RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens on the EOS Ra (PICS)

Canon's relatively new RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens with Blue Spectrum Refractive Optics.

.
RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - First Thoughts:
I'm not ready to review this lens yet for the forum but I'm able to offer some initial feedback and comparisons.  I've been using this lens for less than two weeks but I've only taken around 90-110 pictures with it - so that's not enough time to be able to render anything of value to others.  But I can certainly pass on my initial observations.
.
* It's somewhat obscenely heavy.
* It's expensive (buy one when it's on sale or trade in a lens or two).
* It makes a terrible plasticy sound when you tap it with your fingers.
* It takes astonishingly beautiful photographs.
* The Canon Blue Refractive Optics make it GREAT for Astro work.
* The Air Sphere Coating technology reduces ghosting and flare magnificently.
* It comes with a Lens Hood (gee thanks, Canon).
* It's wider than the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens.
* It's longer than the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens.
* You'll be buying expensive 82mm filters for this lens.
* The Auto Focus nailed every single shot I took.
* The Manual Focus system on the EOS R is very easy to use.
* Merely touching the surface shell leaves marks (these can be wiped away).
* If you have an appreciation for lenses, you'll appreciate just how good this lens is and how it's worth the price, regardless of what you end up paying for it.
.
I put the lens onto my EOS Ra camera body in the store and took a single shot of the text on a bottle of water without bothering to steady my hands.  The lens clearly nailed the focus (see image below) and I then tested it on more complex scenarios.  Obviously I can't post too many examples here but I was really impressed at how consistently this lens nailed the focus time and again. I use a small AF reticule for this reason but I can't complain.
.
It's faster and far, far more reliable than it's parental model (the earlier EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens - which I traded in).  I had a beautiful copy of that lens too. But that type of lens was still unpredictable and the slightest of human errors could ruin the shot. It made no sense to keep that EF lens though giving it up was painful.  But I'm happy with the decision to move to the RF equivalent.
.

A quick test in the camera store (with my EOS Ra) to see if the AF was accurate with this lens.

The original EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens would have struggled with this.

EOS Ra + EF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - I'm using the "small" AF reticule.  Every shot was dead-on.
Canon EOS Ra with the RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens + Protage Lens Heater

.
Using the RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens on the stars...
I took the EOS Ra out last-night for the first time as an astro lens ...and drove up to the mountains where the air would be clear.  This is still considered a rural area so the Bortle Dark Sky index was about 3.  The first shot with the RF lens was literally breathtaking on the LCD screen.  The EF 85mm lens was quite different to the EF lenses I had used previously on the Ra.   When connected to the camera and focused on the stars, the camera's LCD came to life with what seemed like thousands of visible stars.  It's likely that my Focus Peaking settings (Blue highlights selected) became active and contributed to the effect.  Focusing wasn't a problem.  The first image I viewed seemed over-exposed until I realized the Milky Way was a bit too close to the horizon and I was still picking up plenty of light-pollution from Sydney.  I gave it another 60 minutes for the sky to shift and for people to turn off their lights... and the results were much better. After reviewing a few of the images on the camera I was ready to leave again. I edited two images (below) but my favorite shots haven't been touched just yet.
.

EOS Ra + RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - an incomplete panorama of the Carina Nebula below the Coalsack Nebula.  (stitched horizontally from 2x JPEGS side by side).  *Slightly edited for hue and contrast.

EOS Ra + RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - The colorful Rho Ophiuchi structure. (JPEG was edited).

.
The experience shooting with this lens for Astrophotography was different to any other lens I have used in my life.  There was one star that bloomed at little at f/1.2 and that was  Antares... but this was like a subtle ghosting so it was very easy to correct.. Gone was the Chromatic Aberration that plagues Canon's fast EF Primes. The ability to lock focus on a star is made easy via the 30x magnification on the LCD of my EOS Ra, but the screen itself was sparkling with stars - thousands of stars - which shifted smoothly across the screen whenever I panned the camera.  The Core of the Milky Way showed up in color-accurate detail.  Turning the camera to the South-East, I could easily see the crimson magenta hue of the Carina Nebula and some of the Milky Way's southern structure on the LCD screen (see video below).  At one point I managed to capture a shooting star on camera while filming the EOS Ra LCD with the EOS M6 camera.  You can see this meteor just after the 4 second mark.  Turns out that rotating the camera South resulted in a shift in the focus ring.  So even if I'd caught the meteor with the 85mm lens, it would have been out of focus.  But it was amazing to catch it on the live view from the LCD.
.

