I've owned this lens since it came out and the review is pretty much accurate from my experience. I do have to say the macro is excellent and many have used this lens for product shots including myself.
Thank you so very very much Christopher for your years of posting lens reviews. They are the "Go To" ones for me and my friends when purchasing a new lens. Your consistent methodology is so much better than others who take lenses out for a day or two and report upon their images. Your posts help us mere mortals to evaluate lenses online and then purchase responsibly... BTW... I got this baby today. It's now up to me to be up to the lens. Thank you so very much C.F. And now to Canon UK... Chris as a Canon ambassador? ...I would love to sit in on his talk at the NEC Photography show... Just sayin'
Thanks to your review I bought this lens last Friday. I like shooting portraits wide open and this lens sure delivers on my R6 Mk II! Pretty much blown away.
@@vincelam1998 the eos rp is cheaper than many high end phones phones. And you can pair it with the "superb" 50 1.8 rf for the price of a good phone case and a micro sd card. I don't think it's a matter of money in this case.
Firstly, thank you for mentioning the size. For some reason Canon literally call this lens "compact, lightweight" on their product page and it's infuriating that no reviewers or media have called attention to that or pointed out that this lens really is not either of those things. I don't mind the size of it but it's definitely on the slightly larger side of average and I can't believe this is only the second review I've seen actually mention this. Second, I think it's worth pointing out to people that that lens hood is another £60, taking this lens up to £710. Inevitably there will be much cheaper third party hoods that will function just as well eventually, but it's still really gross that Canon is charging so much for a circle of plastic that should be in the box as standard, especially when you consider things like the Samyang can include a fully-flocked metal hood _and_ weather sealing for £500. Third point I'd like to raise is the build quality. You mention things feeling like they're jiggling a bit likely due to the IS system, but I think it's a much bigger problem than that. I've had my copy a mere month and only used it for three product shoots and it's already filled with dust and fogged on the inside, even while some 90s and 80s lenses I have have been used at the same time with no signs of anything breaching the build. It's not like product photography requires weather sealing, but just the dust in the air from moving lights and props around has been enough, and the build quality of this lens has been poor enough, that it's been completely compromised. You only get that when the tolerances around the switches and rings are too loose. It's not just the iS that's shaking around, it's every part of the lens that is loose. I don't expect modern £650+ lenses to be more vulnerable _indoors_ than mid-90s lenses. You did cover the AF, all I'd like to add there is that I've got the Samyang RF 85mm f/1.4 and the old Canon EF 85mm and 100mm here and the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro and of the five lenses this RF is by far the worst-focusing, even with the distanced limiter engaged and even compared to the L lens' full 1:1 scale. It's shameful how slow, clumsy and loud it is compared to things like the EF 100mm f/2 which was only Canon's second USM design from 1991! Suffice to say my copy is back in its box waiting to be picked up by MPB. They're giving me £500 for it, so not a huge loss, which I'll be holding onto for the inevitable RF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, seeing as the Samyang will be sufficient for portraits until Canon has a better sub-£2000 option. Sharpness be damned, this lens is just too cheaply-made even for _indoor_ professional use.
@@damir10535 The Canon is technically sharper if you want to nitpick at 200% but in real-world use the difference is tiny. Obviously for tiny details the Canon is a little better and for portraits the Samyang's rendering is more appropriate (even stopping down) but really the sharpness is the least difference between them. The vignetting, AF, MF, handling and build quality of the Samyang are all much superior to the Canon.
Err, it's relative. Compare it to any other 85mm F2ish lens and it is definitely small and light, most of the others are huge. Nobody is going to say this thing is light and small compared to a 25mm or something, that would be silly. But just how small do you think an 85 F2 can possibly be? Like if it was smaller it literally couldn't be F2, the diameter would have to be too small lol.
