# 85mm 1.8 lens



## beforeEos Camaras (Oct 5, 2015)

hi all I am looking at the 1.8 as a portrait lens as the 1.2 is not in the same range price wise

in my film days I used a 85 1.8 fd lens loved it. But on a crop body its no the same aspect but I will be getting the 5dmk3 in a few months. is the hood necessary for the lens. how is the flare control on the lens?


----------



## awinphoto (Oct 5, 2015)

Flare control for this lens is fair to midland i suppose... I bought a cheap lens hood for this lens on ebay for maybe $5? I barely use it, but it's there when needed.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 5, 2015)

The hood is a necessity for every lens that can take one. But as awinphoto points out, you don't need to get the overpriced Canon one as there are many third party options.


----------



## cellomaster27 (Oct 5, 2015)

Not necessary but it saved my lens when I dropped my camera on concrete. Nothing happened to the lens. Be more careful, and you don't need it. 
If you shoot backlit subjects or in direct sun, you will find the hood useful.


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 5, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> The hood is a necessity for every lens that can take one. But as awinphoto points out, you don't need to get the overpriced Canon one as there are many third party options.



Aargh ! I don't know where you got your third party hood for this lens (and the 100/2) but all the ones I tried just kept falling off ! Every time someone pushed past me they would knock it off and then apologise profusely whilst I tried to hide my embarrassment at having been a cheap-skate. The proper Canon one is actually pretty secure when clipped on properly. Maybe there are better third party ones out there than I tried.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 5, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The hood is a necessity for every lens that can take one. But as awinphoto points out, you don't need to get the overpriced Canon one as there are many third party options.
> ...



I put my hand up and admit my only experiences with third party hoods are using other peoples and back in the days of the FD where we all had rubber screw on hoods! I am a cheapskate too but always get the Canon hood (maybe that is why my 50 f1.4 has lasted so long  ). I suppose that makes me a fanboy or blinded by Canon or whatever, and the truth is my 24-70 hood is pretty loose nowadays........

The modern third party hood I have used most often is a white one for the 70-200 f2.8, it works really well but I am sure there is massive quality variation.


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 5, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



The bayonet style third party ones I have used for other none L lenses worked fine - Kaiser comes to mind on the EF 50 /1.4. However for the fiddly little clip on, or pop on types, that's for the likes of the original 35/2, the 85/1.8 and 100/2 I really recommend the Canon hood.


----------



## beforeEos Camaras (Oct 5, 2015)

thank you both I too rember the rubber lens hoods, in some ways I wish I had one still useful for pressing ageist glass. I will put a hood on my buy list.


----------



## Aichbus (Oct 6, 2015)

cellomaster27 said:


> If you shoot backlit subjects or in direct sun, you will find the hood useful.


If "backlit" means the light source is in the picture, the hood is not particularly useful. A bit, but not much. Also, if the direct sun is in your back, you don't need the hood either. You need it when the sun is not in the picture but comes from an angle where its beams can reach the glass of the lens or the lens frame and thus reach the sensor plane by way of detours. Especially when the light that forms the image is significantly weaker than the light that comes at an angle. This easily happens in night shots, where streets lights from unfavourable angles can cause bad reflexions in an otherwise darkish motif. (Sorry for my English, I am not a native speaker).


----------



## gqllc007 (Oct 6, 2015)

Are you using this 85 for inside or outside? If outside I would highly recommend the 135L f/2 for portraits. It is worlds better for not a whole lot more. I have the 85 1.2, 85 1.8, 100 f/2 and the 135L and if I am going outside the 135 gets put on 99% of the time. The bokeh is just awesome. The 85 1.8 is ok and I will use that for a couple and even then I will prefer the 100 f/2


----------



## Monchoon (Oct 6, 2015)

gqllc007 said:


> Are you using this 85 for inside or outside? If outside I would highly recommend the 135L f/2 for portraits. It is worlds better for not a whole lot more. I have the 85 1.2, 85 1.8, 100 f/2 and the 135L and if I am going outside the 135 gets put on 99% of the time. The bokeh is just awesome. The 85 1.8 is ok and I will use that for a couple and even then I will prefer the 100 f/2



Not sure where you are, but the price for the 135L where I am is more than double the 85 1.8, the 100 f2 is around the same as the 85 1.8 though.


