85mm focal-range lens line-up and three new Tilt-Shift macro lenses: the TS-E 50mm f/2.8L Macro lens, TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro lens and TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro lens. Canon also announced a new Macro Twin-Lite MT-26EX-RT flash. These new products will help provide both advanced amateur and professional photographers the unique photography tools for a variety of applications and solutions including architecture, landscape, food, product and portrait photography.</p>
<p><strong>Preorder: Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS $1599: <a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354803-REG/canon_ef_85mm_f_1_4l_is.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/2vmIjTH">Amazon</a> | <a href="https://mpex.com/canon-ef-85mm-f1-4l-is-usm-lens.html?acc=3">Midwest Photo</a></strong></p>
<p>“Creating a powerful, timeless image requires more than just a camera. It requires high-quality, well-crafted optics and flashes to capture compelling photography,” said Yuichi Ishizuka, president and COO, Canon U.S.A., “These new lenses along and the Macro Twin-Lite flash will continue to push the boundaries and expand the possibilities of what advanced amateur and professional photographers capture and share with the world.”</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p><strong>Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Lens </strong>

Canon EF 85mm focal-length lenses are traditionally very sought-after options for portrait photographers. With that in mind, Canon is expanding its EF 85mm line up with the introduction of the new Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM; the first Canon EF 85mm lens to feature image stabilization, providing up to four stops<span class="green">*</span> of shake correction for smooth and crisp imagery.</p>
<p>The EF 85mm utilizes one large diameter, high-precision molded glass aspherical lens and features an ASC coating. The large f/1.4 aperture produces shallow depth-of-field, fast shutter speeds and a bright image inside the viewfinder, allowing photographers to focus and compose their image reliably. In addition, a circular aperture with 9-blade iris allows for beautiful bokeh.</p>
<p>The New Canon EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS USM is scheduled to be available November 2017 for an estimated retail price of $1599.00<span class="green"><sup>††</sup></span>.</p>
<p><strong>New Tilt-Shift Lenses </strong>

Tilt-Shift lenses have several applications for suitable photographers because of their ability to provide enhanced creative control over perspective through the tilt function and depth-of-field through the shift function in their images. This ability can be optimal when photographing landscapes, portraits, and architecture.</p>

<p>The image quality derived from Canon Tilt-Shift lenses has evolved considerably since their first inception several years ago. Enhanced optical elements like molded aspherical glass and UD lenses are at the core of the new Canon TS-E 50mm f/2.8L Macro lens, TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro lens and TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro lens. These features provide users with edge-to-edge resolution, improved image quality over previous Canon TS-E lenses and minimum distortion. Canon also included two anti-reflective coatings, SubWaveLength Structure Coating (SWC) in the TS-E 50mm f/2.8L and TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro lenses and Air-Sphere Coating (ASC), into the TS-E 50mm f/2.8L and TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro lenses. SWC helps to reduce flare and ghosting, while ASC is a new technology that provides amazingly high, anti-reflective performance, particularly when alleviating incidental light that can enter a lens.</p>
<p>The new Canon Tilt-Shift lenses also offer improved operability over previous models, including larger tilt, shift-and-lock knobs, lock-release button and a new tilt-locking mechanism that firmly locks the lens in the zero-tilt position to help prevent unintended tilting to increase more precise shooting capabilities. The rotation of the tilt-shift lenses also allows users to freely change the axis of tilt movement and shift from right angles to parallel to better adapt to various shooting conditions and situations.</p>
<p>The new Canon TS-E 50mm f/2.8L Macro lens, TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro lens and TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro lenses are scheduled to be available November 2017 for an estimated retail price of $2199.00<span class="green"><sup>††</sup></span>.</p>
<p><strong>Canon Macro Twin-Lite MT-26EX-RT Flash </strong>

To further enhance a photographer’s ability to shoot macro photography, the new Canon Macro Twin-Lite MT-26EX-RT Flash can be the ideal tool. The use of a macro twin-lite allows for a more ideal lighting situation for photographers, and can be adjusted and shifted depending on the direction the photographer would like to control. Detachable macro twin lites can be rotated up to 60 degrees, and features a maximum guide number of 85.3 ft (26 m)<span class="green">**</span>.</p>
<p>The new Canon Macro Twin-Lite MT-26EX-RT Flash inherits the ease of use and operability of Canon’s latest Speedlite EX series flashes and increased brightness of the focusing lamp compared to previous Canon Macro-Twin Lites. There is also less noise produced from the charging of the lights.</p>
<p>The new Canon Macro Twin-Lite MT-26EX-RT Flash is scheduled to be available November 2017, for an estimated retail price of $989.99<span class="green"><sup>††</sup></span>.</p>
<p>For more information on all of these products, please visit <a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">usa.canon.com</a></p>
<p><strong>Preorder: Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS $1599: <a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354803-REG/canon_ef_85mm_f_1_4l_is.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/2vmIjTH">Amazon</a> | <a href="https://mpex.com/canon-ef-85mm-f1-4l-is-usm-lens.html?acc=3">Midwest Photo</a></strong></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
<div style="font-size:0px;height:0px;line-height:0px;margin:0;padding:0;clear:both"></div>
```


----------



## f119a (Aug 29, 2017)

No comments yet? I guess they're all sleeping through these beautiful lenses


----------



## benperrin (Aug 29, 2017)

I'm sure this lens is going to be fantastic but gee Canon's marketing images for this lens are really sub-par.


----------



## padam (Aug 29, 2017)

If I read the charts right, it is sharper wide open.
When it is stepped down, the 85/1.2 seems a little sharper.
Bokeh looks very smooth.

First impressions:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/canon-ef-85mm-f1-4l-usm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsdV99TR0ks


----------



## mclaren777 (Aug 29, 2017)

I hope Canon eventually translates this interview into English...

http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/info/ef85-f14-usm/interview.html


----------



## mclaren777 (Aug 29, 2017)

padam said:


> If I read the charts right...



Did I miss an MTF chart for this lens?


----------



## Chub84 (Aug 29, 2017)

mclaren777 said:


> I hope Canon eventually translates this interview into English...
> 
> http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/info/ef85-f14-usm/interview.html



Do you mean the "Developer Interview"? If I have time I'll do a run down this week. I read the first one, all pretty standard stuff, but give me some time and I'll spit something out for you.


----------



## mb66energy (Aug 29, 2017)

mclaren777 said:


> padam said:
> 
> 
> > If I read the charts right...
> ...



http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard/ef85-f14l/spec.html (the new one)
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard/ef85-f12lii/spec.html (the 1.2)

Using the URLs helped me to navigate their japanese web site without studying the japanese language before


----------



## mclaren777 (Aug 29, 2017)

I was definitely hoping for a better MTF result.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

mclaren777 said:


> I was definitely hoping for a better MTF result.



Same 

It didn't reach the 35 II theoretical level...


----------



## Chub84 (Aug 29, 2017)

Holy crap I kept reading the interviews and there's some serious technical language in there!


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 29, 2017)

Jopa said:


> mclaren777 said:
> 
> 
> > I was definitely hoping for a better MTF result.
> ...



I'll take the four stop IS over an ounce of theoretical MTF. That IS unit is nearly as big as the one used in the 400mm f2.8!

Bokeh is looking very nice too......


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 29, 2017)

It's well placed and well priced IMO. Like the IS, you just know this lens will produce the beans regardless, I say that with the 35ii in mind. That is truly an awesome new lens! I am not sure I will part with my 1.2 just yet, I only shoot portraits with it and use it along side my 135/2 and the 200/2. Seems Canon will continue to make the 1.2 rather than replace it with this, I did wonder given the f stop not that it's stopped Canon in the past as they did with the 200/1.8.

