Canon RF 85mm f/1.2 L USM Lens
Jul 17, 2022 06:20:02 #
I am considering purchasing this lens. This will be my first RF lens. I am purchasing this mainly for taking portraits with. I would love to hear from those who have it what they think? I might add I will be purchasing the one without DS. I don't need to hear about the "DS" version. I did my homework, and for me the one without DS is better for me. So please, no talk about the amazing "DS" version.
Jul 17, 2022 07:49:13 #
I have been using it for last couple of years 85 mm f/1.2 RF lens without DS. I love it for portrait and for getting nice bokeh in the background!
Feel that you will not go wrong. Best luck
Feel that you will not go wrong. Best luck
Jul 17, 2022 08:38:03 #
It's big. It's heavy. So is the price tag, but it does beautiful work. I have used mine (non-DS) a lot for shooting basketball at the local community college using an EOS R, which I no longer have. It did a surprisingly fine job the first time I tried it there so I kept on using it. The autofocus is faster then predicted and I could stop it down to really highlight just one player if I wanted. Bokeh is excellent. Now that I have an R5 I am eagerly awaiting the re-start of the school's athletic programs which have been shut down since 2020.
I haven't shot many portraits but I have used it to shoot the feral kittens playing on our patio. Excellent results. The large aperature allows me to put a face in focus with everything else blurred. As mentioned, the autofocus is faster then expected for a lens like this. Initial reports stated that because of the physical size of the lens the internal componets would naturally be larger and heavier resulting in slower focus. That hasn't been my experience. Autofocusing larger, heavier componets should result in increased battery consumption. Can't say if that is the case or not.
I haven't shot many portraits but I have used it to shoot the feral kittens playing on our patio. Excellent results. The large aperature allows me to put a face in focus with everything else blurred. As mentioned, the autofocus is faster then expected for a lens like this. Initial reports stated that because of the physical size of the lens the internal componets would naturally be larger and heavier resulting in slower focus. That hasn't been my experience. Autofocusing larger, heavier componets should result in increased battery consumption. Can't say if that is the case or not.
Jul 17, 2022 10:37:49 #
Canon R wrote:
I have been using it for last couple of years 85 mm f/1.2 RF lens without DS. I love it for portrait and for getting nice bokeh in the background!
Feel that you will not go wrong. Best luck
Feel that you will not go wrong. Best luck
Great! Thank you for answering.
Jul 17, 2022 10:39:22 #
LFingar wrote:
It's big. It's heavy. So is the price tag, but it ... (show quote)
Good to know. I also shoot sports. I always use my 70-200. If I get this lens, I will try it out there too. Thanks!
Jul 17, 2022 10:43:04 #
The one thing I'm concerned with is the fact I don't know how much a pain in the butt it will be to have to remove my 70-200, than the adapter than add the 85mm and reverse. I read somewhere that it isn't recommended to leave the adapter attached to the lens when taking if off and putting it back on....
Jul 17, 2022 11:09:41 #
Jul 17, 2022 11:31:14 #
Jul 17, 2022 12:29:08 #
I'm sure you've done a lot of research already, but since looking for more feedback / input, I'd consider still some other ideas:
1, The RF 70-200 f/2.8L IS
2, The RF 28-70 f/2L
3, Wait until Canon announces whatever will be the final specs of the RF 135L
Those first two zooms are widely loved, and may be more generally useful in addition to specifically portraits. I have multiple 85mm lenses and one 135mm, after selling-off another version. Canon will need to release some RF-version extension tubes before I could get the most use of either RF focal lengths of 85 & 135, as they tend to not focus that closely, with minimums in the 30+ inches range. The RF lens is listed as 33.5in. Compare that to the RF 50 f/1.2L that has a minimum focus at 15.8in.
1, The RF 70-200 f/2.8L IS
2, The RF 28-70 f/2L
3, Wait until Canon announces whatever will be the final specs of the RF 135L
Those first two zooms are widely loved, and may be more generally useful in addition to specifically portraits. I have multiple 85mm lenses and one 135mm, after selling-off another version. Canon will need to release some RF-version extension tubes before I could get the most use of either RF focal lengths of 85 & 135, as they tend to not focus that closely, with minimums in the 30+ inches range. The RF lens is listed as 33.5in. Compare that to the RF 50 f/1.2L that has a minimum focus at 15.8in.
Jul 17, 2022 12:41:36 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
I'm sure you've done a lot of research already, bu... (show quote)
I would jump on the RF 70-200 if it had a extension tube available. I use my EF 70-200 f2.8 all the time at sports events with the 2x extender. But, as far as I know Canon doesn't have one compatible for that lens. I have done research, but I didn't realize the focusing distance was that long.... Some things to think about. Thank you for the information.
Jul 17, 2022 14:45:26 #
Tracy B. wrote:
The one thing I'm concerned with is the fact I don't know how much a pain in the butt it will be to have to remove my 70-200, than the adapter than add the 85mm and reverse. I read somewhere that it isn't recommended to leave the adapter attached to the lens when taking if off and putting it back on....
I have one EF lens, the EF 100-400 L II. The adapter stays on the lens since I don't need it for anything else. The only reason I can think of for removing first the lens and then the adapter is so that you don't accidentally unlock the adapter from the lens when removing as a unit resulting in it falling off to be damaged or lost.
Jul 17, 2022 14:50:00 #
LFingar wrote:
I have one EF lens, the EF 100-400 L II. The adapter stays on the lens since I don't need it for anything else. The only reason I can think of for removing first the lens and then the adapter is so that you don't accidentally unlock the adapter from the lens when removing as a unit resulting in it falling off to be damaged or lost.
That makes sense.
Jul 18, 2022 05:48:41 #
1.2 can result in some very very shallow depth of field. Especially if shooting sports and athletes up close. I guess I would think about how much I am really going to shoot wide open or nearly so and the shooting distance. A simple DOF app can estimate the DOF.
Jul 18, 2022 06:30:19 #
Notorious T.O.D. wrote:
1.2 can result in some very very shallow depth of field. Especially if shooting sports and athletes up close. I guess I would think about how much I am really going to shoot wide open or nearly so and the shooting distance. A simple DOF app can estimate the DOF.
Thanks
Jul 18, 2022 07:42:18 #
Tracy B. wrote:
The one thing I'm concerned with is the fact I don't know how much a pain in the butt it will be to have to remove my 70-200, than the adapter than add the 85mm and reverse. I read somewhere that it isn't recommended to leave the adapter attached to the lens when taking if off and putting it back on....
I wouldn't be surprised if Canon tells you to do that so that it becomes more of a hassle. In that way, they get you to buy RF lenses. LOL
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.