Debating on lenses.... Any suggestions?

photogmomma · December 12, 2006

Before you think I'm off to buy a few new L lenses, I'm more just mulling this over in hopes of being able to get them in the next 6 months. I recently bought the 24-105mm L IS USM thanks to Andy's review. I haven't really put it to the test yet, but so far it's light years ahead of my old 28-105mm.

Anyway, on my 10D I had my trusty 50mm f/1.4 and LOVED, LOVED it. Well, on my new 5D, I still love it, but it's a very different lens because of the full frame. So I've been thinking about the 85mm f/1.8, which would be pretty close to the 50mm on a FF camera.

But then I realized I needed a better zoom. I'm just not happy with my 75-300mm IS USM. It's generally very soft and VERY slow.

So the real question is: Do I get an 85mm f/1.8 AND the 70-200mm f/4 L or do I just get a single lens that costs the same as those two put together: 70-200 f/2.8 L?

What would you recommend? (The up side is that if the 85mm and the f/4 zoom are best, i can probably get the 85mm sooner. If the other one is recommended, it'll be later.)

Thanks so much!

TristanP · December 12, 2006

Depends what you shoot. If you need an aperture larger than 2.8, well, neither of the 70-200s will do the job. That being said, both choices are excellent, with the 85 + 70-200/4L being the cheaper of the two.

photogmomma · December 12, 2006

TristanP wrote:

Depends what you shoot. If you need an aperture larger than 2.8, well, neither of the 70-200s will do the job. That being said, both choices are excellent, with the 85 + 70-200/4L being the cheaper of the two.

*smacks head* I mainly shoot people - portraits and candids.

Need to think about it being that wide open. I do have my 50mm 1.4 so I can always fall back to that one.

And on Amazon (although I should check out B&H as that's where I usually shop!), you can get the 2.8 for $1095 after rebate. (85mm+70-200mm = $915) Not a huge difference when you're talking that much anyway. If the 70-200mm f2.8 is THAT much better, I'd lean that way.

Thanks!

Tommyboy · December 12, 2006

I just got an 85mm f/1.8 and like it quite a bit. I also have the 75-300 and like it better than you do, though not much.

I assume whichever 70-210 you're looking at, you're NOT considering IS? Is that right?

Although you said you can't afford it right now, the rebates are double on purchases of two or more. That means:

1. 70-210 f/4.0 $570 Rebate: $70
2. 85mm f/1.8 $330 Rebate: $40
3. 70-210 f/2.8 $1125 Rebate: $90

Depending on what you want to spend, I would do this:

1. 70-210 f/4.0 IS & 85 f/1.8 $1,500
2. 70-210 f/4.0 & 85 f/1.8 $830
3. 70-210 f/2.8 $1,100

That's my 0.02

Tee Why · December 12, 2006

I think if you mainly do portraits, a prime for headshots would be nice to have.
I'm not that impressed with the 85mm but it's a good lens. The 70-200 f2.8 would be more versatile, but not if you do mainly portraits as it's dof isn't as shallow.

If it was me, I'd probably go for the 85mm f1.8 and a 70-200f4L.

Here is a review of the Canon 85mm f1.8 and a 70-200 f2.8L versions.
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/gallery/2197033
http://tomyi.smugmug.com/gallery/2158458

Scott_Quier · December 13, 2006

I have the 85 f/1.8 - really like the lens. It's sharp, especially for the price you don't have to pay and, like others have said/hinted - the DOF it delivers can be quite shallow - love it for portraits (head and 3/4 shots).

If you've read the reviews, you know not to expect it to be a lightening fast focusing lens - but for portrait work, I have not really needed it to be.

I can easily recommend this lens for the type of shooting you identified.

Happy hunting!

howard · December 13, 2006

Given your intended use you may want to consider the 85/1.8 and 135/2 about US1200. For candid work the 70-200 zooms and be a attention magnets.

wellman · December 13, 2006

I've got the 85/1.8, and I'm a big fan. On a 5D, your DOF control should be marvelous with it.

Mongrel · December 13, 2006

Scott_Quier wrote:

If you've read the reviews, you know not to expect it to be a lightening fast focusing lens

Respectfully disagree....

Every review I've read combined with my personal experience with two copies of this lens say it is one of Canon's *fastest* focusing lenses. In fact, it is one of the best lenses you can get to shoot basketball because of it's fast aperture and fast focusing. I believe the confusion may be over the 85 f/1.2 "L" Mk I lens which has\had a reputation for having slow autofocus.

The 85mm focal length on a full frame camera like the 5D is very desirable for portraits, as is the 135mm focal length for headshots. Either of these lenses would suit your stated purpose very well.

photogmomma · December 13, 2006

Wonderful! Thanks to ALL of you for chiming in! This is actually the way I was leaning, but wanted to get a better feel for what others thought.

I'm going to go with the 85mm for sure and then revisit later what else I should be getting.

Because most of the stuff I do is pretty casual and I shoot children a lot, I'm definitely going to get a longer zoom later. (The 75-300 has taken some great shots for me so I know whatever I get, I'll use it a lot.)

Thanks again for helping me make this decision!

ETA: I actually just turned in my rebate for the 5D and the 24-105mm lens and wasn't aware that it doubled with two Canon purchases and when I went to pre-qualify online, I was shocked to see it add up to $700!!! If only I could get that back before the rebate was over so I could buy the 85mm and get THAT rebate doubled!

Scott_Quier · December 13, 2006

Mongrel wrote:

Respectfully disagree....

Every review I've read combined with my personal experience with two copies of this lens say it is one of Canon's *fastest* focusing lenses. In fact, it is one of the best lenses you can get to shoot basketball because of it's fast aperture and fast focusing. I believe the confusion may be over the 85 f/1.2 "L" Mk I lens which has\had a reputation for having slow autofocus.

You may well be right about me confusing the lenses. I have used the 1.8 only in portrait sessions, so have not really paid much attention to the speed with which the lens focuses. It's been fast/accurate enough to keep me very, very happy, but in my portrait sessions, speed to (re)focus has not yet been an issue (that could change if I ever get a really challenging subject - like a 5 - 9 month old baby:D).

It's been so nice and so very sharp (at least within my experience) that, if they weren't so darn convient, I would almost convert from zooms to all primes, but....

LiquidAir · December 13, 2006

Scott_Quier wrote:

You may well be right about me confusing the lenses. I have used the 1.8 only in portrait sessions, so have not really paid much attention to the speed with which the lens focuses. It's been fast/accurate enough to keep me very, very happy, but in my portrait sessions, speed to (re)focus has not yet been an issue (that could change if I ever get a really challenging subject - like a 5 - 9 month old baby:D).

It's been so nice and so very sharp (at least within my experience) that, if they weren't so darn convient, I would almost convert from zooms to all primes, but....

As I get better with the primes my zooms get less and less use. As for the 85/1.8, I am convinced it is the best bang for the buck available for the Canon mount. Anyone into people photography should put this one near the top of their list. Another lens to consider rather than one of the 70-200s is a 135/2L. For me it is a real work horse lens on the 5D.

Aussieroo · December 13, 2006

I posted this thread to the wrong forum I feel but you may find it helpful
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=49296

Value for money I don't know you can go past it. With the exception of the weight I can't fault it. Mind you it gives the arm a good work out during a days shooting at an airshow with it pointed skyward most of the day!!:D

Debating on lenses.... Any suggestions?

Comments