# 50mm upgrade or 85mm coverage?



## codewizpt (Dec 12, 2012)

Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)

Anyone had a similar debate?


----------



## wayno (Dec 12, 2012)

(2)


----------



## wayno (Dec 12, 2012)

In that I went down that route and have no qualms at all. The Siggy is tack sharp and luscious where it counts.


----------



## Random Orbits (Dec 12, 2012)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...



If you're happy with your 50, get a 85 next.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Dec 12, 2012)

Why not consider the Canon 85mm f/1.8?


----------



## untitled10 (Dec 12, 2012)

I love my 85 1.8, the saving could go towards more glass, maybe its worth consideration?


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 12, 2012)

If it were me, I'd get a 70-200 or 17-40(16-35) just to be a little bit flexible before I get an 85. Anyway, you know what you need most.


----------



## PavelR (Dec 12, 2012)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...


Having 1.3x with the same lenses and question some time ago.
I owned 85/1.8 and upgraded to S 85/1.4. (C1.8 = too much violet fringing and inconsistent AF)


----------



## codewizpt (Dec 12, 2012)

I had both the 17-40 and 70-200 F4 non-is and sold them to get my primes.



verysimplejason said:


> If it were me, I'd get a 70-200 or 17-40(16-35) just to be a little bit flexible before I get an 85. Anyway, you know what you need most.


----------



## robbymack (Dec 12, 2012)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...



1) how often do you shoot wide open on the 50, if a lot then the L would be a nice upgrade, if you're more or less at f2 or smaller all the time then there is little advantage in the L

2) a good lens indeed (caveat I don't own it), but the 85 1.8 is just as good IMHO and costs a lot less plus just be careful not to shoot wide open in high contrast or you get purple fringing, but even that is easily correctable in post and gone by f2.2. 

3) due to money sounds like it's not really an option, but if you can afford it it's one of the pieces of glass you will likely hold on to for a long time.


----------



## RS2021 (Dec 12, 2012)

All things considered, EF 85 f1.8 sounds like the best compromise.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 12, 2012)

Ray2021 said:


> All things considered, EF 85 f1.8 sounds like the best compromise.


+1.


----------



## TexasBadger (Dec 12, 2012)

85 1.8. Great lens at a great price.


----------



## Plato the Wise (Dec 12, 2012)

I have the 50L and 85L and have shot with the 85 1.8.

If you have the 50 1.4 and you can afford the 85L - I would definitely recommend the 85L. It is such an awesome lens for portraits and the 85L blows away the 85 1.8 in color and contrast. People forget sometimes that sharpness is only one part of what makes a lens awesome.

And of course there is the bokeh!


----------



## wayno (Dec 12, 2012)

I've owned and used the 85 1.8 for a couple of years and it is indeed a very good lens but the Sigma 85 1.4 is another beast altogether. Suggest it is a more marked IQ and visual impact lens vs the 85 1.8 than the 50 1.2 is vs the 50 1.4.
The 85 1.4 has a considerable x- factor to its output - much like the 85L however I think the 85L is somewhat slow and specialized whereas the Sigma is just more versatile and very very close in IQ etc


----------



## IIIHobbs (Dec 12, 2012)

I have the 24L, 50L, and 135L and have pondered getting an 85 or the 100 Macro. Every time I shoot with the 135L, I say, :I love this lens" and doubt if I would use either of the other. Every time I shoot with the 50L, I am so very satisfied, I also doubt I would take out the 85 instead.

I would love to have the 35L, 85L and 200L to technically fill the voids of my current kit, but I have never had a situation yet where the lenses I have left me wanting something more/different.


----------



## criza (Dec 12, 2012)

IIIHobbs said:


> I have the 24L, 50L, and 135L and have pondered getting an 85 or the 100 Macro. Every time I shoot with the 135L, I say, :I love this lens" and doubt if I would use either of the other. Every time I shoot with the 50L, I am so very satisfied, I also doubt I would take out the 85 instead.
> 
> I would love to have the 35L, 85L and 200L to technically fill the voids of my current kit, but I have never had a situation yet where the lenses I have left me wanting something more/different.



