Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Lens Review

J A C S wrote:

sceneIt wrote:

PhotoSimonUK wrote:

sceneIt wrote:

fotoriffic wrote:

sceneIt wrote:

PhotoSimonUK wrote:

For those of you who are interested in the new(ish) Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM lens . . . I've written a fairly detailed review, mainly comparing it to the much cheaper Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM.

https://simonbrettellphotography.co.uk/canon-ef-85mm-f-1-4l-is-usm-lens-review/

Great review! Canon won't be getting my money on this iteration. I have to agree with you in that it doesn't separate itself enough on sheer image quality from the f1.8, which I used to own and really liked. If I'm being honest, I don't know why they bothered making it. As you state 26 years and barely any optical improvement over the old design, they could have left well enough alone and few would have noticed or cared.

They made it because Tamron and Sigma were getting lots of praise for their new 85s. Competition is a wonderful thing. Now we'll have to see if that same competition will drive the price down.

I respect Canon's design choices. They kept the weight and size down and they introduced IS. But for me if it isn't optically better than what I already own I don't need it. Unfortunately the fringing, the bokeh, the overall contrast, it seems to be down slightly vs the Sigma 85 Art. I think they went practical when they should have gone balls out. That's why Sigma and Tamron got praised.

I think it's really interesting hearing people's thoughts on this lens. For me I was a little surprised / disappointed that it wasn't significantly sharper than the old Canon f/1.8. However; it's still a great lens which is more than sharp enough, the IS is invaluable for me with how I like to shoot.

I think if they had got a lot closer to the price of the Sigma 85mm Art people would be a lot less critical and more likely to plump for the native glass. Canon have probably done themselves a bit of a dis-service with the price point. Personally I've had a bit of a love / hate relationship with third party gear, especially lenses.

This does add something to the existing lineup . . . The f/1.2 is a unique bit of glass but is hampered with slow focusing. The f/1.8 is brilliant value for money and also offers incredible performance. Now the 1.4 gives a faster aperture than the f/1.8, faster focusing than the f/1.2, IS, weather sealing and a few other tweaks. It's a great all round portrait lens . . . but not a world beater in terms of sharpness and probably a little over priced!

I also find it interesting!

Consider this image..

Taken with Sigma 85mm art

Could the bokeh balls be round like on the Sony 85 GM? Yes, they could.

No, they could not. There are two reasons why the balls are not completely round. First, the mirror box. ML has an advantage with this but ... a smaller throat diameter works against it. Second: vignetting. This is most of what you see, actually. Sigma's recent lenses are huge but have lower vignetting. To eliminate it almost completely, you would need a huge front element. ML or dSLR - does not matter.

I'm not a lens designer so I don't know if they can be round or not. I feel like if they wanted to they could make the damn bokeh balls round. If it really is as you describe then how did Sony manage to get round bokeh balls in their 85 GM? It's also large but still smaller than the Sigma.