edit:- I forgot to add, at least this has a weather sealing gasket for those who want to shoot in the rain, what level of rain I will leave CR members to debate


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 29, 2017)

Nice looking lens. Not sure the IS was that much useful shooting portraits though. Unless you shoot with shutter speed slower than 1/125 and you likely don't. Here is Sigma 85 Art mtf and distortion charts just for comparison. 



privatebydesign said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > mclaren777 said:
> ...


----------



## andrei1989 (Aug 29, 2017)

Jopa said:


> mclaren777 said:
> 
> 
> > I was definitely hoping for a better MTF result.
> ...



recently it seems complaints appear before the actual products ))

i haven't seen anyone displeased with the 35 and it's also being compared to the zeiss 35..that must surely mean something


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 29, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> Nice looking lens. Not sure the IS was that much useful shooting portraits though. Unless you shoot with shutter speed slower than 1/125 and you likely don't. Here is Sigma 85 Art mtf and distortion charts just for comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't tell me where I shoot! I use the 35 f2 IS at 1/4 sec for people pictures, I'm sure I'll find a good use for the IS on the 85!

Also you can't compare different manufacturers MFT charts, Canon go so far as to say you can't compare their own MTF charts against each other at different focal lengths. Besides nothing on earth would convince me to buy a Sigma lens, so what it is capable of is irrelevant to me.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> Nice looking lens. Not sure the IS was that much useful shooting portraits though. Unless you shoot with shutter speed slower than 1/125 and you likely don't. Here is Sigma 85 Art mtf and distortion charts just for comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



While I think IS is a good thing "to have" I completely agree it's not much relevant for portraits. If it offers fast AF it still can be a great walk around lens. I was just hoping for an Otus / Milvus / Sigma optical performance. Unless the theoretical MTF is wrong (worse than IRL)...


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Don't tell me where I shoot! I use the 35 f2 IS at 1/4 sec for people pictures



I hope you aren't taking pics @ crime scenes / morgues?


----------



## arthurbikemad (Aug 29, 2017)

I know a few old time (and very good) photographers who swear IS makes images soft. Just sayin...lol

Personally I think the wedding crew will love this new lens and find the IS very useful.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > mclaren777 said:
> ...



That's why we all are here. Take a look at the 6d2 DR discussion if in doubt  We should complain and also complain about complaining. That's the true photography spirit


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

B&H review https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cz5eTULLCM
They should have hired the pretty girl from Adorama to do the review LOL


----------



## epsiloneri (Aug 29, 2017)

From the MTF, it seems to me that the Sigma Art is quite a bit sharper. It's all about compromises I guess, as the EF 85/1.4L is smaller, lighter, has IS and potentially a better AF (although the Sigma is already pretty good). Sharpness under optimal conditions isn't everything. We will have to wait for real reviews to see how it plays out in practice.


----------



## tomscott (Aug 29, 2017)

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Really looking forward to having a go with this.


----------



## 9VIII (Aug 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > Nice looking lens. Not sure the IS was that much useful shooting portraits though. Unless you shoot with shutter speed slower than 1/125 and you likely don't. Here is Sigma 85 Art mtf and distortion charts just for comparison.
> ...



It's weird how everyone goes nuts for IBIS but as soon as Canon comes out with their own solution everyone acts like they never wanted it.
This lens is a first of its kind and establishes that Canon can compete with anything the Mirrorless brands have to offer.
Now we just need a 50f1.4IS and 35f1.4IS.


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 29, 2017)

With a November launch date I won't be buying this until March. Whoop!


----------



## traveller (Aug 29, 2017)

All these mtf charts are only computer simulations in any case, few manufacturers actually measure the mtf values from their (representative number of samples of) lenses (Zeiss excepted). Nevertheless, I'm getting the impression that absolutely resolution was not the design objective of the Canon 85mm f/1.4 L IS and that the Sigma may very well out resolve it. 

Perhaps Canon have received market feedback that users found the Sigma 85 Art too heavy and really wanted IS. I think that after the 35mm f/1.4 especially, many were expecting Canon to produce "the last word" in autofocus 85mm primes (probably with a price tag well north of $2000). It seems like this is not what Canon has decided the market wants and perhaps they are correct, the price certainly seems more reasonable than expected.


----------



## snoke (Aug 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Don't tell me where I shoot! I use the 35 f2 IS at 1/4 sec for people pictures, I'm sure I'll find a good use for the IS on the 85!



You take photos, other posts on Internet. Don't waste time here. Comments make it obvious who make photos and who not.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 29, 2017)

I have the 135 and have been waiting for a great 85mm, as the 135 is too long for me, and I also have a 200mm. 

I hope this is at least as sharp as the 135 at f2.0 at f1.4. very low distortion and CA and have great AF and this will absolutely be my next purchase. 

Sigma is not an option for me. And I like the form factor of the new 85, looks great to hold and handle.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

traveller said:


> All these mtf charts are only computer simulations in any case, few manufacturers actually measure the mtf values from their (representative number of samples of) lenses (Zeiss excepted). Nevertheless, I'm getting the impression that absolutely resolution was not the design objective of the Canon 85mm f/1.4 L IS and that the Sigma may very well out resolve it.



The 85 1.2 II 's IRL chart is actually better the theoretical one: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=397, so it could be the case with the 85 1.4 IS. If the contrast is good (the 10 lpm line), no aberrations, fast AF - Canon will make tons of money selling those, no doubt.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 29, 2017)

wow, didn't expect this sort of reaction. never suggested for you what and how to shoot.
Not convincing you to purchase Sigma either. why would I anyway?
as to mtf chart comparison: correct, just thought I will have them here as a reference only. 



privatebydesign said:


> Don't tell me where I shoot! I use the 35 f2 IS at 1/4 sec for people pictures, I'm sure I'll find a good use for the IS on the 85!
> 
> Also you can't compare different manufacturers MFT charts, Canon go so far as to say you can't compare their own MTF charts against each other at different focal lengths. Besides nothing on earth would convince me to buy a Sigma lens, so what it is capable of is irrelevant to me.


----------



## NorbR (Aug 29, 2017)

So, no BR then  I was still holding some hope that it had just been "forgotten" in the rumoured specs ... Oh well. Still a buy for me. 

I find it weird that we haven't seen BR in any other lens since the 35mm II. As far as I can tell it was pretty well received all around. It's no silver bullet, but it does a good job at controlling CA. So I wonder why we haven't seen more of it. I can see how it would be challenging to include it in zoom lenses, and I never expected to see it in more entry-level lenses, but if there was one lens where I expected to see it back, it's this 85mm. 

I wonder if it's being left out because of technical reasons (maybe it's not so easy to make it work at other focal lengths) or just because it's been deemed to not be cost effective enough. In any case, as someone with a severe allergy to purple fringing, I'm a bit disappointed ...


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 29, 2017)

what is obvious to you?
what if I proved to you that I make real photos then what?
Will you apologies?
Will you stop steering arguments around this place?

this is typical example of how you come across with you posts.

p.s. I haven't seen none of your photos yet. while there are tons of mine around here and on internet. care to share some? 



snoke said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Don't tell me where I shoot! I use the 35 f2 IS at 1/4 sec for people pictures, I'm sure I'll find a good use for the IS on the 85!
> ...