Hi Chris! First of all, I love your reviews, you are definitely the go to channel before buying any lens. I have 1 little comment that may improve your videos. when you test sharpness of lenses, u can put a rating (for example 9.5/10) instead of saying "blazing sharp" so viewers can really refer to other lenses of your tests, especially because people have different understanding of "blazing sharp" due to differences of their own experiences and systems. I have been watching ur videos for a while and sometimes u refer to perfect sharpness or great sharpness and i would wonder the differences between blazing sharp vs perfect sharpness lol
I get what you're saying :-) but ultimately it would prove a complete nightmare. I'd never be able to remember what the differences would be between a 9.5 on a Canon EOS R5 and a 7.8 on a Sony a5100 and a 9.2 on a Fuji X-T3 etc., and everyone would be constantly complaining that my 9.3 on such and such a lens looked sharper than my 9.4 on another lens hehe
@@christopherfrost thats true. it would require u to log almost every test. regardless, Chris, thank you for all the testings! perhaps just nail down to a few words that u usually use instead
It's interesting that you bring up the wobbly part inside the lens, and the idea that it relates to the IS system. I noticed the wobble myself, but with that said the build quality is decent. Yes, the AF will hunt in backlit or low-light situations, but many of the shots will be accurately focused (based on the results of a photoshoot, backlit at night) and the optical qualities are nice for the price.
Great review Chris. I've seen Gordon Laing found that the bokeh of this lens is considerably busier than EF 85mm f/1.8 , he has a side by side comparison of that on his review of RF 85 f/2 on his channel. Alongside with slow af this lens is a no go for me unfortunately 😭 But I think at this price point no other 85 can compete with this lens in terms of sharpness , I've seen 85 f/1.8 this sharp is the Zeiss Batis 85 which costs 1000+$
Thanks! Ive rented this lens 3 times now because I love the 85mm focal length, this lens is impossible to find for sale and only have the RF 50mm f/1.8 Two copies were great but one was soft. Sharpness is not an issue, but I really dislike the look of the bokeh against any kind of trees, for instance, even when shooting more stopped down around f/2.8 It just has a weird look to the bokeh like the 50 f/1.8 does. People have described it as "nervous". The bokeh is just weird and distracting at wider apertures. I need to rent the Samyang 85 or just save for the RF f/1.2 which is perfect.
@@alingeorge8791 I actually bought a Sony a7iii and a Sony 85 f/1.8 FE. Its considerably better than this Canon lens, I can shoot it wide open, and it was cheaper too. The Canon RF 50 f/1.8 is garbage, returned it. Really disappointed in Canon and the RF lenses, I shouldn't have to pay $3k to get a quality lens.
@@michaelbell75 I'm in the same situation as you were. I bought an R6II and I already regret it. I only have the Canon RF50mm F1.8. And I'm looking to leave Canon. Sony's 85mm f1.8 FE lens renders just as beautifully as the RF 85mm f1.2. I don't recommend Canon to anyone else. I will have to buy the Sigma 105mm f1.4 with an adapter to be able to have a beautiful rendering or exchange my Canon R6II with someone who has a Sony to use the FE 85mm f1.8.
I wonder why Canon is producing these externally focusing primes, I do not get it. This will suck dust into the lens, especially if it is not weather sealed.
Have to agree, it’s a very strange design choice for these lenses. Even the RF 50mm 1.2L has a moving front element and that is a very expensive prime. I hope these lenses at least have a dust filter? Would like to see a lens rentals tear down for this one.
@@cagf2013 but L series are weather sealed. Even with a moving front element it’s protected (you have the same in the RF 70-200 and 100-500). Unfortunately they only put the WS in the L series... probably making this a problem in this lenses.
@@leogc5300 yes L series are weather sealed but in the manual for the RF 50mm 1.2L it says you need to use a front filter to complete the weather sealing of that lens. They may be able to filter dust on that particular lens, but if you want water protection with a front element like that you do need the filter.
This is really my only problem with RF mount. I come from Micro Four Thirds where lenses like these stopped being released after the first couple years of the mount. I believe that the only reason why Canon gets away with it is because their DPAF is simply better than every other focusing system so it can rescue an ancient focusing system. But at least Canon has obvious, strict stratification between their affordable consumer-level primes and their expensive pro primes. Other lens systems often have premium f/1.8 or even f/2.8 lenses that really make the choices especially confusing. Take a look at how many Sony lenses exist for 35mm or 50-55mm focal lengths.
This is an RF lens that I didn't like that much, small and light, effective IS, very good image quality, but the AF is just not quick enough. The RF 35/1.8 focuses faster.
I have that lens. It is the best 35 mm I have ever used. The USM RF range is quicker for autofocus. But to shoot better video then the STM does better for video as it is less noiser and a bit of focus breathing can be used for good effects.