Loads of FALSE COLOR from Chromatic Aberration & Color Fringing  can be seen on the image from the older 50mm EF lens (left).  Both shots were taken at f/1.2  Both images have been edited. The RF 85mmL lens (right) produced more accurate color and non of the false color blooming that the 50mm lens did..
Editing the images was fairly straight forward.  Any light-falloff was dealt with in Lightroom and colors were adjusted and bumped if needed.  Blues were fainter and needed a stronger bump to raise them to the correct intensity and shadows and highlights were pushed in Levels and Curves (in Photoshop).  In all, since no stacking and no RAW was involved, the resulting images gave the impression they'd been aggressively edited.  The sample directly above shows two nearly identical shots that were adjusted to match the same scale.  The visible difference shows a profound different between the two lenses in terms of resolution, color accuracy and CA related issues.  These two photographs were taken with the same wide-open f/1.2 aperture and the RF lens demonstrates excellent control.  You simply cant correct for blooming stars and all that color fringing.  Even the colors themselves are false on the 50mm lens (see cluster of stars towards the lower left of each image... true color should be pale blue, not crimson-cherry-violet. The amount of resolving power and clarity that the RF 85mm f/1.2L lens is capable of at f/1.2 is profound.  I can only put this down to engineering combined with the Blue Spectrum Refractive optics combined with the Air Sphere Sub-Wavelength Coatings.
.
I am going to shoot something commercial with this camera and lens shortly and that ought to add to the experience a little more.  I was talking with some astrophotographers this evening and sent them some recent stills.  These guys have been shooting astro for years but I could tell they were skeptical of any of the results from the 85mm RF lens.  I was able to show them some footage of the Live View as the images were captured and then resulting unedited images - followed by the edited ones.  I think they were as surprised as I was at what the sensor on the Ra was capable of when combined with this lens. These guys are used to staking 60x shots of 150 second exposures at high ISO to capture shots that I took with a JPEG in just 6 seconds (with this lens).  Even without editing and corrections for light-falloff, the results look good. I'm probably not going to shoot the sky again until I can get my hands on a decent EQ Mount (which I'm told is in transit).  In the meanwhile, I'll continue to use this lens for terrestrial applications.
.

EOS Ra with the RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - and the light of a passing car.

That Articulared-LCD is handy.

.

Great report - looks like the Ra and that RF 85 f/1.2 make a sick combo for astrophotography! I am shooting with a dedicated astro camera now, but I do like to see Canon staying active in this space. And VERY fun to see how the Blue refractive optics works on the very tough assignment of imaging starfields. Amazingly nice stars at wide open f/1.2 and at f/1.4. I enjoyed the ability to zoom into those.

I am currently shooting a 5DSr for my scenic stuff, but am considering strongly the R5. While it would be peimarily a scenic and wildlife camera for me, I would also try some nightscape stuff with it. Of course, it will not have the Hydrogen-alpha response of the Ra. Will have to see how the R5 does for Milky Way with the stock filter. I do also still have a modified T2i that has a clear glass in place of the original filter. It was my second astro camera after starting with a stock 40D.

Anyway, really nicely detailed and very enjoyable report on both the body and lens, including the cool video. Appreciate the effort and sharing the pics. Will look forward to more.

One last thing, could you send that Carina Nebula up here - I don't have an image of that one yet

Best Regards,

Mike L.

Longmont, CO, USA

www.thinairphotography.com

Great observations and images as always. I'm curious if you will find any issue with the Ra for everyday photography. Canon says on it's Ra webpage that the camera has special infrared cutting filters and is not intended for everyday photography.

Get a star tracker! Shame to have that camera and lens combo and no star tracker.

shawnphoto wrote:

Get a star tracker! Shame to have that camera and lens combo and no star tracker.

I tried to get one for Comet Swan but they whole country ran out almost overnight as the Pandemic Lockdown began.  I've got one on back-order.  Just waiting for stock to arrive... although it's winter time here at the moment so it won't be pleasant learning to use it at this time of the year.