----------



## hne (Aug 29, 2017)

Jopa said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > Nice looking lens. Not sure the IS was that much useful shooting portraits though. Unless you shoot with shutter speed slower than 1/125 and you likely don't. Here is Sigma 85 Art mtf and distortion charts just for comparison.
> ...



Of course there will be uses. Perhaps limited such at f/1.4, but there are aperture blades in those lenses for a reason.

I'm regularly hitting ISOs above 800 wide open with my 85/1.8 for photos in a home setting. That was the highest ISO with really good skin tones on the 5DmkII. If I can stop the lens down to about f/4.5, that'd give a much more natural transition out of focus for head and shoulder framed portraits. This would require 1/25s at ISO1600. Luckily the 5DmkIV has about the same DR at 1600 that the mkII has at 800. Add IS and as long as the subjects don't move faster than about 0.01km/h (0.007mph) you'd get a really sharp shot. Could actually be doable when people are sitting down.

Sure, I could use a 70-200/2.8 IS for such apertures, but that's a lens people get scared of if I swing it around indoors. And outdoors. People seem to associate big white lenses with mostly paparazzi and large groups PJs harassing politicians.

It be a lie to say that I'm not disappointed with the release date. November? That's after the fall colours portrait season!


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 29, 2017)

just an observation, personal experience only, nothing set in stone:

still would be hard to achieve reliable outcomes as those people do breath and bodies keep on moving ever slightly  I would not risk going under 1/60s shooting people up close with 85mm lens stabilised or not, your mileage may vary of course, but I was never able to achieve reliable results with 85 mm lens shooting at any slower aperture than that. there are plenty of other uses of course.

p.s. attached is an example of what you were referring to (people sitting down), Sigma 85 Art @F1.4, 1/60s, run and gun at a function. Sharpness is quite reasonable, to my eye at least, at 1/60s shutter speed but I would not go any slower. 



hne said:


> ... I'm regularly hitting ISOs above 800 wide open with my 85/1.8 for photos in a home setting. That was the highest ISO with really good skin tones on the 5DmkII. If I can stop the lens down to about f/4.5, that'd give a much more natural transition out of focus for head and shoulder framed portraits. This would require* 1/25s at ISO1600 *. Luckily the 5DmkIV has about the same DR at 1600 that the mkII has at 800. *Add IS and as long as the subjects don't move faster than about 0.01km/h (0.007mph) you'd get a really sharp shot. Could actually be doable when people are sitting down..
> *...


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 29, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> just an observation, personal experience only, nothing set in stone:
> 
> still would be hard to achieve reliable outcomes as those people do breath and bodies keep on moving ever slightly  I would not risk going under 1/60s shooting people up close with 85mm lens stabilised or not, your mileage may vary of course, but I was never able to achieve reliable results with 85 mm lens shooting at any slower aperture than that. there are plenty of other uses of course.
> 
> ...



This is true, I can't see why they add the weight of a stabilised motor to focal lengths below 60mm


----------



## Yiannis A - Greece (Aug 29, 2017)

Dear friends,

i'm quite sure, the lens will be fantastic but, once again, Rudy Winston is THE man to convince somebody that cancer is a hair color and not a possibly lethal disease! At 1:04 of the video he says that, the EF 85 f/1.4 L IS is priced between (???) EF 85 f/1.8 and EF 85 f/1.2 L! Technically speaking...well...ok, he is right but, from an ethical point of view, 1230$ north of 1.8 and 300$ south of 1.2 isn't exactly between (they should use "between" for something towards the middle in my opinion), it's just a marketing dept trick to put some sugar on a rather salty/overpriced piece of machinery!
Rudy could make a tremendous career as a Whitehouse spokesman, he can be the liar of the century without breaking a sweat 

All my best wishes to you and your beloved, from marvellous, shiny, summery Greece...

Yiannis


----------



## hne (Aug 29, 2017)

wockawocka said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > just an observation, personal experience only, nothing set in stone:
> ...



I totally agree that breathing can become a sharpness limiting factor. Luckily we can get away from about half of it using servo AF.

With wider angles and longer distance you get away faster movements per pixel. Same framing at wider angle of course means shorter distance. If you limit yourself to no wider framing than roughly half-body portraits, I can agree that 60mm or so becomes way too wide for IS adding much. But not everything is half-body or tighter portraits. There's group photos too, and architecture, landscape, ...

Framing width over horisontal resolution, divided by shutter speed is the speed at which movements become one pixel long lines. At 24mm and 5m distance, you'll have 5.2m over 6700px on a 5DmkIV. This translates into 7.8mm/s (1/3") for for example a loosely framed group shot stopped down to f/4 in the back of a church. Breathing wouldn't be an issue here, but hand-holding that non-IS 24mm for 1/10s would.

Geometry. Yay!

PS. You take great photos. I've learnt a lot from looking at them.


----------



## jebrady03 (Aug 29, 2017)

It's not just Rudy being a salesperson here, did y'all notice that the side by side images showed the 85mm f/1.2L II with the barrel extended? They were trying to add some size to the lens to make the 1.4 not look as tall. DECEPTIVE!!!!


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 29, 2017)

thank you for the appraisal. really appreciated.

just wanted to clarify. yes, i was talking about up close tight portrait situation at 85mm strictly. 35mm should not be a problem at 1/20s provided I have something to lean against to avoid camera shake. (a wall, a chair, a pilar, etc).
I found space constraint being an issue shooting functions indoor, therefore I shoot full body portraits and group with a shorter lenses (Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 50 Art). just not enough room to step back and shoot with 85mm lens.

I would prefer shooting with F2.8 zooms when run and gun but have to switch to Sigma 35 Art / Sigma 85 Art combination if light level gets really bad and no flash allowed.
attached is one of these shots. Sigma 35 F1.4 ISO 6400 1/30s. as you can see the sharpness is not brilliant at this shutter speed. 

But I digressed, sorry...





hne said:


> I totally agree that breathing can become a sharpness limiting factor. Luckily we can get away from about half of it using servo AF.
> 
> With wider angles and longer distance you get away faster movements per pixel. Same framing at wider angle of course means shorter distance. If you limit yourself to no wider framing than roughly half-body portraits, I can agree that 60mm or so becomes way too wide for IS adding much. But not everything is half-body or tighter portraits. There's group photos too, and architecture, landscape, ...
> 
> ...


----------



## bholliman (Aug 29, 2017)

epsiloneri said:


> From the MTF, it seems to me that the Sigma Art is quite a bit sharper. It's all about compromises I guess, as the EF 85/1.4L is smaller, lighter, has IS and potentially a better AF (although the Sigma is already pretty good). Sharpness under optimal conditions isn't everything. We will have to wait for real reviews to see how it plays out in practice.



MTF charts cannot be compared between manufacturers, so let's wait for hands on testing before we make any conclusions about sharpness and comparisons to the Sigma Art 85.


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Aug 29, 2017)

Really looking forward to this. Part of me wonders with marketing this lens between the other two 85's if the 1.2L will get a refresh in the next 6-12 months as well. That would give people a budget lens, a moderate priced 85L and then the top of the line 85L.


----------



## jdavidse (Aug 29, 2017)

can0nfan2379 said:


> Really looking forward to this. Part of me wonders with marketing this lens between the other two 85's if the 1.2L will get a refresh in the next 6-12 months as well. That would give people a budget lens, a moderate priced 85L and then the top of the line 85L.