That sloth speed AF really makes me think about getting the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 or the good old Canon 100mm f/2 instead 😕
3 года назад+8
All macro/semi-macro-lenses tend to be slow, when looking at the entire zoom range, but in practice much smaller movements are required most of the time, so depending on your usage pattern it may, or may not, be an issue
@ to be honest I want a bright all rounder short telephoto lens which is good for portrait photography, doesn't cost a fortune, but can be used for sport photography, such as extreme mountain biking (to shoot my friends), and sometimes I visit rally races too. Maybe even a 100mm lens is a bit short for this kind of usage, but I managed to get some OK shots with my Samsung NX 1000 paired with 20-50mm kit lens.
@ I have the Samyang lens and have been very happy with it. I am curious that Chris says the Canon is sharper since I have had no issues with sharpness with the Samyang lens actually can't see how it could be much sharper
3 года назад
@@staLkerhu Have you considered the EF 135L lens, it is in many ways a brilliant lens and it can be found used for reasonable amounts
Canon could've done a lot more with this lens. It's a regression from the EF mount version in almost every way. Louder and slower autofocus, external focusing vs internal, slower aperture, more expensive, plastic build vs metal, etc. It's a little sharper and controls aberration a little better, but not by much. Pretty disappointing IMO.
@@godsinbox "Hot Garbage" ? It's a great lens provided you know the limitations. The f/11 limitation is down to the camera sensor, not the lens. This is a very good 85mm standard portrait lens with the added benefit of being able to focus down to 1:2 magnification with great image quality. That's pretty damn good.
@@cardiacade why would they write 'macro' on the box if that is its actual limitation? clever marketing by canon. if it also becomes sharp at 2 stops above advertised then...
i don't understand how the new RF line has extending front elements, noisy motors (for this one) and cheap plastic bodies when even cheaper EF lenses had internal focusing with ultrasonic motors and bodies that did not show every fingerprint and scratch. For every RF review i'm thinking of buying the EF version to save an enormous amount of money and do not have to deal with focus by wire and extending barrels. Sometimes even gaining that cute window with the distance indicator...
If the AF would be double as fast this would be fine for me shooting dynamic photos. But for slower occasions, it has marvelous colors and contrast and is super sharp. Adapted the EF100mmf2.0 is faster.
Great review. I use the EOS R and since the more affordable RF lenses came out I been wondering which lens is best out of this RF 85 vs the 100mm EF macro L series. I know the EF uses adapter which I have and use, but which of the 2 do you recommend? Thanks.
You all prolly dont give a damn but does any of you know of a way to log back into an instagram account? I was dumb lost my password. I love any tips you can offer me!
@Kaison Dante I really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and im waiting for the hacking stuff now. Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will reply here later with my results.
Now that I have watched this and other videos related to this lens I've gone back to the idea of getting the Samyang 85 f1.4 instead. Thank you Christopher for your great videos. I now have ordered the Samyang with a faster, more silent no focus hunting AF and not moving in and out barrel unlike the Canon 85mm f2 does. Luckily the Samyang dropped in price on Amazon Germany to 607 Euros plus I got an Amazon voucher from my phone carrier to drop the price by another 100 Euros. Since I don't do macro photography and only shoot people between 5,6 and f11 in a studio setup and rarely shoot outdoors where I might be tempted to shoot open wide, I think this is the best option for me as corner sharpness is absolutely not relevant, when you shoot people.
@@charismaticrell4206 Yes, I have received the lens and use it often for photo shoots. I'm very happy with the lens, its color rendering, image sharpness even wide open. When portraying people wide open and both eyes of the subject are parallel to the camera sensor aka in the plain of focus I'm super happy with the results. I can recommend this lens to who needs a 85mm. And it's way sharper than my old 85mm f1.8 by Canon which is why I love to shoot with the Samyang and going to sell the Canon lens together with my trusty old 5D MK III.
Lets compare the list prices of a couple of lenses (NL includes 21% VAT): - EF 85/1.8 €375 - EF 100/2.8 macro €460 - EF 100/2.8 IS L €1000 - RF 85/2 IS Macro €715 If you take into account the 1/3 stop slower than the 85/1.8, but 1 stop faster than the 100mm macros, add IS and an RF mount, the RF lens is priced where it fits in the lineup. Quite good value for the money. Ypou always have the option to use a second hand EF lens with an adapter, and save +/- 25-35% compared to the list price.