Chrisinhouston wrote:

Great observations and images as always. I'm curious if you will find any issue with the Ra for everyday photography. Canon says on it's Ra webpage that the camera has special infrared cutting filters and is not intended for everyday photography.

I actually do use the Ra for non-astro images although I haven't photographed any people (portraits) with it yet and that's likely to be the challenge. I think that the images are fine as long as I am prepared to apply some fairly minor color tweaks to the majority of images. Mostly red/orange/yellow tones need adjusting. Anything with a red/yellow hue tends to appear slightly pinkish. And anything that it normally blue-grey appears to be magenta hued. Normally this can be corrected. There are also IR lens filters that are supposed to be a likely solution but they area little expensive. Too expensive for just a simple experiment.
.
Here's one from HOYA that looks like it might be an answer for at least the 85mm lens:
https://hoyafilter.com/product/uv_ir_cut/
.
Otherwise, performance is the same as the EOS R in every way... although Canon swapped out the 10x magnification for 30x.  There's some samples below that I have taken with the Ra using different lenses.  Some were color-corrected and others were not.  I'll wait to see what the R5/6 offer before making a decision on an everyday body to shoot with because I do a fair bit of ocean and food photography and that may be tricky to nail every time with the EOS Ra. I find that color-correcting the color of beach sand to be problematic with regular cameras on occasion.
.

EOS Ra + RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - AF test with no color correction required.

EOS Ra + RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens - AF test with color correction applied later (for skin tone)

EOS Ra + EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM - color test (image was gently corrected for WB).

EOS Ra + EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM - color test (image was gently corrected for WB).

EOS Ra + EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM - color test (image was gently corrected for WB). .

EOS Ra + EF 50mm f/1.2L USM - color test (image was not corrected).

EOS Ra + EF 50mm f/1.2L USM - color test (image was lightly corrected for WB).

EOS Ra + EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM - color test (image was not color corrected).

mikeyL wrote:

Great report - looks like the Ra and that RF 85 f/1.2 make a sick combo for astrophotography! I am shooting with a dedicated astro camera now, but I do like to see Canon staying active in this space. And VERY fun to see how the Blue refractive optics works on the very tough assignment of imaging starfields. Amazingly nice stars at wide open f/1.2 and at f/1.4. I enjoyed the ability to zoom into those.

I posted some astro JPEGs from the Ra camera on an amateur Astro forum - and was shortly after told that they were "obviously"  stacked and 'faked'.  I was even asked by some members why I was "lying".  Hence I had to make that video last night to show that yes indeed, the EOS Ra can actually capture many these colors, details and structures in a single JPEG image. I also made it clear that for images I had posted, I had edited the contrast, levels and both shadows and highlights (plus  enhanced the color saturation). I had also removed any light-falloff or vignetting and gave all my settings and lens details.   The comments were withdrawn by the time I had uploaded the video to YouTube but the amount of venom I saw was curious.  My wife was with me when I arrived home and showed her the images on the camera before downloading them - and when I told her of the outburst on that astro forum she said that some people find it frustrating when new technology arrives that replaces their past work and methodology.  I'm thinking this was the case.  I took a look at the most vocal of those individuals and discovered they'd spent many nights imaging for hours with 60x150sec exposures which were then edited for hours in stacking software.  The end results were acceptable ... but then I came along with a single 6 second exposure from the Ra + RF 85mmL lens that produced a more detailed and vibrant image with a single unstacked JPEG.  With less or no noise as well.   It's understandable that people would be incredulous.  Especially since I don't have a tracking mount.   There's a few members here with this lens: If you're reading this and you have the RF 85mmL lens, you ought to try turning that lens to the heavens.  The original R ought to be able to resolve plenty of the same visual data with perhaps a little less color saturation on the nebulous areas.
.

I am currently shooting a 5DSr for my scenic stuff, but am considering strongly the R5. While it would be peimarily a scenic and wildlife camera for me, I would also try some nightscape stuff with it. Of course, it will not have the Hydrogen-alpha response of the Ra. Will have to see how the R5 does for Milky Way with the stock filter. I do also still have a modified T2i that has a clear glass in place of the original filter. It was my second astro camera after starting with a stock 40D.