Give us a 50mm first


----------



## Ruined (Aug 29, 2017)

I would totally buy this lens because I have been wanting a more practical f/1.4 version of the 85 f/1.2 due to that lens' autofocus issues (slow, drive by wire, extending barrel, etc). My only concern is that I will pick this up and Canon will release an 85mm f/1.2L III that has less autofocus compromises. Then again, maybe that's just not possible with f/1.2 at 85mm.

If this offers the same type of practicality improvement the 50mm f/1.2L offered over the 50mm f/1.0L while retaining most of the magic from the 85L f/1.2L II, then this is the lens for me.


----------



## snoke (Aug 29, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> what is obvious to you?



you easy upset. best say nothing. apologies.


----------



## cellomaster27 (Aug 29, 2017)

Wow! I'm very surprised at the price point of this lens! I was expecting >2000. Hopefully this will end up in my bag sooner than later!


----------



## Sharlin (Aug 29, 2017)

The developer interview was actually surprisingly readable using Google Translate. Even most of the technical stuff was translated properly.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 29, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> just wanted to clarify. yes, i was talking about up close tight portrait situation at 85mm strictly. 35mm should not be a problem at 1/20s provided I have something to lean against to avoid camera shake. (a wall, a chair, a pilar, etc).



I think that's more like how much % a person takes in the frame, than the 1/focal_length rule (which is still applicable for static objects to eliminate the hands shake effect). For a close up on a 35mm I'd take the same 1/100 to 1/160s (to be sure . If the person is far and the movements are less noticeable (and DoF is much deeper) 1/40s on a 35mm shouldn't be a problem. 1/20s - as you said with extra support and "extra care" probably. Or if @privatebydesign is taking pics of dead or on some kind of drugs people - 1/4s seems to be ok too. Would love to see those pics.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 29, 2017)

Hey, the living dead can still be pretty active -- from what I hear.


----------



## Act444 (Aug 29, 2017)

Great - now all that's remaining is to see the IQ tests. Unfortunately my hopes for high sharpness have dimmed somewhat but ultimately the proof will be in the pudding.


----------



## JRPhotos (Aug 29, 2017)

I have the 85 1.2 and am for the most part, no happy with it. When it works it produces some great images but that focusing is off on my 5DMKIV. Maybe it's me, but I used another and it's the same problem.

I'll probably check this one out.


----------



## Tangent (Aug 29, 2017)

Well I think Rudy does a good job with these videos.


----------



## wsmith96 (Aug 29, 2017)

I'm looking forward to trying this lens for indoor sports. On a crop you might get great high school football shots when the teams are close to you as well.


----------



## padam (Aug 29, 2017)

wsmith96 said:


> I'm looking forward to trying this lens for indoor sports. On a crop you might get great high school football shots when the teams are close to you as well.


The 135L on a FF body is a credible alternative for that, lighter, cheaper, at least as sharp, almost as close focusing (with a limiter function for even faster AF) and the lack of IS isn't really a problem.
I wonder which combination would provide a better hit-rate or a more pleasing look.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 29, 2017)

padam said:


> wsmith96 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm looking forward to trying this lens for indoor sports. On a crop you might get great high school football shots when the teams are close to you as well.
> ...


I've been using the 135 with the 1dx2 for kids soccer and the hitrate isn't anywhere near what i expect. The 200 f2 is stellar so I try using that instead.

Hopefully this new 85 will be a better option.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 30, 2017)

I am keen to see some real world results from good photographers with this lens.

Given how competitive the 85mm market is and what a key piece of equipment it is for wedding photographers I can't believe Canon won't have produced something that performs very well. 

I do find it curious though that Canon seems determined that this doesn't replace the 85/1.2 II. I wonder if the market will see it that way though. If the new 85/1.4 matches the image quality of the old lens but one assumes has much better autofocus and is superior for control of chromatic aberrations and obviously has IS, I would expect most buyers to go for the new lens and by a fairly substantial margin. 

Yes 1.2 sounds enticing but Canon has generally been a company that tries to be sensible and goes for the overall experience. Some people were disappointed that the 200/1.8 was replaced with a 200/2.0 IS and others complained that the 50/1.0 was replaced, years later, by a 50/1.2 but in most situations the newer lenses are superior and much easier to use. I have the feeling that will be the case here too.

So although Canon insists they will keep selling a 1.2 L version and a 1.4L version is this a realistic outlook or are they just waiting to shift the remaining stock of 1.2 lenses? It would be fascinating to know if they are still being produced.


----------



## aceflibble (Aug 30, 2017)

So it's 0.2 f-stops slower (but very likely the same t-stop), more-than-compensated for by IS, it'll for sure focus better and it will most likely be sharper and be better-corrected. (Hell, it's not like it could be any worse than the f/1.2.) _And_ it's cheaper. It is slightly bigger, but it's not like the f/1.2 was ever going to win any awards for compactness or weight anyway.

They may say it's not replacing the 85mm f/1.2L, and that may be true on paper, but in reality there's no practical reason for the f/1.2 to continue being manufactured after this. You'd have to be utterly insane to pay the premium for that extra 0.2 f-stop as well as taking the hit on AF/aberration/etc.



Tangent said:


> Well I think Rudy does a good job with these videos. 8)


Except he still says 'I-S-O' erroneously. Nobody working for any major camera manufacturer should be getting such basic terminology wrong, let alone in a new product announcement video.


----------



## Chub84 (Aug 30, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> So it's 0.2 f-stops slower (but very likely the same t-stop), more-than-compensated for by IS, it'll for sure focus better and it will most likely be sharper and be better-corrected. (Hell, it's not like it could be any worse than the f/1.2.) _And_ it's cheaper. It is slightly bigger, but it's not like the f/1.2 was ever going to win any awards for compactness or weight anyway.
> 
> They may say it's not replacing the 85mm f/1.2L, and that may be true on paper, but in reality there's no practical reason for the f/1.2 to continue being manufactured after this. You'd have to be utterly insane to pay the premium for that extra 0.2 f-stop as well as taking the hit on AF/aberration/etc.



My guess is that the drawing won't be like the 85 f/1.2, which will be a big difference for people looking for the exotic look. I just bought a 50 f/1.2 L not because it's the sharpest lens, because Sigma and Zeiss do it better, but because of the fantastic rendering it gives me for my professional work. People who need the 85 f/1.2 will still buy it regardless. All of the sample images I've seen with the 85 f/1.4 L IS haven't looked nearly as "special" as the 1.2, but I still pre-ordered the 1.4 because it will be much more efficient at its job, and that pays the bills too. I look at it this way: for events and other fast paced shooting situations, get the 1.4. But if you've got time to get the stars aligned, the 1.2 will still give you the ultimate in image quality, including from a "drawing" perspective.


----------



## Diltiazem (Aug 30, 2017)

Sample images in Flickr. 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/36080797903/in/photostream/ 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/36080795093/in/dateposted/


----------



## aceflibble (Aug 30, 2017)

Chub84 said:


> My guess is that the drawing won't be like the 85 f/1.2, which will be a big difference for people looking for the exotic look. I just bought a 50 f/1.2 L not because it's the sharpest lens, because Sigma and Zeiss do it better, but because of the fantastic rendering it gives me for my professional work. People who need the 85 f/1.2 will still buy it regardless. All of the sample images I've seen with the 85 f/1.4 L IS haven't looked nearly as "special" as the 1.2, but I still pre-ordered the 1.4 because it will be much more efficient at its job, and that pays the bills too.