@@Vlay76 i had a jjjc hood for my ef-m 32mm break in the bayonet mount. it would still slide on, but it wouldn't lock into place. not that it is bad, but it was a bit annoying. but thank you for the help !
Hello, thank you for your informative videos. Comparing this lens to the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 you reviewed earlier, which do you recommend? Or do you have another better option even?
Interesting that Canon has gone budget with their f1.8 lenses while Nikon have gone for optical excellence. All of Nikon’s f1.8 lenses are weather sealed too.
Canon is playing the same game again unfortunately. Mediocre AF in 85mm lens is a no-go. The R system bodies follow the pattern of their EOS DSLR - which is unfortunate, given Nikon Z5 offers quite some features and great sensor while costing not so much. And Nikkor lenses are more appealing to me - most are handy, good quality and quite affordable. Canon gives us record-breaking lenses that only some will really buy, like 50 and 85 1.2 and that crazy 28-70.
FYI: ruclips.net/video/qoXCuNEJpCA/видео.html According to this test by Chris of the Z 85 F1.8 above, the RF is a little sharper and a little more contrast in the middle and corner at equivalent AV vs the Z equivalent. Personally though, I’d take the RF’s cheaper price, Image Stabilizer and 1:2 macro capability all day and night, if I were to choose a mount eco system. The RF’s budget F1.8-2 line up will provide way more keepers than the Z F1.8 line up equivalents because, it widens the shooting envelope by providing IS(indoors & after sunset) and macro capability, PLUS it’s cheaper.
@@vivalasvegas702 z 85 only $100 more than the RF in Canada right now. Id take the z for weather sealing, silent af motor and better build quality. Also once you factor in the lens hood price you'll have to spend on the RF, pricing becomes moot. Shooting backlit portraits with the z will be better as well it seems
@@vivalasvegas702you only need IS in Canon lenses because unlike the other companies, they release bodies without IBIS. You can get a stabilized Sony or Nikon for the same price or less money as the EOS R/RP, get IBIS and wider aperture. I’m doing lots of low light and it’s a no brainer for me.
In getting a feel for a lens like this without actually buying/renting it, I'm using a nifty fifty in crop mode. Similar aperture and min focus distance and effectively 80mm vs 85mm, just less clarity. Is this valid? Or would there be other major differences?
Good afternoon. You talked about the Canon 85mm f2 RF lens. I bought the same one, but I wanted to ask: the retractable lens is a little backlash both in the extended and in the original state in relation to the main body, perhaps because of the stabilizer, perhaps structurally. The backlash is approximately 0.5 mm. Is this how it should be?
I assume the results are extremely sharp, but can you tell me how bad or ok the AF is? Does the focus lock helps enough to make the lens good, and not a pain in the *ss?
@@staLkerhu AF hunts too much in macro mode. I prefer to place the lens in manual mode and physically move the camera back and forth until focus is sharp. Aside from that The AF is fine when photographing regular subjects.
Hey, thanks for this video. Can i suggest another video? A comparison between RF 85mm f/2 Macro against EF 85mm f/1.2 L with adaptar on a mirrorless camera? Here in Brazil, an used 85mm EF 1.2L has a price similar to a brand new RF 85mm f/2. Thanks!
I have/had both and suffice to say my RF 85 just got traded in to MPB while the 100mm f/2.8L is still on my work shelf. The RF is a tiny fraction sharper stopped down to f/2.8 than the EF is wide open at f/2.8 but at macro & product apertures they're identical in IQ and the EF is better in every other way.
Extra features are: too short for macro (barrel extending and reducing work distance) ,not a macro,slow AF and whole bunch of plastic.The lens is closer to 400 euro then to what Canon ask.
Do you think that 100% compatibility to the RF protocol and thus IS+IBIS is also an advantage to this lens if one has an R5/R6 since it's a .5 macro? Or does it not matter as much? I love my 3rd party lenses but I don't think they'll ever be fully compatible with lens IS+IBIS, just partially compatible.
If you still think that then you've been reading out of date news. The Samyang 85mm f/1.4 for example was updated a couple of months ago and works 100% with the new systems. And just look at any camera system and how Sigma, Tamron etc always get their lenses fully working, it's just a matter of time.