----------



## sdsr (Oct 6, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The hood is a necessity for every lens that can take one. But as awinphoto points out, you don't need to get the overpriced Canon one as there are many third party options.
> ...



The inexpensive Fotodiox hood I bought for my 50mm 1.4 fits tight; so unless that's a fluke and/or doesn't apply to their hoods for other lenses, theirs might be worth trying.


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 6, 2015)

sdsr said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



The 50/1.4 has a bayonet 'twist on' way of attaching, lenses like the 85/1.8 (and the 85/1.2 for that matter) have a clip on where four spring loaded tongues clip into the grove around the lens barrel. If they don't fit exactly in the groove then the hood will fall off, or get knocked off very easily. For bayonets, by all means get a third party hood but my advice for the clip on ones is get the Canon.


----------



## ntt2007 (Oct 7, 2015)

I love the perspective of 85mm lens too, but I wonder when will Canon replace this 23 years old lens. hopefully news about it will come soon


----------



## rfdesigner (Oct 8, 2015)

For the record

I have the 100f2

This is my take on the 85~135 primes... I currently use APS-c

The 135L was a little too much for my pocket, one day maybe, once I've got a FF to go with it.
the 100mm2.8Macro I felt was a little slow on the AF front (fast enough but not instantly in focus)
the 100mm2.8L was a little too much for my pocket at the moment
the 85mm1.8 was a little soft wide open, but fast on the AF.
the 85mm1.2L was too slow on the AF and way too expensive.

I am confident in using the 100f2.0 in fast action situations with the lens at f2.0, and it's still sharp enough, I like really close cropped portraits (national geographic style), for these I can use it indoors at home.

It was also in budget.


----------



## Luds34 (Oct 8, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The hood is a necessity for every lens that can take one. But as awinphoto points out, you don't need to get the overpriced Canon one as there are many third party options.
> ...



I'm not a huge fan of the clippy lens hood design. I much prefer the screw on type. However with that said, the Canon one seems to work pretty well actually on the 85. I think I broke down one day when Canon had some sales/rebates going and I loaded up on new pinch style caps and lens hoods for a few of my lenses, the 85 f/1.8 being one of them. Yes, I might recommend going the Canon route for this lens/hood.

With that said, I've had the hood on for so long now (great for tossing in the bag face down and not worrying about front lens caps) however I used this lens without a hood for a good year or so. I don't remember not having a hood being too much of an issue. I suppose it probably helps shooting into the sun or something. I just know I got great shots before and after attaching the hood.


----------



## Luds34 (Oct 8, 2015)

One anecdotal perspective (aka this is just my limited feel, my lens etc) is that I find the lens performs so much better just stopped down to f/2.0 from wide open f/1.8. I think the color and contrast is much better and I found the shots seem to pop a bit more on their own. So take that for what it's worth. Speaking of worth, there is a lot of value in this lens. I think I saw one going for $240 on craigslist the other day. Lot of bang for one's buck!


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Oct 8, 2015)

I love the 85 1.8 and use it quite a lot. I rented the 1.2 for a week and really did not like the weight. I also found that sharpness between the two lenses was about the same at similar apertures.

In my experience, the 1.8 has a sweet spot between F/2 and F/2.8 where you get good sharpness with good background blur.

This shot was taken at F/2 using a 5D3. Sharpness is Lightroom default. Minor cropping at top and bottom.

I also have the 100 F/2 and the 135L but don't use them as much simply because it forces me to stand too far from the model and it's hard to communicate with them.


----------



## beforeEos Camaras (Oct 8, 2015)

the more I think about the lens the more excited I am getting something has to cure the gas I got looks like there is no longer any hope for me


----------