See, I sold my two f/1.2Ls (the first version a while back; bought the mk II hoping it'd solve my complaints and sold that when it didn't) specifically because neither lens managed to provide either a 'special' look nor a technically proficient one. (My work has historically been a 50/50 split, sometimes needing absolute technical perfection and other times needing a lot of purposeful imperfection as clients' style dictates.) 
In other words, _they were far too generic_ to be of any use to either side of my work, and given the size and value of them, I couldn't in good conscience justify keeping them for personal/casual shooting. (As it happens, I moved to the 100mm f/2.8L IS for the technical stuff and for the 'special' work I just gave up on Canon and switched to Mamiya 6x7 with a Hasselblad digital back.)

But I should also disclose that I had the same experience with the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 , their 85mm equivalent. So maybe I should just stop paying attention to 85s.


----------



## Chub84 (Aug 30, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> Chub84 said:
> 
> 
> > My guess is that the drawing won't be like the 85 f/1.2, which will be a big difference for people looking for the exotic look. I just bought a 50 f/1.2 L not because it's the sharpest lens, because Sigma and Zeiss do it better, but because of the fantastic rendering it gives me for my professional work. People who need the 85 f/1.2 will still buy it regardless. All of the sample images I've seen with the 85 f/1.4 L IS haven't looked nearly as "special" as the 1.2, but I still pre-ordered the 1.4 because it will be much more efficient at its job, and that pays the bills too.
> ...



Certainly, nothing for a DSLR, no matter how highly touted, will be able to recreate the magic of 6x7 or larger formats. So yes, I agree if that's what you're looking for, but then that comes with its own hurdles as well. I used to shoot 6x6 film and know exactly what you're talking about, but that in itself is not practical enough for the majority of my clients. Horses for courses.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 30, 2017)

Diltiazem said:


> Sample images in Flickr.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/36080797903/in/photostream/
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/36080795093/in/dateposted/



Thank you for the samples!


----------



## Memdroid (Aug 30, 2017)

I am really excited for this new 85mm to replace my 85mm 1.2 II and the price is very reasonable. But the sample images that I have seen so far discourages me a little bit, they kinda look dull to me. It kinda reminds me of the 35mm 2.0 IS, a great lens nonetheless but it misses a "pop" to it. I look forward to see more images and the performance at F1.4


----------



## wsmith96 (Aug 30, 2017)

padam said:


> wsmith96 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm looking forward to trying this lens for indoor sports. On a crop you might get great high school football shots when the teams are close to you as well.
> ...



I've considered that lens when I had a full frame camera, but got rid of the camera before getting the lens. I've only got crop sensors now and the 85 will give me a similar FOV as the 135 on a FF. I've been using the 85 1.8, but I'm hopeful to see if the 1.4 is sharper wide open. I'm confident that it will be.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 30, 2017)

Some more samples here:

http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/info/ef85-f14-usm/impression.html

Not very big images but it looks promising. I had toyed with the idea of selling my 85L II over the last year and now I fear that ebay prices for it will probably fall - I had told myself that if Canon brought out a top flight 85 with IS it would be $2000, for this to come in at a reasonable price is a bit of a shock but a nice shock really. I can't see many people choosing the 1.2 version any more unless there are some pretty big discounts. 

I will wait to see some head to head comparisons with the 85L II but the prospect of fast AF and 4 stop IS is alluring.

Looking at the samples my gut feeling is the bokeh is slightly more "busy" than the 1.2. But the in focus parts look like they have a wonderful clarity even if it's hard to tell for sure on such small images. It rather reminds me of the 35L II - again great clarity and sharpness but a slight sacrifice of bokeh. And perhaps of more relevance, it looks similar to the 85Art Sigma too I think.

Part of me thinks that bokeh is very important for a portrait so maybe that will push people to keep buying the 1.2. But then part of me thinks that at 85 and 1.4 most backgrounds will just be turned to mush anyway so people will go for it regardless of whether some 'purists' say the 1.2 is nicer.


----------



## Jopa (Aug 30, 2017)

Memdroid said:


> I am really excited for this new 85mm to replace my 85mm 1.2 II and the price is very reasonable. But the sample images that I have seen so far discourages me a little bit, they kinda look dull to me. It kinda reminds me of the 35mm 2.0 IS, a great lens nonetheless but it misses a "pop" to it. I look forward to see more images and the performance at F1.4



Don't replace the 85 II! I don't even think this new lens is a replacement. The 85 II does have a nice pop when stopped down a little.


----------



## Memdroid (Aug 30, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Memdroid said:
> 
> 
> > I am really excited for this new 85mm to replace my 85mm 1.2 II and the price is very reasonable. But the sample images that I have seen so far discourages me a little bit, they kinda look dull to me. It kinda reminds me of the 35mm 2.0 IS, a great lens nonetheless but it misses a "pop" to it. I look forward to see more images and the performance at F1.4
> ...




I think that too. But the main reason I want to replace it with is the AF speed and wide open sharpness. I use the 85mm at f2.0 during event work and the slow AF and super shallow dof at 1.2 is not really reliable, even on my 1dx II. But if the new 85mm matches the sharpness at 1.4 vs f2.0 on the v2 lens and far exceeds the AF speed I will gladly take it for that price.


----------



## aceflibble (Aug 31, 2017)

wsmith96 said:


> I've been using the 85 1.8, but I'm hopeful to see if the 1.4 is sharper wide open. I'm confident that it will be.


There's really no reason to believe the 1.4 will be sharper at 1.4 than the 1.8 is at 1.8. It should handle flaring better, which will improve contrast, and of course IS will get you sharper results than a lens that is shaking around, but in terms of ideal conditions—medium focus distance, no shake, no lights flaring directly into the lens—they should be about the same. The 85mm f/1.8 (and the 100mm f/2) are very unusual in that they are older, cheaper designs which are sharp enough and well-corrected enough that in most cases they are indistinguishable from 'L' versions. (Of course there are things like some Zeiss lenses which completely beat them, but at those prices they damn well should.) The 85mm f/1.8 vs the f/1.2L mkII, for instance, has far less problems with fringing and general aberration, less distortion and less vignetting, and has almost the same resolving power on a 35mm sensor body; on an APS-C body they actually match in resolving power. (Which is to say they're equally soft wide open and equally sharp from 2.8 onward; also note the older mkI f/1.2 actually resolved more detail and had better contrast, but slightly worse transmission and vignetting). In other words, that f/1.8 you have is already about as good at f/1.8 as either of the L lenses is, on your crop body at least. If you had a 35mm body there would be more of a difference but then you wouldn't be looking at 85mm lenses anyway.

If you want an upgrade to your 85mm f/1.8 and you're sure that's the focal length you want, go for the Sigma 85mm f/1.4. It is _significantly_ sharper _and_ better-corrected than _any_ of the Canon lenses. Considering that it beats the Canon f/1.2 in every way and Canon are pitching their new 85 f/1.4 as being below the 1.2, it stands to reason the new Canon won't match the Sigma either. Or even better for your indoor sports, if you're definitely going to stick with crop sensors, would be the Sigma 50-100 f/1.8. On crop bodies it is equally as sharp as the prime, it's as well-corrected, the AF performs identically as well (which is also slightly better than your current Canon f/1.8) on any of the better-driven bodies (7D, 7D2, 80D), it's actually slightly cheaper, the actual light _transmission_ is the same (t/1.9 and t/2; about 0.15 faster than your current lens; no, it's unlikely the new Canon will be any faster as the f/1.2 is only t/1.7, so the new 1.4 will probably be about t/1.9 itself) and of course you get a little more range; for a crop body shooter there is absolutely 0 downside. A 7D2 with the Sigma 50-100 is actually preferable for indoor sports (or any indoor event really) than a 5D3 with the 70-200 f/2.8, for instance; the 'full frame' options gives you about 40mm more on the longest end but the 7D2's focusing is that little bit better, the frame rate is of course better, and the Sigma on the crop sensor actually resolves more detail and has better contrast than the 70-200 on the 35mm sensor. (The 5D4 and 1DX sure are another step up again, but I am expecting the 7D3 will level that playing field next year, especially if it ditches the low pass filter like the Nikon D500 has.) 