@@sebastianmatthews1663 I'm talking about lens full IS+IBIS compatibility. You are correct that the samyang RF works perfectly well with IBIS but it doesn't have lens IS. But EF lenses with IS (3rd or 1st party) mostly but don't fully work with IS+IBIS. I don't know of any 3rd party RF lenses with lens IS. It's a marginal advantage for sure. I'll edit the last sentence of my question to make sure it reads as lens IS+IBIS like my first sentence.
@@geoffreyenriquez Fair enough. For what it's worth, at 85mm and shorter in my experience there's really no difference between IS, IBIS, or IS+IBIS. IBIS is good enough for 3-3.5 stops at 85mm (or more for shorter) and how often does anyone try to take a photo with an 85mm at 1/10th or slower? For 100-200mm is where IBIS+IS has really made a difference; I've shot 6 stops below reciprocal with the RF 70-200 on the R5, not that 6 stops of stabilisation is ever really necessary, which is a definite improvement over the ~4 stops I got on the R with the lens IS alone. Over 200mm it feels to me like only lens IS is useful, since I get an identical keeper rate with the 300mm f/2.8 IS II on both the R5 and R and once I throw on a 2x tele converter the R actually winds up being better. (Lower resolution is easier to handhold; the R5's IBIS doesn't help.)
@@sebastianmatthews1663 Right, the most benefits of IS come from longer focal lengths and most of the time shutter speeds have to be faster than 1/125 for portraits/people. And even then at longer focal lengths using a shutter speed faster than 1/1000 reduces the benefits of IS if one is photographing a bird in flight. I was just curious about the .5 macro and IS+IBIS since one might stop down to f4-f8 for say a mushroom in the woods and might have to use slower shutter speeds.
How did this lens get highly recommended with so many compromises? (While the Nikon Z 85 is only recommended for instance). I see some inconsistency (in other word: bias) here.
@Viktor Nagy Simple. This Canon lens was very slightly sharper in my tests, a little less expensive, and has the extra features of image stabilization and macro ability, both of which are highly valuable to many photographers. But hey, it's all subjective: if the only important thing to you is autofocus speed then obviously I wouldn't recommend the lens so much.
@@DJLazinator I've often said I have a preference for lenses that are good value for money - that's not always the same as 'less expensive'. And I've never 'admitted having a preference for Canon' - can you let me know where you think I said that? I started with Canon at the beginning but I actually almost totally migrated to Sony for a number of years.
@@christopherfrost To your credit, you’ve made so many videos I don’t quite recall exactly which one you stated your preference for Canon in, but before you added Fuji and Sony cameras to your testing arsenal, you did state only using Canon in this video: ruclips.net/video/vAWX326Fy0E/видео.html But again, to your credit, the last 3 years or so seem to be the most unbiased and well rounded I’ve seen. And I value your reviews and opinions.
not a bad lens 85 mm lenses are good in resolution tests pretty often tho F2 for a 85 mm lens is not that fast for 85 mm lenses often go up to f1.4 it seems to be always * 1.41 (sine wave) forward and * 0,707 backwards that would unison the sine calculations aswell i like the possiblity going for f1.4 instead of going from f2 or going from f1.4 to f2
Hello, ignoring other factors that only care about the sharpness and color of the image, Canon RF 85 f2 is still very good, isn't it, I don't need bokeh and background removal. Thank ( Google Translate)
@@Poli-IX That and the lack of IS are advantages for Canon, sure, but I'm asking for input because I cannot judge how much those would or would not impact the average user's experience.
@@gabrielkarczewski4453 you're writing it allover the comment section and it's not true, only first two eos R and RP did not have ibis, canon R5 & R6 bodies have ibis
@@andyfink4419 I wrote it twice, seemed relevant to both comments. I didn’t say none of them have it, of course the R5 and the R6 do, I just said that not all of them. The lack of IBIS on the EOS R and the EOS RP are major drawbacks (at least for me).
That AF speed is probably one of the slowest ive ever seen from a canon lens. Some of the cheaper EFS lenses put this to shame and thats saying a lot. Im not even referring to the video AF but for stills
It's almost like Canon are _trying_ to push people to Sony with their cheaper lenses. This costs the same as Sony's 85mm f/1.8 and the only thing this really has going for it over the Sony is the focus distance, if we don't include the camera body itself in the equation. So here's hoping for Canon's sake that they come out with an 85mm f/1.8 for about $700 before Sigma has a chance to port over their mirrorless-specific 85mm f/1.4.