The R5 ought to be the FF mirrorless equivalent of the 5DSr. I'm curious to see what the R6 might offer.  Even before buying the EOS Ra, I was wary of purchasing a body that was essentially dedicated to astro ...and wouldn't be of much use in the real world as a terrestrial camera. I lost some sleep wondering if I was making the right decision because I had a lot of people telling me I should just get a CCD/CMOS cooled astrocam that plugs into the back of a telescope. But for taking pictures of night landscapes etc, this is probably a good solution for me.  I can't do landscapes with a tube-camera specifically designed to plug into a telescope. I can still connect the Ra to a telescope if needed.   Right now, I'm not even sure I need a telescope with the RF 85mm lens.  I'm more interested in a shot through the EF 100-400mmL II lens of something like Orion (which is not in my skies right now).

Anyway, really nicely detailed and very enjoyable report on both the body and lens, including the cool video. Appreciate the effort and sharing the pics. Will look forward to more.

Thanks.  I will try my hand at some product photography shortly.  I might yet be able to contribute to the EOS R forum with conventional shots.

One last thing, could you send that Carina Nebula up here - I don't have an image of that one yet

It sits down on the Southern end of the Milky Way but it seems high up enough that I'm surprised it's not visible to those in the Northern Hemisphere. It's an absolute favorite target by as lot of astronomers and photographers because you can keep zooming in to discover all sorts of structures inside it. The colors aren't visible to the human eye but you can just make it out in a clear sky.  I think I once read that this is the only nebulae structure that the human eye can detect (but that comment may have been error). The pink color is actually visible on the EOS Ra's live LCD display so I can see it while lining up the angle of the camera on the sky.  I think I can just barely see it with my own eyes but I can more easily see where it sits by the faint glow in the general area. The darkness of the Coalsack nebula (just above it) makes it easier to figure out where it is.
.
At least you guys have a North Star to align your EQ mounts with.

Marco Nero wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

Get a star tracker! Shame to have that camera and lens combo and no star tracker.

I tried to get one for Comet Swan but they whole country ran out almost overnight as the Pandemic Lockdown began. I've got one on back-order. Just waiting for stock to arrive... although it's winter time here at the moment so it won't be pleasant learning to use it at this time of the year.

Which one did you order? I was looking at getting the iOptron Skyguider.

shawnphoto wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

Get a star tracker! Shame to have that camera and lens combo and no star tracker.

I tried to get one for Comet Swan but they whole country ran out almost overnight as the Pandemic Lockdown began. I've got one on back-order. Just waiting for stock to arrive... although it's winter time here at the moment so it won't be pleasant learning to use it at this time of the year.

Which one did you order? I was looking at getting the iOptron Skyguider.

I've requested a SkyWatcher HEQ5Pro-Dual - because I need to be able to use 10kg payloads on it eventually.  I wanted a Celestron CGX but the prices soared and then stock ran out here in Australia.  The SkyWatcher is designed to be much lighter and quieter. Ideally, I'd like to run a 14kg payload but I can probably work with 10.

J A C S wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

It's faster and far, far more reliable than it's parental model (the earlier EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens - which I traded in). I had a beautiful copy of that lens too. But that type of lens was still unpredictable and the slightest of human errors could ruin the shot.

Was it unpredictable on your Ra or on a dSLR?

.
My EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM was the best possible copy of this lens Canon made. I selected it from three others but I knew that the sharpness of the RF lens would make my EF lens absolutely redundant. And I hated the idea of retaining a lens I may never use again, considering the price.  Another major reason for me wanting to "trade up" is that all the EF 85mm f/1.2L lenses would usually backfocus slightly (or a lot) and that you had to use an MFA ...and then apply the adjustments to the camera's lens menu lens register. The problem with this is that it took some dedicated effort to make that adjustment... and yet the lens could still throw out the AF. To make things worse, some APS-C DSLRS have no MFA option. And even worse, if you adjusted the camera to match the lens.... but then swapped lenses at some point, you often had to recalibrate your camera when you used the 85mmL lens again (other members here have noted the same). I bought the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens to use for a friend's wedding and when I arrived, the event was held outside on a mountain and everyone was spread out. So the FOV was just too narrow for most of my needs. Some samples from my lens below...
.

Some samples from my EF 85mmL II copy.