If you're certain you're sticking with crop sensors, there are crop-specific lenses being made now which totally beat 'full frame' lenses, when both are used on those crop bodies. If you think you might in the near future go back to a 35mm body then sure, definitely stick with buying 'FF' lenses, but if crop is the way you're going (smart for sport or any kind of action) then take a serious look at those crop-specific lenses. They're not a joke any more like they were 15 years ago.


----------



## hne (Aug 31, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> If you had a 35mm body there would be more of a difference but then you wouldn't be looking at 85mm lenses anyway.



Your text almost made sense until this sentence. Then I stopped reading and just skimmed through the rest.

Have you actually tried an 85mm lens on a 35mm body?

It is my second most used combination after the 35. This combination of focal lengths is a true classic. It is so asked for that Fuji makes two odd focal length, large aperture primes 23/1.4 and 56/1.2. Yet no 33mm (true 50 equivalent), 89 (135) or 132 (200).


----------



## Viggo (Aug 31, 2017)

"No reason the f1.4 will be sharper at f1.4 than the 1.8 at 1.8" ??

First off, its new, it's an L and it's like 5 times more expensive. It will destroy the 1.8 for both sharpness and CA.


----------



## Eldar (Aug 31, 2017)

Viggo said:


> "No reason the f1.4 will be sharper at f1.4 than the 1.8 at 1.8" ??
> 
> First off, its new, it's an L and it's like 5 times more expensive. It will destroy the 1.8 for both sharpness and CA.


If this lens optically does not match up to the new Sigma 85/1.4, I´d be most surprised. However, I doubt it will provide as beautiful portraits as the 85 1.2L II. Images are more than sharpness ... If I am wrong, I´ll be happy and send Canon some more money.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 31, 2017)

I would be most surprised if it does  but what do I know. lets wait and see.



Eldar said:


> ... If this lens optically does not match up to the new Sigma 85/1.4, I´d be most surprised...


----------



## Viggo (Aug 31, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> I would be most surprised if it does  but what do I know. lets wait and see.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't think it will be as sharp, but I do think it will have better bokeh and less CA. And I KNOW the AF will be fantastic.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 31, 2017)

I agree, less CA on new Canon - that is very solid expectation. AF must be fantastic, no doubt about it. 



Viggo said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > I would be most surprised if it does  but what do I know. lets wait and see.
> ...


----------



## Eldar (Aug 31, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> I agree, less CA on new Canon - that is very solid expectation. AF must be fantastic, no doubt about it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Too many are obsessed with sharpness as the dominant optical quality and too many are reading the likes of DxO as the final verdict on lens quality. It is not. 

With all the new releases we have seen lately, sharpness is not the problem. I love sharpness, but to me, the optical qualities that separates the great from the good are more complex than that. Colour, contrast (high on in-focus and low on out of focus), bokeh, CA in a general sense and how it is controlled to provide the right rendering are more important differentiators today. Distortion, vignetting and flare are also important characteristics. In sum, these are the characteristics where the Zeiss Otus lenses and a lens like the Leica APO Summicron 50/2 shines and separates themselves from the rest.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 31, 2017)

Very true, thank you for the explanation, Eldar.



Eldar said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > I agree, less CA on new Canon - that is very solid expectation. AF must be fantastic, no doubt about it.
> ...


----------



## Viggo (Aug 31, 2017)

Agreed Eldar.

I hope for "no distortion" as I never correct this in post, because the pop goes away.

I think this will be a great lens and my next purchase for sure


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 31, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> wsmith96 said:
> 
> 
> > I've been using the 85 1.8, but I'm hopeful to see if the 1.4 is sharper wide open. I'm confident that it will be.
> ...



I think we might be in danger of reading too much into Canon's claim that the new 85L doesn't replace the 1.2 version. It might just be the case that they are saying that while they run down stocks of the old lens. It would be fascinating to know if they are still making the 1.2 lens. Or maybe they learnt a lesson from abandoning the 50/1.0. Canon's executives must be aware that they sell for thousands on eBay. Starting up a new production line once it has been stopped is extremely expensive, maybe they will keep making the 1.2 version in small numbers for many years.

85mm is such a popular focal length, so important especially to wedding and portrait photographers that I have a very hard time seeing Canon release a new L lens at 85mm that doesn't at the least match Sigma's offering.

Of course there is more to a lens than sharpness.

The price being lower than many expected is a surprise. And it doesn't look to be quite as beastly as the Sigma. I don't think this will be the case that we saw at 35mm - where Sigma made a very good lens but Canon made a better one. I think the Sigma one at 85mm is spectacular, it's just that I think Canon's is likely to be either as spectacular or so close as to make no difference.

This will be a big, consistent seller for Canon over the next decade - I just can't see them not having given it their best shot.

Of course if next year we get an 85/1.2 III then everything I have said goes out the window!!


----------



## Viggo (Aug 31, 2017)

... for those of us that doesn't even consider Sigma as any kind of option, and Canon knows this, it will be superb. I don't really like anything about the Art, except for the very low vignetting and extremely low distortion of the 50.

I'm confident that Canon will make a f1.2 III that will be the new benchmark, but the price will be crazy so they really need this middle option.

I mean, why on earth will they make a 85 f1.4 cheaper if it's going to sit on top?? People have no issues paying for the 1.2 with it's lacking abilities, so clearly they would pay even more if a new fantastic version would come along.


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 31, 2017)

I very much agree with Eldar when he is emphasizing other lens qualities than sharpness. Following DXO scores alone can be very misleading.

With regards to the new Canon 85L f1.4, I don't expect it to match the Sigma in terms of sharpness. It doesn't have much exotic glass elements in it, but most important, Canon isn't aggresssive in terms of the pricing. When they released the 35LII and 16-35LIII, Canon demanded a significant premium over Sigma and previous Canon lenses, but these releases were significantly better than the competition. The moderate pricing indicates thar Canon is aware that the new 85L 1.4 lags behind the Sigma in certain areas, most likely sharpness.


----------



## Viggo (Aug 31, 2017)

Bryan has analyzed and compared MTF, and he seems to think the sharpness will match the Art.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.4L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx


----------



## stevelee (Aug 31, 2017)

hne said:


> aceflibble said:
> 
> 
> > If you had a 35mm body there would be more of a difference but then you wouldn't be looking at 85mm lenses anyway.
> ...



Back in my 35mm film days, the Canon 85mm lens was my favorite all-around lens. I also used the 28mm a lot, and I had a very good 200mm Canon, though I didn't take telephoto pictures as much. I found when I traveled, taking those three lenses worked well for just about anything I would shoot. Of course having just those three lenses along meant my brain likely saw things and got ideas for photos in light of the tools at hand. The 55mm f/1.2 was a really nice lens, so I would use it on occasion when I was around all my gear. I liked the look it gave in certain circumstances.

For my Rebel, I got the 50mm f/1.4 to do much of what I used the 85mm for in the past. My normal kit lens zooms in to 55mm, but opens up only to f/5.6 at that focal length.