@@p_adam19 Sony cameras have IBIS and you can fairly easily get shots down to 1/20th of a second with it. The lens having stabilization at this point only really covers it for use on the EOS R and RP. That said, you're probably not wrong with the price thing.
@@RealRaynedance This lens gets down to 1/10 second on an EOS R, haven't tested it on the R5 but I think it can do even better. Also excellent for video (I guess the Batis with OSS is similar but more expensive), where you don't want the focus to jump, it does its job smoothly, although not silently. Again I really don't think this lens makes or breaks a system choice, they are different systems for different people as or right now, there is just more lens options for native E-mount lenses including 3rd party options, some of them will also come to RF-mount this year. But the bodies handle EF lenses with EF adapter so there is an even wider range of lens options available with even cheaper lenses.
@@p_adam19 "But the bodies handle EF lenses with EF adapter so there is an even wider range of lens options available with even cheaper lenses." Cheaper but not breathtaking lenses. Sharpness is not the strongest quality of them. If this would be different then I could simply rush to purchase an EF 85mm f/1.8 or 100mm f/2 instead of this RF 85mm macro. 50mm EF lenses seems like worthless to touch, the 1.8 and 1.4 have serious bokeh and CA issues in addition. Maybe the Sony FE 50mm f/1.8 has no better bokeh, but at least it is very sharp and CA is not an issue while the lens is cheap. The EF 50mm 1.2 is probably better, but it is crazy expensive, and still has awful contrast wide open. So yeah, Canon definietly has bigger lens park, the question is, do you really want to buy any of those old EF lenses? Because they are either on the "not so good" or "crazy expensive" side. I bought an EOS RP in kit with the adapter, paired up with the truly good and affordable 35mm f/1.8 macro before I realized I will have a hard time picking acceptable lenses with different focal length 😣
@@staLkerhu Well I don't think smaller and cheaper lenses are about being breathtaking on test charts. They work perfectly and they do the job of taking pleasing images very well. But you can also get newer Sigma, Tamron etc. lots of options to choose from and they all work well. This RF 85/2 lens works well as long as one is not shooting action with it and uses the appropriate AF settings, which minimises the chance of focus hunting. Sometimes I use vintage glass like the Olmypus OM Zuiko 50 1.2 which I guess performs worse than the Canon EF 50 1.2 regarding CA, etc. or even the Canon 85 1.5 LTM which is the worst lens I've used regarding sharpness or CA but the images simply look very good with them, if anything the bokeh looks worse (more boring) with lenses that are better corrected, some of these newer, "better" lenses start to have less personality. I think FE 85 1.4 GM looks way better in comparison to the FE 85 1.8 even though it has more CA so from that aspect it is not as well corrected and the AF motor is not the most refined. (But I could also mention the old A-mount Planar 85 1.4 lens which has way more CA, that looks better to me as well.)
3 года назад
0.5 m to infinity it's a nonsense. 0.8 m to infinity would be better (faster Af performance). This type of lens isn't usefull for fast work.
Is it just me, or all new non-L RF lenses are dull, loud, cranky, plasticky, and overpriced? If you don't like it, you can pay 2000 € for an L lens that's at least not loud 😅 Can they not design one with no moving front element? It reminds me of old 90s Tamrons, the ones that go for 50 € now.
Noisy and slow af, extending during focusing, no lens hood, busy bokeh for my taste, pricey and average build. Same goes for RF 50stm and 35stem... That turned me away from Canon to Sony, after 20 years of hard core devotion to Canon and L sect...
I prefer Canon because of the color science but their affordable RF primes are terrible. Nikon has the best affordable primes and Sony has some good ones too. Sony has the most lenses when you include 3rd party ones.
Your reviews are excellent. No waffle. Straight to the important issues and clear examples of what you are talking about. Thank you.
I've owned this lens since it came out and the review is pretty much accurate from my experience. I do have to say the macro is excellent and many have used this lens for product shots including myself.
a lens without a bokeh. He was with me. I sold it and I don't regret it - he's not a portrait painter at all. does not blur the background.