That's almost the same situation I am in, got the 24L, a converted FD 55 1.2 and a soon to be EF converted FD 135/2. Well I also own the 100L, which I don't know if I really need it and the 15mm fisheye which is always nice to have and the 200/2.8! Now I want to sell the 200 because I don't use it, not even with my 1.4x II but don't know if I should buy the sigma 85 to complete my set...or just sell the 100 as well  and keep the 3 firstly mentioned lenses and the fisheye... ??? After all the sigma 85 1.4 is pretty similar to the 55mm 1.2, you can always crop the pictures from the latter...


----------



## sagittariansrock (Dec 12, 2012)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...



Buy the 85 1.8 and wait for the 50 1.4 IS!


----------



## codewizpt (Dec 31, 2012)

I'm waiting to see the January announcement before deciding, but the Sigma seems a good bet


----------



## helpful (Jan 1, 2013)

Someone mentioned that the Canon 85mm 1.8 has more unreliable autofocus. I am just posting to say that I have not found that to be the case. The Canon 85mm 1.8 has the best autofocus on any possible lens that I have tried, better for sure than the 70-200 II, for instance. It's never unreliable unless user error causes it to be so. (I.e., you mis-place your focusing points, such as accidentally beginning to press the button before the AF points are actually on your desired subject.)

The Sigma 85mm f/1.4 has slightly unreliable autofocus, I have found, but good enough that I can still rely on it at a basketball game (not 100% reliable). But Sigma's image quality at f/2.0 is far better than the Canon just because of the CA problem (chromatic aberration) that the Canon has.

With the Canon, you will get purple reflections from the out of focus stadium lights reflecting off of glasses, for example (ruining an otherwise good dunk photo, for example) if you shoot below f/2.8. So basically you are wasting more than one stop of the len's potential in order to avoid CA.

I don't have to worry at all about CA with the Sigma lens at f/2.0.

CA is the problem with the Canon, but its auto focus is as close to perfect as possible on all of my copies and every else's that I know. So I had to chime in and say something.

Yes, I have had disappointing focus experiences myself, but it has always been user error of my own like getting too eager and starting to lock focus before a subject is close enough to even register on the AF sensor. If I make a mistake like that, the lens will do a perfect job of tracking focus on the background. The way to fix that mistake is to take my finger completely off the shutter and re-acquire focus on the proper subject. So if you are experiencing any focusing problems with the 85mm 1.8, just wait a little bit. AF takes technique from the photographer as well as capability and accuracy from the lens. I am still learning and improving every day.


----------



## elflord (Jan 1, 2013)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...



I was in a similar boat and I went with (2). That's my lineup now -- 35L, 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 85mm and the 135L. Haven't looked back (though I daydream about the 200mm f/2L every now and then)


----------



## RLPhoto (Jan 1, 2013)

I have found the 85L a strange focal length for me. It's not quite normal but not quite tele. It will melt the background but still leave some information.

Overall, I'd probably never own an 85L since my 135L is just so good. My 24, 50, and 135 kit are all good, separated, and unique focal lengths. 

I'd recommend just to continue to use the 135L.


----------



## mingyuansung (Jan 1, 2013)

35mm -> 85mm -> 135mm. I would recommend 85mm. Many people would recommend also to rent one for a weekend and see what you like. It depends on what you are shooting. Japanese yeh would go weak all the way till mid 2013. Do not know how much it would impact the lens price. Wait till then if you can. Or buy when you have to. A used Canon 85L maybe? Thanks.


----------



## codewizpt (Feb 16, 2014)

Bringing back my question, I still debate upgrading my 50mm f.14, but now there is a Sigma 1.4 that may surprise...


----------



## hawaiisunsetphoto (Feb 17, 2014)

codewizpt said:


> Bringing back my question, I still debate upgrading my 50mm f.14, but now there is a Sigma 1.4 that may surprise...



The new Sigma 50 and the 50L are going to be comparable in price, both would be good choices. The 85L is beautiful, and the Sigma 85 would be a great alternative to that at less than half the price. Another alternative to consider, not mentioned yet, would be the new version 24-70mm f/2.8L II. It's tack sharp, great bokeh, and would cover the wide end as well as some coverage between 50 and 135. About the same price as the 85L. Just a thought.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Feb 17, 2014)

The new Sigma 50mm is supposed to be rockin'. And it's about $300 less than the Canon 50mm f1.2.

But I don't think I've seen you or anyone ask 'What do you shoot?' or "Which lens do you use most often?"