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 31, 2017)

Viggo said:


> Bryan has analyzed and compared MTF, and he seems to think the sharpness will match the Art.
> 
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.4L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx



I see that he claims that, but as far as I can tell the mtf of the Sigma is quite a bit better than the new Canon. It is a little hard to tell because the Sigma mtf only shows f1.4 at 10 and 30 lines per mm, while Canon mtf shows both f1.4 (black lines) at 10 and 30 lpmm and f8 (blue lines) at 10 and 30lpmm. If you ignore the blue lines when comparing you will see that the Sigma is better.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 31, 2017)

MTF (marketing) lines comparison science just been taken to the whole new level. Wow, let's claim thats new Canon better than Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 as mtf lines of Sigmotus 85 are even bett r than Ones of Zeiss

Yeah, Zeiss and Sigmotus 85 with huge 86mm front elements are surely optically overbuilt. 

I will hazard the claim that Canon will be better than Sigma 85 in CA department and overall rendering, bokeh somewhat. 

There is no way that new Canon will be sharper in mid frame and corners, Pay attention to vignetting levels wide open and that steep drop of the mtf line in about 15mm away from centre.


----------



## BillB (Sep 1, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > Bryan has analyzed and compared MTF, and he seems to think the sharpness will match the Art.
> ...



If I read Brian's explanation correctly, he is saying that Sigma does not show 30 lpmm. He seems to say the 2 Sigma curves are F1.4 at 10 lpmm and F8 at 10 lpmm.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 1, 2017)

Sigma curves are: Diffraction MTF and Geometrical MTF and both at *F1.4* 10 and 30 lpmm

p.s. at F8 the Sigmotus 85 curve is plain and boring horisontal line at 1.0 contrast level from corner to corner 



https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_85_14/data/



BillB said:


> If I read Brian's explanation correctly, he is saying that Sigma does not show 30 lpmm. He seems to say the 2 Sigma curves are F1.4 at 10 lpmm and F8 at 10 lpmm.


----------



## aceflibble (Sep 1, 2017)

mjg79 said:


> I think we might be in danger of reading too much into Canon's claim that the new 85L doesn't replace the 1.2 version. It might just be the case that they are saying that while they run down stocks of the old lens.


That's what I'm assuming is the case. I caught wind of the 24-105 mk I being discontinued (replaced by the mk II) 18 months prior to the official public announcement that it was discontinued. In all the time leading up to the announcement of the mk II, Canon said the mk I was still in production (it wasn't, they'd already switched to making the mk II in preparation for that release). After announcement of the mk II they said they were still going to make the mk I for a while (they'd already stopped). By the time they finally told the public the mk I was discontinued it had actually been out of production for a year and a half by my own count, and quite possibly longer than that in truth.

Fuji keep doing it with their bodies, too. And Canon did it with the 1D/Ds/Dx lines. So, yeah, my assumption is they're only saying this isn't replacing the 1.2 for as long as existing 1.2 stock lasts. I can't see them still actually producing new 1.2s once the 1.4 is on shelves.



hne said:


> Your text almost made sense until this sentence. Then I stopped reading and just skimmed through the rest.
> 
> Have you actually tried an 85mm lens on a 35mm body?


You mean like how I wrote, in this very thread, that I've had both versions of the 85 1.2? And the 1.8? And the Sigma? And the Samyang, the Canon FD 1.2, the Fuji equivalent one, several equivalents for medium format systems... yeah, I've used it. 



Viggo said:


> "No reason the f1.4 will be sharper at f1.4 than the 1.8 at 1.8" ??
> 
> First off, its new, it's an L and it's like 5 times more expensive. It will destroy the 1.8 for both sharpness and CA.


New does not always equal better; the 1.2 mk I is optically better than the mk II, for instance. Being an 'L' doesn't mean it's optically better; there are plenty of L lenses which are total dogs and optically beaten by regular lenses. (The two non-IS 70-200s say hello, as well as the mk I 70-200 2.8 IS, the previous 24-70, both versions of the 24-105 which are optically worse than the cheaper Sigma version, etc.) Being expensive does not guarantee optical quality; they could price the 50mm f/1.8 to three grand, doesn't mean it'd suddenly be on par with a Zeiss.

You're mistaking marketing for technical build. All the 'L' means is that the lens requires more complicated manufacturing than typical; it has absolutely nothing to do with optical quality, although that frequently happens to be coincidentally along for the ride. (e.g. It's been long-rumoured that Canon has frequently thought about relaunching the 100mm f/2 as an 'L' lens just by adding minimal weather sealing, without touching the optical quality or focusing; it's expected the new TS-E 90mm will also be along these lines as the non-L TS-E 90mm is already Canon's 2nd-best-resolving lens.) That complication of course also results in a higher price tag. That's really all there is to it. Just because something is expensive and has a red line drawn on it doesn't mean it's mechanically better, just mechanically more advanced. That advancement can—and most usually does—take form as features such as weather sealing, IS, closer focusing distances, and faster or more accurate auto focus. Those things may aid you in getting better pictures as a matter of utility, but they suggest nothing of the raw optical quality of any given lens. If you take a non-L lens and put IS in it and a rubber gasket around the mount, you've got yourself an L lens you can charge 3x as much for, without having touched the optic quality.

As it so happens, the existing Canon 85mm f/1.8 is an unusually well-corrected lens. It has the same resolving power as the 1.2 mk II but with less aberration. In order to beat that kind of resolving power, Sigma have had to make a radically different design. The new Canon isn't that much of a departure from the existing Canon lenses. If one company can only make a marked improvement in actual image quality by shifting the fundamental design greatly, then it stands to reason that another company sticking with more-or-less the same design _isn't_ going to see the same jump in optical quality.

Which is not to say that it's utterly impossible for the new Canon to surpass the older lenses. (Actually, it'd be shocking if it didn't at least beat the 1.2.) But it's not *guaranteed* and people should be waiting before actual testing is completed, before they throw down their money on a pre-order.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 1, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> Which is not to say that it's utterly impossible for the new Canon to surpass the older lenses. (Actually, it'd be shocking if it didn't at least beat the 1.2.) But it's not *guaranteed* and people should be waiting before actual testing is completed, before they throw down their money on a pre-order.



That was EXACTLY what was going through my head...only thing is to wait for test results to come in. 

From examining what is currently available, I expect maybe a *slight* sharpness improvement over the 85 1.8 (hopefully with the fringing issue addressed) below f/2...and maybe slightly softer performance at f/4 and beyond. f/2.8 will be the ??? though...I'm willing to give up a bit of the center crispness for better mid-frame performance but don't know if this lens was designed in that manner or not.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 1, 2017)

please review the image attached. 30 lpmm mid-frame performance area marked with bold red vertical line.
observations:
pronounced astigmatism. rapidly declining 30 lpmm mtf line (13mm and further away from centre) , flatlining where it should continue smooth decline. we need more data to draw the conclusion on.
the data I am looking for: Lensrentals OLAF testing, Dustin Abbott, The Digital picture, Lenstip




Act444 said:


> ...I'm willing to give up a bit of the center crispness for better mid-frame performance but don't know if this lens was designed in that manner or not.


----------



## Larsskv (Sep 1, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> please review the image attached. 30 lpmm mid-frame performance area marked with bold red vertical line.
> observations:
> pronounced astigmatism. rapidly declining 30 lpmm mtf line (13mm and further away from centre) , flatlining where it should continue smooth decline. we need more data to draw the conclusion on.
> the data I am looking for: Lensrentals OLAF testing, Dustin Abbott, The Digital picture, Lenstip
> ...