Thank you so very very much Christopher for your years of posting lens reviews. They are the "Go To" ones for me and my friends when purchasing a new lens. Your consistent methodology is so much better than others who take lenses out for a day or two and report upon their images. Your posts help us mere mortals to evaluate lenses online and then purchase responsibly... BTW... I got this baby today. It's now up to me to be up to the lens. Thank you so very much C.F. And now to Canon UK... Chris as a Canon ambassador? ...I would love to sit in on his talk at the NEC Photography show... Just sayin'
Thanks to your review I bought this lens last Friday. I like shooting portraits wide open and this lens sure delivers on my R6 Mk II! Pretty much blown away.
Who are these people who down-vote such innocuous videos?
The same people who punch golden retriever puppies in face！
probably people who can't afford the RF system lol
Nikon users
@@vincelam1998 the eos rp is cheaper than many high end phones phones. And you can pair it with the "superb" 50 1.8 rf for the price of a good phone case and a micro sd card. I don't think it's a matter of money in this case.
One of the mysteries of life
Dear Chris, please review this lens on EOS R7.. that will be interesting to see how it perform on very demanding sensor of R7 😁
Thanks in advance !
I own the Canon EF 100mm f:2 and It's more quickly focusing and it has nicer bokeh too.
Great review!!!!
The 100mm is quicker or the 85mm?
It's a shame that AF is slower than on the cheap and ancient EF 85mm 1.8. That lens seems to be much better constructed with internal focus.
Firstly, thank you for mentioning the size. For some reason Canon literally call this lens "compact, lightweight" on their product page and it's infuriating that no reviewers or media have called attention to that or pointed out that this lens really is not either of those things. I don't mind the size of it but it's definitely on the slightly larger side of average and I can't believe this is only the second review I've seen actually mention this.
Second, I think it's worth pointing out to people that that lens hood is another £60, taking this lens up to £710. Inevitably there will be much cheaper third party hoods that will function just as well eventually, but it's still really gross that Canon is charging so much for a circle of plastic that should be in the box as standard, especially when you consider things like the Samyang can include a fully-flocked metal hood _and_ weather sealing for £500.
Third point I'd like to raise is the build quality. You mention things feeling like they're jiggling a bit likely due to the IS system, but I think it's a much bigger problem than that. I've had my copy a mere month and only used it for three product shoots and it's already filled with dust and fogged on the inside, even while some 90s and 80s lenses I have have been used at the same time with no signs of anything breaching the build. It's not like product photography requires weather sealing, but just the dust in the air from moving lights and props around has been enough, and the build quality of this lens has been poor enough, that it's been completely compromised. You only get that when the tolerances around the switches and rings are too loose. It's not just the iS that's shaking around, it's every part of the lens that is loose. I don't expect modern £650+ lenses to be more vulnerable _indoors_ than mid-90s lenses.
You did cover the AF, all I'd like to add there is that I've got the Samyang RF 85mm f/1.4 and the old Canon EF 85mm and 100mm here and the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro and of the five lenses this RF is by far the worst-focusing, even with the distanced limiter engaged and even compared to the L lens' full 1:1 scale. It's shameful how slow, clumsy and loud it is compared to things like the EF 100mm f/2 which was only Canon's second USM design from 1991!
Suffice to say my copy is back in its box waiting to be picked up by MPB. They're giving me £500 for it, so not a huge loss, which I'll be holding onto for the inevitable RF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, seeing as the Samyang will be sufficient for portraits until Canon has a better sub-£2000 option. Sharpness be damned, this lens is just too cheaply-made even for _indoor_ professional use.
And it comes highly recommended!
Can you tell us something about the sharpness difference between the Samyang and the Canon?
@@damir10535 The Canon is technically sharper if you want to nitpick at 200% but in real-world use the difference is tiny. Obviously for tiny details the Canon is a little better and for portraits the Samyang's rendering is more appropriate (even stopping down) but really the sharpness is the least difference between them. The vignetting, AF, MF, handling and build quality of the Samyang are all much superior to the Canon.
Err, it's relative.
Compare it to any other 85mm F2ish lens and it is definitely small and light, most of the others are huge. Nobody is going to say this thing is light and small compared to a 25mm or something, that would be silly. But just how small do you think an 85 F2 can possibly be? Like if it was smaller it literally couldn't be F2, the diameter would have to be too small lol.