.
So when I realized I wanted to be able to shoot Astro with the EOS Ra, I also realized that the best lens for reasonably wide (compared to a telescope) field exposures was undoubtedly the new RF 85L lens.  Canon actually recommend it for Astrophotography.  So I had to think long and hard about obtaining this lens over a similarly priced telescope tube. It would be good for comets and the Milky Way and I could also use it on another non-modded EOS R body as a reliable lens for terrestrial use.
.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens + Comet 46P/Wirtanen (the green bokeh blob).

EF 85mmL - The effect into the front optics was like looking through a time-space portal

EF 85mmL - A comet I photographed at sunset with the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens in 2015.

EF 85mmL - I'm really going to miss this glass.

EF 85mmL - In-camera HDR shot with the EF 85mm f/1.2L II lens

EF 85mmL - In the moonlight, waiting for the moon to set (moon is out of frame on the right)

.
The EF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens was a real champ. I miss it already. All my keepers from that lens were great. But there were times when I took a single picture and missed the focus because my own body drifted slightly before the shutter was activated. Worse still, I could not use the Focus + Recompose method with that lens for anything within 30 feet or I'd ruin the shot.
.

Canon RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens on the EOS Ra.

.
So fast forward to the new RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens:
Now I have a lens that produces the same dreamy bokeh as the original, but with the EOS R cameras I can use this lens with much more precision with the LCD touch screen, negating the very need to use the Focus + Recompose method. The focus is bang-on target every single time so far and there's no concern for me to need to check pictures and review them immediately afterwards in case I might have missed the shot (it's still prudent to do this if the image you took is a critical one).
.
I think that combined with DPAF, the RF 85mm version made it absolutely pointless to retain my EF lens. In fact I traded my EF lens towards the cost of the RF version.  That's something I don't normally do.  I did not get to try it on the Ra because I'd already boxed and packed it for trade when I bought the Ra home.  Either way, as much as I genuinely liked my EF lens, the benefits for me with the new BR Optics (which all but eliminates color fringing that otherwise plagues astrophotography) and the inclusion of ASC (Air Sphere coating) to remove glare and ghosting - means I've essentially got access to 'the best tool for the job' when combining terrestrial and astro photography. Plus I love bokeh so there's that too.  It really is a kind of mini-telescope... and it's priced around the same as well.

Marco Nero wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

Get a star tracker! Shame to have that camera and lens combo and no star tracker.

I tried to get one for Comet Swan but they whole country ran out almost overnight as the Pandemic Lockdown began. I've got one on back-order. Just waiting for stock to arrive... although it's winter time here at the moment so it won't be pleasant learning to use it at this time of the year.

Which one did you order? I was looking at getting the iOptron Skyguider.

I've requested a SkyWatcher HEQ5Pro-Dual - because I need to be able to use 10kg payloads on it eventually. I wanted a Celestron CGX but the prices soared and then stock ran out here in Australia. The SkyWatcher is designed to be much lighter and quieter. Ideally, I'd like to run a 14kg payload but I can probably work with 10.

I looked at that one as well, it looks amazing. The problem for me was powering it and getting all the gear to a location. Seemed like a huge hassle. Plus,  I was wondering how resolution limited we are on the Earth's surface. It started to occur to me that unless I can get to Mauna Kea I probably won't ever push a setup like that to its limit.

shawnphoto wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

Get a star tracker! Shame to have that camera and lens combo and no star tracker.

I tried to get one for Comet Swan but they whole country ran out almost overnight as the Pandemic Lockdown began. I've got one on back-order. Just waiting for stock to arrive... although it's winter time here at the moment so it won't be pleasant learning to use it at this time of the year.

Which one did you order? I was looking at getting the iOptron Skyguider.

I've requested a SkyWatcher HEQ5Pro-Dual - because I need to be able to use 10kg payloads on it eventually. I wanted a Celestron CGX but the prices soared and then stock ran out here in Australia. The SkyWatcher is designed to be much lighter and quieter. Ideally, I'd like to run a 14kg payload but I can probably work with 10.

I looked at that one as well, it looks amazing. The problem for me was powering it and getting all the gear to a location. Seemed like a huge hassle. Plus, I was wondering how resolution limited we are on the Earth's surface. It started to occur to me that unless I can get to Mauna Kea I probably won't ever push a setup like that to its limit.

