85mm 1.8 worth it?

Cameron · August 1, 2007

Ok, I'd like some opinions... I've been contemplating buying the 85mm 1.8 lens to expand my low-light shooting ability and benefit from the creative aspect of the narrow DOF at 1.8. I would use it for indoor low-light portraits (not groups - obviously too long for that). I anticipate that many of my photos in the near future will be of my soon-to-arrive twins.

The reason I'm hesitating is that I am not sure if I'd gain enough over what I alreay have to justify it. I'm shooting with a 30D -- here's what I have close to that range:
17-55 EF-S 2.8 IS
50mm 1.8
70-200 F4L IS
100mm macro

I find that since I got the 17-55 I don't use the 50mm 1.8 much at all -- the 17-55 has such great quality at 2.8 that I rarely switch it out for the 50mm (and the IS is great on the 17-55).

Thoughts?

pathfinder · August 1, 2007

The 85mm focal length was the ideal head and shoulders portrait lens for full frame 35mm cameras. On a crop body, you get the same effective view with your 50mm f1.8, so...... or your 17-55 at 50mm. Maybe you need to swap the 50mmf1.8 for the 50 f1.4 or the 50 f1.2........ Those will gather more light for you than the 85 f1.8. The 85 f1.2 is another lens that is lovely, but only if you plan to shoot at f1.2, otherwise buy the 85 f1.8.

Those of us who shoot with the 85mm lenses, like them, but with you having a 50mm f1.8, a 17-55, and a 70-200, don't expect a lot of use with it. How often do you shoot with your 70-200 at the short end, and wish you had another stop or 2 of more light?

sirsloop · August 1, 2007

It has its uses, but I don't think you're going to find it very versitile. Its a pretty long lens on a 1.6x camera... and I think even a 50 is too long for walk around on a camera like that. Its a portrait lens, an indoor sports lens, and maybe a low light concert type lens.

Peter Dumont · August 1, 2007

The 85 is indeed a bit long on a 30D, but.....
The 85 is indeed a bit long on a 30D, but
It is a nicely build lens and very very sharp !

Also, I like it's colors and of course it is very fast with it's f/1.8 and USM
AND it even has full time manual

.

I think it is a great lens that can be bought for a nice price.

I shot this picture two days ago in the zoo in Amsterdam with my 5D and the ef 85mm f/1.8 attached.

(It's titled:"Now that's a good joke !")

Bye,

Peter Dumont

Cameron · August 1, 2007

Thanks for the input. I think you're probably right that I'd find myself using it only in very specific situations. I think I'll continue with what I have and reevaluate when I feel like I can't do what I want with the lenses I already have.

saurora · August 1, 2007

I have the 85 f/1.8 and it is the least used lens I own. That kind of surprises me as I love portraiture and shooting people, especially small children and shallow DOF. You will not use it as an indoor lens on a crop, it is way too long (except for maybe head shots). They say it's a good lens for sports. I think the lenses you have should do well, but if you want more light and to shoot indoors on a crop camera, I would consider the 35 f/1.4. It's lucious, too! Super colors and gorgeous bokeh. Of course, it's not the bargain that the 85 1.8 is, that's for sure. But a lens is not a bargain if you don't use it. I am only hanging onto mine for a while with thoughts of moving to a 5D where it would perform more like the 50 on a crop. I agree w/Pathfinder that you might also want to consider the 50 f/1.4 if you are looking for more light. It's more of a bargain than the 35.

sirsloop · August 2, 2007

The 35/2 is a heck of a lens and its only $225. At that price I can't believe its not in everyone's bag. I use mine ALL the time.

Tee Why · August 2, 2007

Personally, I'd skip the lens and just use what you have, which are good lenses.

~Jan~ · August 2, 2007

I love my 85 for outdoor portraits. I wouldn't ever be able to use it indoors, though. Too long. For babies, I think your 50 would be more appropriate, or even a 35.

CONGRATS on the twins! Wow!

85mm 1.8 worth it?

Comments