Another cheap(ish) RF prime review/demonstration

RLight wrote:

davidwien wrote:

Many thanks, Alastair, for taking the trouble to select and post these photos.

I have never had an 85mm lens and have been considering whether I need to add the RF85 f/2 to my collection. As you have ably shown, the lens is highly competent technically, and the price is acceptable. The question for me is whether I like the type of photos an 85mm takes. I do not take a lot of portraits, which may be why I am not so enthusiastic about this focal length; but when I do, I use my RF50 or RF35. For groups indoors I often use the RF16 -- though I have to be careful not to make those on the periphery look too fat than they are!

What I do not like about portraits taken with an 85mm lens:

The purpose of a 85mm is largely head and shoulders portraits... Not everyone is a portrait popper inasmuch as not everyone is a landscape shooter. I wouldn't recommend a landscape shooter get a 85mm, no matter how strong it is, well priced, etc, if it's not their thing. Conversely, a portrait shooter may not need a wide angle. Arguably everyone should have a lens for in case they want to do something, but, some people do not want to (shoot certain things) and lenses cost money, and sit in bags adding weight. Money aside, I can tell you, less is more. If you don't need it, it is better left home. It is however beneficial to have a plan, and have a backup, even for amateur shooting. I leave a PowerShot or EOS M in the car for example most of the time, that's a form of backup if you will. If I think I might go indoors/be out after dark, when I had the 24-240 (don't anymore), I'd take the RF 35 f/1.8 IS STM along, that's planning. But, I'd leave it in the car till needed as the day might look like going to the zoo, and then restaurant after, you get to pickup that RF 35mm in the car at that time, meaning no bag, no lens swap on the go.

As someone who does like 85mm (me), I don't have one. Why? I'm an event shooter largely, I live off zooms like a 24-240, or in my case, a 28-70 f/2L. When I want head and shoulders, I compromise, and use 70mm @ f/2 instead of a true 85mm. But, I don't swap lenses either during events, or usually anyways.

a pj event shooter can have a big advantage shooting the RF 28-70 f2 L + RF 70 -200 F2.8 L on two RF event bodies -- because they don't have to occupy two bodies with the 35 and 85 primes. They get to run two event bodies with two zooms covering 28 -200 that will keep up with the pj action.

that said, 35 + 85 is what I run for value proposition

I'll say I have never touched the RF85mm, but it resolves the complaints of the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM, which that was a stellar lens in terms of price/performance. If you want an 85, I can say Alastair has demonstrated it correctly that the RF 85mm f/2 IS, is the one to beat. For the price, those kind of results are otherwise not achievable without some kind of compromise. Example, lack of IS, which is VERY useful for 85mm indoors where you want to keep your shutter and ISO down, even on FF, but keep your sharpness up. The R/P don't have IBIS yet, and even for R5/6/3 shooters? You want the newer optical formula that alleviates purple fringing concerns of the EF version...