I read opinions from people who had the next model up and ended up switching to the HEQ5Pro because it was so much lighter and easier to transport and carry.  It's pretty affordable for what it can do.  Powering it ought to be easy... I already have one of the Celestron Power Tanks and the output matches the SkyWatcher mount.  The local dealer said it would work fine as well.
.

Celestron PowerTank with USB Ports and both Red/White LED illumination panel.

.
That's eventually going to be important if I'm setting up by myself.    Even a regular tripod is annoying if you're walking about with it in the dark.  Using tracking will make it possible for much longer exposures with wider apertures and more subtle details to be captured.  Especially with even longer lenses which are useless to me right now.  But it's winter time here at present and the mountains are truly freezing.  So I have time to wait and see.  But the mount I'm looking at is considered to be one of the lightest in its class and very convenient to move and set up.
.
Mauna Kea would be a great, clear-sky location for you to get to!

J A C S wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

J A C S wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

It's faster and far, far more reliable than it's parental model (the earlier EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens - which I traded in). I had a beautiful copy of that lens too. But that type of lens was still unpredictable and the slightest of human errors could ruin the shot.

Was it unpredictable on your Ra or on a dSLR?

[snipped]

I take it that it was on a dSLR. I am asking because the new lens is too expensive for a favorable WAF and I always like the photos from the EF lens, which I had the chance to use for a while. If it focuses as well as my EF 50L on my R, that would be good enough for me.

Beautiful photos, BTW.

My wife will probably get to use any RF lenses I obtain so she's fine with it.  I made sure to pay off any personal debts and expenses first.  I'm sure the EF lens would have focused well on the EOS R cameras because my EF 50mm f/1.2L USM lens was also a little sensitive when used on any DSLR (full frame or APS-C) and yet it's really easy to use on the EOS Ra.  The focus nails the shot every time.  But that new RF 85mmL is able to resolve faint details in the night sky beyond what the old EF lens was capable of.  .
.
Something I personally don't like about the 85mm EF version is that the lens would extrude when in use but would not retract unless you forced it to refocused.  And that was a slow process that took several seconds.  So, if you were finished shooting, and reversed the lens hood before bagging the camera/lens and the lens was not retracted, you risked destroying the lens gears if you put your camera bag down to hard.  So I always made sure to put the lens cap on and half-depressed the shutter button to get this lens to retract first before stowing it. People complained that the AF speed was very slow on that lens.  Another concern was the focus-by-wire method it used.  By comparison, the 85mm RF version feels and acts the same as any "normal" lens when it comes to nailing the focus perfectly using MF.
.
The clarity of the new RF 85mm lens at f/1.2 for nightsky photography still has me astonished.  I didn't think it was even possible to get some of the shots I've taken (not yet shown) with a lens like this.  It's opened my eyes to a whole new world of possibilities.  I'm not normally moved by lenses but this one has really impressed me so far.  I look forward to reviewing it properly after I've spent some time with it shooting terrestrial subjects.

Sittatunga wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

<Snip>

. But that new RF 85mmL is able to resolve faint details in the night sky beyond what the old EF lens was capable of.

I almost wish you hadn't told me that...

I'd strongly urge folks to hire or try this lens if they're ever thinking of switching lenses at some point.  The EF 85mm f/1.2L II seemed to produce sharper results (even with Astro) than the 50mm version.  But the EF 85mm lens produced VERY strong color fringing and inaccurate hues when dealing with deep space shots.  At f/1.2 with 1.6 second exposures of the Orion Nebula, the EF version produced thick purple/magenta halos around brighter stars, generated excessive blooming and coma was observed at the edges, even on the smaller stars.  All that occurred with a third of the exposure time.  I can't observe Orion in the sky right now but looking at the Carina nebula last week, the RF lens at f/1.2 produced none of these artifacts, even with 6 second exposures.  There was a tiny bit of correctable ghosting around the star Antares because it's bright.  No doubt that could be attributed to the aperture used or the UV lens filter I was using.
.
I'm just guessing as to why... but the ability to shoot the night sky at f/1.2 or even f/1.4 (without being forced to drastically reduce the aperture to say f2 or smaller) means it's picking up a lot more light during the exposure time.  In some of the images I haven't posted yet, I was picking up illumination on nearby dust lanes next to the yellow star Antares.  I could clearly see this on the LCD screen from the JPEG taken immediately beforehand.  Normally I'd expect to just see some dark smudges where these darker nebulous strands were.  That enabled me to increase illumination and contrast and color to reveal more of this structure during processing.  As with the examples I posted earlier, I'm no longer getting the color blooming/fringing or blurring that plagues f/1.2 apertures when pointed at the stars wide open. Colors of say the Southern Pleiades (IC 2062) cluster (not the '7-sisters' M45 Pleiades) is the correct light-blue color, not purple & orange like the EF 50mm lens was producing for me.  It's reassuring to know you can use this wide aperture RF lens at  f/1.2 (or f/1.4) and not suffer for it.  When I get to using tracking, I'll reduce the apertures to get some diffraction spikes and increase exposure times.

