Is the 85mm compromise wirth it?

panther fan wrote:

I think it is pretty clear that Canon is positioning the 85mm F2 against the competing 85mm F1.8 options while wanting to provide additional versatility by making it a stabilized macro. It seems they have made some smaller sacrifices to get there

-1/3rd of a stop less light

I don't have much hope but if vignetting is low enough and equivalent at f2 to what the f1.8 options have at f2 this might not be that visible in actual photos.

-slightly higher weight

And one big one:

-External "whole unit" focus, which is likely not fast and expectedly not silent

Is that a welcome tradeoff

Another potential trade-off is that macro lenses tend to be quite well corrected for spherical aberration and focus shift, and I'm wondering if this might be an additional constraint put on the designers to make it great for portraits. Maybe, maybe not, IDK.

or do you wish Canon had stuck to the classic formula?

I would have largely preferred to see Canon focus all their efforts on IQ - and particularly background blur transitions and homogeneity across the frame (low field dependent aberrations). But that's just me and I can see the value in the closer focusing range.

Samples should multiply in the coming weeks / months so we'll see !

Its positioning leaves room for a f1.4 L similar to the EF one.

MayaTlab0 wrote:

panther fan wrote:

I think it is pretty clear that Canon is positioning the 85mm F2 against the competing 85mm F1.8 options while wanting to provide additional versatility by making it a stabilized macro. It seems they have made some smaller sacrifices to get there

-1/3rd of a stop less light

I don't have much hope but if vignetting is low enough and equivalent at f2 to what the f1.8 options have at f2 this might not be that visible in actual photos.

-slightly higher weight

And one big one:

-External "whole unit" focus, which is likely not fast and expectedly not silent

Is that a welcome tradeoff

Another potential trade-off is that macro lenses tend to be quite well corrected for spherical aberration and focus shift,

To be fair the competition is also pretty well corrected there. So I don't think focus shift will be a huge differentiator

panther fan wrote:

I think it is pretty clear that Canon is positioning the 85mm F2 against the competing 85mm F1.8 options while wanting to provide additional versatility by making it a stabilized macro. It seems they have made some smaller sacrifices to get there

-1/3rd of a stop less light

No big deal to me. f2 is fine if very usable wide open.

-slightly higher weight

If one wants macro that goes with the territory. I'd rather have a regular 85 that is smaller.

And one big one:

-External "whole unit" focus, which is likely not fast and expectedly not silent

This is first I've read of that. Why oh why? My ancient 85 1.8 USM has internal focus. This is 2020. My excitement is fading.

Is that a welcome tradeoff or do you wish Canon had stuck to the classic formula?

I'd take something similar to my 85 1.8 USM in a RF mount with IS added. No macro please. Internal focus.

I bought a 100 2.8L IS Macro specifically to use on the R so I'd have a moderate tele lens with IS. I hate that the IS runs all the time and is somewhat noisy. I thought the 85 2 IS was the answer to my needs.  We'll see, but looking doubtful.

For me the interesting comparison is between the new RF 85 and the Samyang 85mm

Canon vs Samyang

f2 vs f1.4

$599 vs $699 (although Sony mount is perpetually on sale for $599)

IS vs none

.5x vs .11x magnification

500 vs 582g

91mm vs 97.5mm long

external vs internal focus

non-sealed vs weather sealed

Size and weight difference is negligible. Price will likely settle into the same range. So we are down to a f1.4, internal AF and sealing vs IS and 1:2 macro.

jwilliams wrote:

panther fan wrote:

I think it is pretty clear that Canon is positioning the 85mm F2 against the competing 85mm F1.8 options while wanting to provide additional versatility by making it a stabilized macro. It seems they have made some smaller sacrifices to get there

-1/3rd of a stop less light

No big deal to me. f2 is fine if very usable wide open.

-slightly higher weight

If one wants macro that goes with the territory. I'd rather have a regular 85 that is smaller.