Are you sure that the red line indicates mid frame performance? The sensor is 36mm wide in total. Shouldn't the edge of the sensor be 36/2=18mm away from the center, or did I miss something?


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 1, 2017)

oops, 18mm image height (out of 24mm for 36 x 24mm sensor) not away from the centre, of course.



Larsskv said:


> Are you sure that the red line indicates mid frame performance? The sensor is 36mm wide in total. Shouldn't the edge of the sensor be 36/2=18mm away from the center, or did I miss something?


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 3, 2017)

All this talk about MTF charts and hypothetical center sharpness, pop, vignetting, corner sharpness, Sigma, Ziess, red ring vs no red ring, etc.... Even a reference to Brian C. and his opinion (even comparison to another lens) concerning a lens he hasn't even shot yet.

Where's the emoji eating popcorn? :

Gonna go get a tarot card reading now. I'll see what Madam Silvia says about it all.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 3, 2017)

You're no fun 

I still say thinking a new L, five times more expensive, would be equal to a Stone Age lens non-L is worse than worst case.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 3, 2017)

you are on rumors forum. you know.. predictions, opinions and more opinions... 

here is a simple one for you: the new Canon lens will sell very well in coming years as the old F1.2 lens resolving power will continue disappointing on new generation high resolution bodies i.e. 5DsR, 5DsR II. etc  




CanonFanBoy said:


> All this talk about MTF charts and hypothetical center sharpness, pop, vignetting, corner sharpness, Sigma, Ziess, red ring vs no red ring, etc.... Even a reference to Brian C. and his opinion (even comparison to another lens) concerning a lens he hasn't even shot yet.
> 
> Where's the emoji eating popcorn? :
> 
> Gonna go get a tarot card reading now. I'll see what Madam Silvia says about it all.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 3, 2017)

Maybe this thread is finally burning itself out until we have some actual lens test information. ‍


----------



## brad-man (Sep 3, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> Maybe this thread is finally burning itself out until we have some actual lens test information. ‍




History does not support your supposition. Facts and data rarely have a place in the spirited discussions around here 8)


----------



## Viggo (Sep 3, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> Maybe this thread is finally burning itself out until we have some actual lens test information. ‍



Speaking of which, why aren't there any more info? The D850 has lots and lots of info around and first impressions, but nothing about the 85, except from Canon.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 3, 2017)

I'm 99.9999% sure this will be a great lens. However, pre-order nothing.


----------



## Ryananthony (Sep 3, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I'm 99.9999% sure this will be a great lens. However, pre-order nothing.



Agreed.


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 7, 2017)

Viggo said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe this thread is finally burning itself out until we have some actual lens test information. ‍
> ...



I don't think there are production samples available yet. Or if there are, the people in possession are still under embargo.


----------



## bholliman (Sep 7, 2017)

Ryananthony said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > I'm 99.9999% sure this will be a great lens. However, pre-order nothing.
> ...



Same here. But, I'll order quickly if the initial reviews are positive. If this is of similar quality to the EF 35mm f/1.4L Mk II as I expect it will be, it will be a terrific lens.


----------



## Larsskv (Sep 7, 2017)

bholliman said:


> Ryananthony said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



I hate to bring you the bad news, but the mtf curves Bryan provides indicates that the 35 L II is a bit sharper wide open. You have to scroll down and compare in both links. 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-35mm-f-1.4-L-II-USM-Lens.aspx

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.4L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

The mtf 10 curve on the 35 L II is approximately 0,95 at f1.4, in the center. The 85 L f1.4 is approximately 0,87 at f1.4 in the center. 

The mtf 30 curve on the 35 LII is approximately 0,8 at f1.4 in the center. The 85 L f1.4 gets approximately 0,59. 

I wouldnt be too worried though. The 85 L at f1.4 is very close to the 135 L at f2, and I have always found the 135 L to be sharp enough at f2.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 9, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > Ryananthony said:
> ...



I'd be interested in seeing comparisons (real world, not charts) between the two 85 L lenses. For me, it is going to be about IQ between the two at f/1.4... specifically the bokeh and "3D" effect. I never photograph brick walls.


----------



## Talys (Sep 9, 2017)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I'm 99.9999% sure this will be a great lens. However, pre-order nothing.



Me too. I'm 99.9999% sure I will buy this lens. But I'll wait for the first sale/price drop.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 10, 2017)

Larsskv said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > Ryananthony said:
> ...



Unfortunate, but not surprising TBH. 

Looking to get the most out of that 5DSR sensor. The 35L II and 100L do well in this regard. Although, if I'm honest, with this 85 I'm actually more interested to see how it compares at f/2 and f/2.8, since if it's less sharp than the 35 at 1.4, I can just use the 35 instead if 1.4 is needed.


----------



## Larsskv (Sep 11, 2017)

Act444 said:


> Larsskv said:
> 
> 
> > bholliman said:
> ...



I find the 85L f1.2 to be very sharp at f2, even when pixel peeping on pictures from my 5Ds, and I expect that the new 85 L IS will be sharper. However, the amount of detail I ask for in a portrait lens is limited, so I prefer shooting with a lower resolution camera when shooting portraits.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 11, 2017)

If the new 85 is worse at f1.4 than the 135 L is wide open, I'll be disappointed... but I guess other factors like less ca, better microcontrast and overall contrast might be the better looking image in the end.

Frankly I thought the 85 IS would be as sharp/ wide open as the 135 is at f2.8.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 11, 2017)

Viggo said:


> If the new 85 is worse at f1.4 than the 135 L is wide open, I'll be disappointed... but I guess other factors like less ca, better microcontrast and overall contrast might be the better looking image in the end.
> 
> Frankly I thought the 85 IS would be as sharp/ wide open as the 135 is at f2.8.



I got the wrong eye in focus (my very first portrait shot, ever) but the 135 f/2L is great wide open. CA is a problem on the lashes of the closest eye. I would hope the 85 is better, but it would be hard to make it worth the money compared to the 135 f/2L. The IS would be the clincher for me.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 11, 2017)

*Re: Canon Announces the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM *



CanonFanBoy said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > If the new 85 is worse at f1.4 than the 135 L is wide open, I'll be disappointed... but I guess other factors like less ca, better microcontrast and overall contrast might be the better looking image in the end.
> ...



Yes, I didn't mean the 135 isn't sharp, I have one now and I have owned at least 8-9 in the last 12 years.
But having had the Zeiss 100 f2 and my two other current lenses 35 L II and 200 f2 makes me expect great things for a new 85 

The biggest issue I have with the 135 is the focal length is too long and hard to handhold for me without IS.


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 11, 2017)

*Re: Canon Announces the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM *



Viggo said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



You are right. These old hands have to use a tripod with the 135 f/2L. I'd be all over one if it came with IS.


----------



## ktrphoto (Sep 29, 2017)

The new 85 f/1.4 L IS looks like being a wonderful lens. For travel it would be the perfect companion to my 16-35 f/4. Did Canon produce it in response to Sigma's super 85 f/1.4, or was it already in the pipeline?

Whichever, the advantages of IS and weather sealing should make the Canon lens the more attractive, despite its higher price, if it really does produce comparable IQ.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 29, 2017)

Well, a sad and nice day for me today. I had to sell my 200 f2.0 today since car repairs and [email protected] But it means I can buy the 85 IS and I’m really looking forward to it.

And I pray to the photo Gods that my curse is no longer with me. (If I ever buy anything new, and not used, it won’t work).


----------