Something I personally don't like about the 85mm EF version is that the lens would extrude when in use but would not retract unless you forced it to refocused. And that was a slow process that took several seconds...

The R has a handy option for Retract lens on power off in the orange camera menu. It focusses to near infinity automatically, about a second after you switch off, whether the lens is in AF or MF. Best switched off if you think the camera might get bored and switch off one night when it's on a tripod.

I did see that option when I was  going through the manual (it's on the Ra since both cameras have virtually identical features).  There's a couple of lenses this could probably be applied to.  Not a bad idea that they included this option. But the retraction process on the 85mm was far too slow for some people.  I didn't mind the speed of operation and considered the quality of the images to be an acceptable trade-off.

Hoka Hey wrote:

The deep space images are beyond anything I would have expected. There are folks spending vast amounts of money and huge chunks of their time to produce images like that, and you are doing it with 6 second JPGs.

Put simply, I could probably just adjust the brightness of a JPEG from this setup and it would exceed what I could get from an EOS 6D with a similar lens and the same settings. I could NEVER get the blue star colors or any dust lane reflections to show up on my other gear. I was all set to start image stacking this year but now it looks like I might be able to just use an EQ Mount to enable longer exposures and to just blend a couple of shots together if I need to. Those shooting RAW will presumably have evenmore room to play with during pp.

I have to admit that I'm a little angry at you, but in a good way. 🙂 I have wanted both the Ra and the RF 85, but I have been able to overcome those impulses up til now. I frankly hadn't thought of using them in combination. This changes things. Now, I can "justify" getting them.

I was annoyed that hardly anyone was using the Ra online and only a few members here had the RF 85mmL lens but hadn't used it for astro. So I had to base my research on what I could find on the internet. I did find this image from PetaPixel to be useful in demonstrating one of the differences between RF and EF lenses for Coma Control ...
.
https://petapixel.com/2019/06/17/canon-this-is-why-rf-lenses-are-outstanding/
.

If you get a chance and have one, could you use an x-rite color checker passport and see how that works for color correction of the Ra? The dual illuminant profile does a nice job (in my opinion) with the R for skin tones and I'd love to see how close it would get with the Ra.

I don't have an x-rite color checker passport here. I did do a Custom WB using a white-card shot in direct sunlight whilst overhead. Then when I took some shots with this Custom WB, I wasn't as happy with the results (on the LCD) so I ended up returning to Auto WB.

As always, thanks.

Best,

I've been here on the forums since March 2003 and I've always followed the same principal of sharing any experiences or observations with others here. The shots of the Carina nebula caught be by surprise when I first reviewed the images while the camera was still on the tripod. To get shots like this with a 6 second exposure (limited only due to the 85mm focal length) has caught me completely by surprise. I did not expect these types of results without stacking dozens of longer exposures (eg 160x 150sec exposures). Normally we'd have to use a smaller aperture (at least f/4) to prevent the stars from bloating or generating coma and CA complications. The only thing I'm not getting at these wide apertures is diffraction spikes on the brighter stars. Presumably, with longer exposures using smaller apertures, the results will be even better.
.

This was the playback view from the older EF 50mm f/1.2L USM lens on the EOS Ra Note the colors and detail captured. This was also an under-performing lens.

