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

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/

Simon, that is an OUTSTANDING review!

Its so refreshing to read a practical review written by someone who can provide a quantitative comparison while explaining whether the measurable result matters in practical use.  Anyone considering this lens should read your review.  Bravo!

I use my 85 f/1.8 more than my other lenses combined, and while the f/1.4 was tempting, I chose the 24-70 f/2.8.  Fixed length photography has its drawbacks, such as when a crowd of people gather for a shot... 85mm can’t cut it.  Maybe I’ll rent the f/1.4 sometime or borrow it from Canon. I hope I didn’t make the wrong choice; I usually buy one lens a year and this was the year of the 24-70.

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.

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.

On this review I would definitely buy the 1.4 because it is at least as good as the 1.8 on everything plus has 1.4 which is stunning and of course IS.

no brainier to me.

the more interesting one is would I swap out my 1.2ii for the 1.4 and so far no....

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.

sceneIt wrote:

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.

It is optically better than the 1.8 version. It costs >4X the price but, however, isn't >4X optically.

Comparing to the Sigma, however, is different. The Canon has IS and has worry-free, future-proof, AF which may or may not make up for the difference in price depending on what you value more.

I'm with you on it not being worth the price premium for my needs. I don't have the 85 1.8 anymore -- I preferred the 100 f/2 which is essentially the same -- but wouldn't move up the 85 f/1.4 move up to the 85 f/1.4 for the current price. For other people, they may value the differences enough to make the change.

The nice thing about Canon is that they give you 3 flavors of 85mm from which to choose and all will be more than enough for the vast majority of people's needs. Honestly, with the equipment we have these days it's only our talent that holds us back.

fotoriffic wrote:

sceneIt wrote:

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.

It is optically better than the 1.8 version. It costs >4X the price but, however, isn't >4X optically.

Comparing to the Sigma, however, is different. The Canon has IS and has worry-free, future-proof, AF which may or may not make up for the difference in price depending on what you value more.

The nice thing about Canon is that they give you 3 flavors of 85mm from which to choose and all will be more than enough for the vast majority of people's needs. Honestly, with the equipment we have these days it's only our talent that holds us back.

Again, we're talking practical considerations. Sigma and Tamron got praised for going beyond practical. Sigma and Tamron have both introduced lens firmware updates for their lenses that haven't worked properly with new Canon cameras. Right now I remain optimistic that if future camera's don't work with my Sigma lens Sigma will update the lens.

Canon needs to stop this silly game of keeping everything a trade secret. It would actually benefit their camera business to make things like their radio technology for flashes and their AF systems for lenses available to 3rd parties.

Huge thanks from me for this. A great review (and great sample photos BTW) that is of help because this was a lens I had my eye on. Having read your review I'll just keep my 1.8.

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/

I don't know what you use to publish your blog, but if it's wordpress there are cool scripts like this one: https://wordpress.org/plugins/image-comparison-slider/ that you can use to compare images instead of an animated gif. If you don't use wordpress writing a script should be easy enough to switch between two images.

J A C S wrote:

PhotoSimonUK 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/

I don't know what you use to publish your blog, but if it's wordpress there are cool scripts like this one: https://wordpress.org/plugins/image-comparison-slider/ that you can use to compare images instead of an animated gif. If you don't use wordpress writing a script should be easy enough to switch between two images.

Yeah, it's Wordpress based. Thanks for the tip on the comparison tool, it's something I'd not even thought about.

I do not want to change the topic - but I will ask nevertheless - is there any downside of using Wordpress for people who do not get too deeply into HTML coding?

The main downside is changing themes. I've never had it work. So, you'll possibly be stuck with whatever theme you choose unless you can find an expert to make the switch for you.

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.

Unfortunately Canon must not be interested in round bokeh balls either because their new 85 exhibits similar bokeh performance to the Sigma. They had a chance to be better and they missed it. Somehow Sony got the memo???

The Sigma also has purple fringing... so does the Canon.

Even their new 35L with the special "blue lens" has fringing, and I own that.

If Canon somehow can't engineer a lens to be optically better than its 26 year old predecessor I'm just not interested in it.

Oh well! More money in my pocket I guess....

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.