And one big one:

-External "whole unit" focus, which is likely not fast and expectedly not silent

This is first I've read of that. Why oh why? My ancient 85 1.8 USM has internal focus. This is 2020. My excitement is fading.

It's the macro focus part. 85mm f1.8 is only about 1:10 magnification so it has room to focus internally. 1:2 requires a lot of movement. Macro lenses are either very long or they have to extend a lot to focus close.

Is that a welcome tradeoff or do you wish Canon had stuck to the classic formula?

I'd take something similar to my 85 1.8 USM in a RF mount with IS added. No macro please. Internal focus.

I can't see that happening given that they just launched this lens.  No way they make 2 lenses that are near identical other than the focusing distance.

I bought a 100 2.8L IS Macro specifically to use on the R so I'd have a moderate tele lens with IS. I hate that the IS runs all the time and is somewhat noisy. I thought the 85 2 IS was the answer to my needs. We'll see, but looking doubtful.

Well it looks like IBIS is going to be a standard in newer R bodies, so maybe down the line when we all upgrade it won't be an issue.  Run a Samyang 85mm f1.4 with IBIS.

KLO82 wrote:

Wedding photographers will now be able to shoot wedding rings with this portrait lens without carrying a dedicated macro lens. To me that seems very convenient.

I predict this lens will be used by zero professional wedding photographers.

tkbslc wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

panther fan wrote:

I think it is pretty clear that Canon is positioning the 85mm F2 against the competing 85mm F1.8 options while wanting to provide additional versatility by making it a stabilized macro. It seems they have made some smaller sacrifices to get there

-1/3rd of a stop less light

No big deal to me. f2 is fine if very usable wide open.

-slightly higher weight

If one wants macro that goes with the territory. I'd rather have a regular 85 that is smaller.

And one big one:

-External "whole unit" focus, which is likely not fast and expectedly not silent

This is first I've read of that. Why oh why? My ancient 85 1.8 USM has internal focus. This is 2020. My excitement is fading.

It's the macro focus part. 85mm f1.8 is only about 1:10 magnification so it has room to focus internally. 1:2 requires a lot of movement. Macro lenses are either very long or they have to extend a lot to focus close.

Yes I'm well aware of that. I really don't want a macro lens.

Is that a welcome tradeoff or do you wish Canon had stuck to the classic formula?

I'd take something similar to my 85 1.8 USM in a RF mount with IS added. No macro please. Internal focus.

I can't see that happening given that they just launched this lens. No way they make 2 lenses that are near identical other than the focusing distance.

I'm sure you're right. Thing is they have a rather large gap between the 85 1.2 and the f2 macro. They might make a 85 1.4 but that seems too close to the 1.2 and would still be rather pricey.

To me a 85 1.8 with IS and then maybe a 100 2.8 macro makes more sense but hey I'm obviously not running things at Canon.

I bought a 100 2.8L IS Macro specifically to use on the R so I'd have a moderate tele lens with IS. I hate that the IS runs all the time and is somewhat noisy. I thought the 85 2 IS was the answer to my needs. We'll see, but looking doubtful.

Well it looks like IBIS is going to be a standard in newer R bodies, so maybe down the line when we all upgrade it won't be an issue. Run a Samyang 85mm f1.4 with IBIS.

R5 is a bit pricey for me and I think a lot of amateurs. R6 is nice, but really besides IBIS not much of an improvement over the R. Really makes upgrading from the R troublesome unless one has deep pockets. In that case the R5 is a no brainer.

tkbslc wrote:

Size and weight difference is negligible. Price will likely settle into the same range. So we are down to a f1.4, internal AF and sealing vs IS and 1:2 macro.

That would be an easy decision if one owns a body with IBIS.  Those of us with pre R5/6 bodies (i.e. everyone at this instant) have a tougher choice.  Upgraders will probably choose the Samyang.