.
I was saving this for another thread where I could post some product photography (terrestrial indoor shots) alongside it, but here's an example of what I did the other night. Note that astro images tend to require editing compared to terrestrial shots like portraits etc. But most people tend to have to add colors and push levels of contrast and color into the realms of fantasy. In this instance, I've tried to retain the colors captured with Auto White Balance... which is still quite a bit off from the ideal "proper" white balance needed for the Milky Way with an astro-modded camera.
.
This is a set of three JPEGs I took of the Milky Way's core that I only just finished working on yesterday. Because the RF 85mm lens doesn't distort much at this focal length, (and because coma is greatly reduced in this lens) I only needed a very slight overlap.
.

The three original unprocessed JPEG images from the Ra + RF 85mm f/1.2L USM lens.

.
Now these colors and details appeared a bit brighter on the LCD but I didn't want to over-expose since I was deliberately shooting in JPEG. Looking at the original JPEGs above, you can see that the colors and details are essentially all there in the singular shots. There's light from the yellow star Antares illuminating the dust lane next to it on the right. The pale blue glow of Rho Ophiuchi with a triple star grouping in the core is there - and this is something I've normally failed to catch in the past. I can even make out the blue hue of the lesser horse head reflection nebula (IC 4593) in the upper right. Any coma from corner stars is so subtle that it's not noticeable, even here at f/1.4 . Essentially, all the colors and details were captured in the JPEGs. RAW might have offered a little more but I wanted the camera to use its lens corrections and any automated color corrections, sharpening, contrast etc settings to see what I could get.
.
The settings used were as follows:
[CAMERA] : User Defined Setting: "Fine Detail" | 10-sec self timer
[SETTINGS]: 6 Seconds | ISO 5000 | f/1.4 | Auto WB
.
My method of editing these JPEGs was to merge them together into a panorama using Photoshop's automated feature. Then, I create layers that enable me to tweak and manipulate the highlights and shadows. Colors are sampled directly from the captured data in the images. No noise reduction or sharpening was needed. The process I used enabled me to darken some areas of the dust lanes and raise illumination in other areas. The lack of color noise, even at ISO 5000 was interesting. It's there in some areas (especially in the top left) but it was subdued. I only worked on this image for a few hours the other day when I was on a fairly long hands-free phone call. When I was finished, the results were as follows:
.

EOS Ra + RF 85mm f/1.2L USM - a three-shot JPEG panorama - shown after editing.

.
[Editing]:
* Color Saturation (two manual, selective passes with a Wacom Tablet/Pen)
* Contrast Adjustments (once)
* Levels (once)
* Curves (twice)
* Manual Shadow enhancement (via Wacom Tablet/Pen)
* Manual Highlight enhancement (via Wacom Tablet/Pen)
* Forgot to apply proper correction for Light Falloff (!)
* Brightness Adjustment in Center of image.
.
The reason for the washed out area in the extreme left is because when I have rotated the panorama from vertical to horizontal. When I took these pictures, the bright lights of the city of Sydney were adding to the glow on the horizon. That's where this glow was coming from... light pollution. The White Balance isn't exactly perfect but it was good enough for this test. I hope to try this again when I can use a tracking EQ mount to enable smaller apertures and longer exposures. For a singular JPEG image, the results were just fine and better than anticipated. A challenge I had was keeping the layered PSD files under 2GB in order to keep saving them without having to resort to a PSB (Large Document format).
.

This was the eye-opener for me...

.
Part of me was concerned that the cost outlay for this lens and camera was more than I wanted to be spending money on at this time. I reasoned that I could try out the EOS Ra for terrestrial use and may later purchase an EOS R6 for general use with the same RF lenses. The reason I bought the RF 85mm lens was because I knew it would vastly outperform my older EF variant (which was an exceptional copy that I regret having to part with). But since the R is Canon's future-proof system, this seemed to be the right decision for me at this time.
.
Where I see this camera (EOS Ra) as being useful for me is for
* landscapes & nightscapes with the Milky Way in the background
* mounted directly to a telescope.
* mounted on an EQ Tracking Mount with longer lenses.
.

Damn it beats me over M6ii with at least 1hour of stacking to get workable signal, this combo sure is a beast, I might want to try out someday.

Beside Marco, if you are into Landscape Astro stuff, you should try canon EF 35mmLii with BR optics, same characteristics as your RF 85mm, shooting wide panos at 1.4 is sure fun.