I LOVE my Zeiss 50mm and it's the pick up truck of lenses. Very utilitarian focal length. As long as you don't get too close for portraits, those types of shots are very pleasing. 

But 85mm is the defacto portrait lens. But it's not so great for street and landscape photography.

I say, if you use one of your lenses much more than the others, upgrade that to the best you can. But if you currently use all your lenses about the same amount of time, then maybe the 85mm would be the next lens.


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 17, 2014)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...



the current 50mm options with AF are all crap IMO

i use the sigma 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 they partner each other really well

i am waiting for the next generation of 50's to come like a sigma 50 art or the rumoured canon 50mm f1.8 IS 
IS and a compact size is gonna be critical for me on the new 50 because i'd use it mainly for travel


----------



## bholliman (Feb 17, 2014)

PavelR said:


> Having 1.3x with the same lenses and question some time ago.
> I owned 85/1.8 and upgraded to S 85/1.4. (C1.8 = too much violet fringing and inconsistent AF)



I've heard differing opinions on the Sigma 85 1.4. How is the AF performance (speed and accuracy)? I have the Canon 85 1.8 and find the AF to be pretty good overall. How about the Bokeh?


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 17, 2014)

RLPhoto said:


> I have found the 85L a strange focal length for me. It's not quite normal but not quite tele. It will melt the background but still leave some information.
> 
> Overall, I'd probably never own an 85L since my 135L is just so good. My 24, 50, and 135 kit are all good, separated, and unique focal lengths.
> 
> I'd recommend just to continue to use the 135L.


Interesting...that's my take on the 35mm, as in it's not wide enough, and not normal enough. I bought the 85mm after the 24, 50, and 135 because I found the 50 less than flattering for headshots and the 135 was often too long to use indoors. After buying it, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the 85L was great for all of my portrait work other than environmental shots. 

To the OP, I'd recommend getting your hands on a 85mm lens (borrow or rent) to try it out for a couple of days. Most shooters (like RL & I) find certain lengths preferable to others and it's a very personal thing. If the 85mm FL melts your heart, then you can decide 85 Sigma or L, and if not, then you can wait for 50 Sigma or buy L.


----------



## MLfan3 (Feb 17, 2014)

I can't wait to see a new 85mm f1.8 ISUSM, I think f1.8 is fast enough for most of apps considering the high ISO performance of the 6D ,the 5D3 and the 1DX.
I also want to see a new 135mm f1.8LIS USM.


----------



## RavePixel (Feb 18, 2014)

codewizpt said:


> Having FF with 35L, 50 1.5 and 135L, I'm thinking in:
> 1) selling the 50mm 1.4 and buy the 50L
> 2) buying the Sigma 85 1.4
> 3) buying 85L (more difficult due to the money involved)
> ...



Well, the 50mm f/1.2L will provide superior results to the 1.4, is built far better, and has bokeh to die for @ 1.2. It does require some skill to shoot with as it has some limitations at close range, but once you learn the lens the results are outstanding.

But, you don't have an 85 at all. I am thinking you are better off getting a 85L, and maybe down the road upgrade to the 50L. Because, you'd probably benefit from the 85mm coverage for portraits if you don't have one, and the 85L is a killer lens.

Only thing is, there are no specials right now so you are going to pay a lot more than when rebate season is around in the fall.


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 19, 2014)

bholliman said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > Having 1.3x with the same lenses and question some time ago.
> ...



Here is the sigma 85 on 5D3 wide open iso 3200

AF is good not suited to action but still faster than the 85 1.2
IMO Bokeh on the canon 1.2 is better but the lens is 3x the price

if you want the best bokeh you can get and dont care about price or fast AF get the canon there is nothing that can touch it, the sigma gets damn close though at 1/3rd the price has faster AF and is smaller


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 19, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I have found the 85L a strange focal length for me. It's not quite normal but not quite tele. It will melt the background but still leave some information.
> ...



I'm the same I LOVE the 135 but indoors its too tight but outdoors I love it and have been using it alot on the EOS-M actually!  the 85 is my goto lens for portraits indoors


----------



## TexasBadger (Feb 19, 2014)

I would recommend the 85 f1.8. It can be had for ~$400 and it has the fastest focus of all of my lenses. Great for portraits and action photography.


----------

