The 85L II is pure indulgence

The 85L was a lens I lusted for over 3 years. I bought the 85 f1.8 which was (is) a great performer for the money. Certainly it is faster to focus, accurate, lighter and works decently on a range of Canon bodies. The 85L is none of these things. It is heavy, costly, only seems to work decently on pro bodies and is difficult to use at maximum aperture. Nevertheless, it is one of a kind. Sharp, reasonably fast to focus to a 1D series body and often renders sublime results. I don't use this lens a huge amount, but I do love using it. All I can say is: the 85L is an incredible indulgence, but everyone needs a little luxury every now and again. Why not photographers?

The 85L was a lens I lusted for over 3 years. I bought the 85 f1.8 which was (is) a great performer for the money. Certainly it is faster to focus, accurate, lighter and works decently on a range of Canon bodies. The 85L is none of these things. It is heavy, costly, only seems to work decently on pro bodies and is difficult to use at maximum aperture. Nevertheless, it is one of a kind. Sharp, reasonably fast to focus to a 1D series body and often renders sublime results. I don't use this lens a huge amount, but I do love using it. All I can say is: the 85L is an incredible indulgence, but everyone needs a little luxury every now and again. Why not photographers?

I absolutely love mine and we'll never part with it.

You haven't really experience the pleasure of the 85L II until you put it on the 1Dx. It absolutely transforms the lens. Lens AF speed and accuracy is improved to the point where I have photographed BIF at short range, volleyball and other indoor sports. Previously I used it on a 1DIV and 5DIII. neither were close to the 1Dx experience.

Of note, the lens is not much faster below about  3ft because the AF rotational movement is so large but beyond that length speed is not an issue.

sempervivum wrote:

Correct. While shooting portraits in natural environment I use mostly the 135L. Focuses faster, and more consistent; gives greater magnifucation at minimal focusing distance, has more convenient working distance for tight portraits, has less CA...

But from time to time the 85L gives results that simly nother lens can...
--
Yours Truly,

sempervivum

For me, it became the order you end up buying the 85L and 135L.  In the beginning I was shooting more indoors, so the order was 70-200/2.8L IS II, 85L, and 135L.

I played with this lens for the first time a month ago.

Oh

My

God

What a gem.  I knew it would be big and heavy, but I was not prepared for what I saw.  Just a solid chunk of beautiful glass front and rear.  Ultra-bright, and just something special about it.  I cannot imagine what Canon would do for a III version (other than add an extra $1,000 on the price).

Blake Cook wrote:

You haven't really experience the pleasure of the 85L II until you put it on the 1Dx. It absolutely transforms the lens. Lens AF speed and accuracy is improved to the point where I have photographed BIF at short range, volleyball and other indoor sports.

Or you could use the f1.8 version on a cheaper camera like I do.

studioduplateau wrote:

I have it and honestly, I prefer the results from the Canon 70-200mm f2.8L II IS

The 85L is not as sharp plus there are more aberrations than the 70-200L

The 85L is better when shooting at f1.2 though

I have it and honestly, I prefer the results from the Canon 70-200mm f2.8L II IS

The 85L is not as sharp plus there are more aberrations than the 70-200L

On what body. This is not what I have seen. Have you ma'd the lens?

Scott Larson wrote:

Blake Cook wrote:

You haven't really experience the pleasure of the 85L II until you put it on the 1Dx. It absolutely transforms the lens. Lens AF speed and accuracy is improved to the point where I have photographed BIF at short range, volleyball and other indoor sports.

Or you could use the f1.8 version on a cheaper camera like I do.

A good point. f/1.8 is not f/1.2 but AF is so much better on newer bodies the erratic AF  of the 85 f/1.8 may rejuvenate a lens that only had that as a fault.

The 85L II lens is indeed special lens but....  I recently sold it and bought 100 f2.0 and Fuji X-100s with that money. I couldn't be happier.

draculr wrote:

The 85L is better when shooting at f1.2 though

Which I have never found a need for. I find f1.4-r1.8 risky except for carefully posed shots.

Yes, I've seen lots of photos with the subject's nose out of focus. I'm not really into that.

I found the 50 f1.2 focus was completly diffrent on my 1Dx as compaired to my 1DmIV. On the 1Dx it didn't hunt around so I would believe the 85 f1.2 would react the same when used on a 1Dx. Some photos please...

jasrockett wrote:

I found the 50 f1.2 focus was completly diffrent on my 1Dx as compaired to my 1DmIV. On the 1Dx it didn't hunt around so I would believe the 85 f1.2 would react the same when used on a 1Dx. Some photos please...

It's a shame that Canon was never able to get these lenses working that well on the crummy old 1D Mark IV.

I looked at EVERY ONE of your images on your website, and I am speechless!!!!!!! Each image takes my breath away!!! WOW! I am SO VERY JEALOUS. You are extremely talented. Thanks for sharing.

canon person wrote:

I looked at EVERY ONE of your images on your website, and I am speechless!!!!!!! Each image takes my breath away!!! WOW! I am SO VERY JEALOUS. You are extremely talented. Thanks for sharing.

Blush! Thanks for the comments. Photography is renewed hobby for me. I used to have a darkroom, which I closed down because I couldn't justify having all those chemicals around. I didn't take any photos for about 20 years. Digital reawakened my interest, so I am learning photography all over again. I have probably over-invested in equipment, but it's all I spend my spare cash on, so I'm not too worried about that. I'm glad you enjoyed some of my shots.

songeun7 wrote:

The 85L II lens is indeed special lens but.... I recently sold it and bought 100 f2.0 and Fuji X-100s with that money. I couldn't be happier.

I get that, but I reckon if I were to do that, some time in the future I would still want to buy the 85L all over again.

Sigh! Such are the problems of the First World!

Scott Larson wrote:

draculr wrote:

The 85L is better when shooting at f1.2 though

Which I have never found a need for. I find f1.4-r1.8 risky except for carefully posed shots.

Yes, I've seen lots of photos with the subject's nose out of focus. I'm not really into that.

What Scott? Not even full length portraits? The 85L's ability at middle distances can create some very fetching, 3D-like, images. I agree that f1.2 for head shots has a limited value, but even if you stop the 85L down to f2 or f2.8, its rendering is still quite distinctive.

keithinmelbourne wrote:

What Scott? Not even full length portraits? The 85L's ability at middle distances can create some very fetching, 3D-like, images.

If I always knew that I would be taking nothing but full length posed photos at middle distance for an entire event, yeah, sure. This just shows what limited use the lens is.

I agree that f1.2 for head shots has a limited value, but even if you stop the 85L down to f2 or f2.8, its rendering is still quite distinctive.

It looks no different to me than the 85mm f1.8 at those apertures. Why risk losing candid shots because the AF motor is so slow?