Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Lol. You're probably right.

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

For portraits you won’t regret the 85 1.2. I only own the EF versions but I know the lens is considerably sharper than the 70-200 at 2.8. I can’t see using the 85 for sports except for limited applications at fixed distances like the say the balance beam. My only complaint with the EF 85 is that it’s too sharp for closeups like headshots. I routinely subtract texture in LR to counter sharpness. For waist and full length work it’s absolutely amazing from 1.4 on down. Someday I’ll upgrade to the RF but I’m intrigued by the DS version and looking forward to test reviews. Good luck and enjoy your new lens!

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I would hope and assume you have read Rockwell's review of the f2 macro version https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/85mm-f2.htm

Aside from better AF, it is hard to justify $2K more cost if you are shooting at f2 or smaller anyway.......just sayin'

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

DOF example at 15 feet. Of course closer gets less DOF and longer distance gets more DOF...

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

I just saw this video and I am now re-thinking.....
https://youtu.be/ezDuuLvmS2I

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

That was a good analysis. So if you shoot a lot of low light get the 85. Otherwise stick with the 70-200. I’m thoroughly satisfied with my older EF 70-200. The new RF model with it’s shorter size is very temping though.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Yes it is tempting, just wish the extender work the the RF model

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

Uh, what is DS?

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

google it ....... then let me know if YOU can figure it out. LOL

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

Ah, defocusing smoothness

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

Back in my day photographers used to smear a little Vicks vapor rub on the lens. It softened everything right up.

maciej

I use the EF 85mm f/1.2L with an adapter on my R5 with great results. Portraits pop with great looking back ground our of focus. Often a spare adapter, left on each lens, makes changes easy and convenient.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

You are correct that the RF 2X Extender cannot be used with the RF 70-200mm.

Why not just get the RF 100-500mm? That will give you almost the same range as the EF 70-200mm + 2X + EF to RF adapter. The 100-500mm is not much larger or heavier than your combo. Of course, you won't have the f/2.8 aperture the way you do now, when using your 70-200 without the 2X. At the short end the RF 100-500mm is f/4.5, while out at 500mm it's f/7.1. It's actually f/4.5 from 100 to 150mm, f/5 from 151 to 253mm, f/5.6 from 254 to 362mm, f/6.3 from 363 to 471mm and f/7.1 only from 472 to 500mm. So it's almost a match for your "140-400mm f/5.6 combo" for much of the focal length range. At 300mm and upwards image quality is certainly better with the RF 100-500mm! https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1510&Camera=1508&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=1197&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=2

You would still have your 70-200mm for use without any teleconverter, for those times when you really need f/2.8 instead of the telephoto reach.

If I were still shooting weddings or similar portraiture the RF 85mm f/1.2 would be at the top of my list. But I avoid weddings now (), so my choice would be the RF 85mm f/2 IS STM instead.... much smaller, about 1/3 the weight, smaller filters (67mm instead of 82mm) and very similar image quality. The f/1.2 lens is slightly sharper at f/2, but they are nearly identical at all smaller stops. Not to mention, the f/2 lens has 5-stop IS, is much closer fo focusing (0.5X vs 0.12X) and is less than 1/4 the price of the f/1.2!

Hey, I love big glass! But only if I really need it. And there are things like background separation and a dreamy look that an f/1.2 lens can do, which lesser lenses can't.

There's also now an even less expensive Viltrox 85mm f/1.8 available for RF mount ($400). No IS, but in other respects I've been pleasantly surprised by the the quality of some other Viltrox products I've used. I'll have to check it out more closely.

User ID

Dont believe everything you read. Are you reading that online ? If so you can always negate any specific advice with the opposite advice. Its all out there.

Leave the adapter on the lens.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

You've given me lots to think about. I have thought about the 100-500 before. But that would only be if I wanted the new RF 70-200. The set up I have now, with the extender works good. Thanks for the response.