A very fair review - The F2 RF is very decent but I think the 85mm 1.4 IS EF is still my most coveted lens
what's fair about that? there are major flaws but still highly recommend? would you say the same if this would be a sony or nikon lens? i hope not!
Hi Chris! First of all, I love your reviews, you are definitely the go to channel before buying any lens.
I have 1 little comment that may improve your videos. when you test sharpness of lenses, u can put a rating (for example 9.5/10) instead of saying "blazing sharp" so viewers can really refer to other lenses of your tests, especially because people have different understanding of "blazing sharp" due to differences of their own experiences and systems.
I have been watching ur videos for a while and sometimes u refer to perfect sharpness or great sharpness and i would wonder the differences between blazing sharp vs perfect sharpness lol
I get what you're saying :-) but ultimately it would prove a complete nightmare. I'd never be able to remember what the differences would be between a 9.5 on a Canon EOS R5 and a 7.8 on a Sony a5100 and a 9.2 on a Fuji X-T3 etc., and everyone would be constantly complaining that my 9.3 on such and such a lens looked sharper than my 9.4 on another lens hehe
@@christopherfrost thats true. it would require u to log almost every test. regardless, Chris, thank you for all the testings! perhaps just nail down to a few words that u usually use instead
7:52 RIP to Samyang and all third party RF lenses now that Canon won't allow them to be made/sold anymore.
I appreciate all you do to review and how much detail you go into as well as you tone of voice. Thanks
It's interesting that you bring up the wobbly part inside the lens, and the idea that it relates to the IS system. I noticed the wobble myself, but with that said the build quality is decent. Yes, the AF will hunt in backlit or low-light situations, but many of the shots will be accurately focused (based on the results of a photoshoot, backlit at night) and the optical qualities are nice for the price.
Great review Chris. I've seen Gordon Laing found that the bokeh of this lens is considerably busier than EF 85mm f/1.8 , he has a side by side comparison of that on his review of RF 85 f/2 on his channel. Alongside with slow af this lens is a no go for me unfortunately 😭
But I think at this price point no other 85 can compete with this lens in terms of sharpness , I've seen 85 f/1.8 this sharp is the Zeiss Batis 85 which costs 1000+$
There's the Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 RF which is pretty much the same price.
@@TherconJair Cheaper, in most countries. Especially when you factor in Canon charge extra for the lens hood which Samyang includes in the box.
I had this lens and didn’t care for it surprisingly. I ended up returning it and getting the 24-105 f4L. It hasn’t come off my camera since I got it.
I just want to say thank you for showing me how to save space in my bag by turning the lens hood around! And yes I bought the lens. Again thank you?
Thanks! Ive rented this lens 3 times now because I love the 85mm focal length, this lens is impossible to find for sale and only have the RF 50mm f/1.8 Two copies were great but one was soft. Sharpness is not an issue, but I really dislike the look of the bokeh against any kind of trees, for instance, even when shooting more stopped down around f/2.8 It just has a weird look to the bokeh like the 50 f/1.8 does. People have described it as "nervous". The bokeh is just weird and distracting at wider apertures. I need to rent the Samyang 85 or just save for the RF f/1.2 which is perfect.
Did you end up renting the Samyang 85? If so, did you like it better than the rf 85 f2?
@@alingeorge8791 I actually bought a Sony a7iii and a Sony 85 f/1.8 FE. Its considerably better than this Canon lens, I can shoot it wide open, and it was cheaper too. The Canon RF 50 f/1.8 is garbage, returned it. Really disappointed in Canon and the RF lenses, I shouldn't have to pay $3k to get a quality lens.
@@michaelbell75
I'm in the same situation as you were. I bought an R6II and I already regret it. I only have the Canon RF50mm F1.8. And I'm looking to leave Canon. Sony's 85mm f1.8 FE lens renders just as beautifully as the RF 85mm f1.2. I don't recommend Canon to anyone else. I will have to buy the Sigma 105mm f1.4 with an adapter to be able to have a beautiful rendering or exchange my Canon R6II with someone who has a Sony to use the FE 85mm f1.8.
Hi chris, thank you for your videos. Would it be possible a review of this lens on a r7? Thank you
I think I’ll stick with the predecessor.
Half the price, more sturdy and no extension.
Thanks for the review.
The predecessor is less sharp, no image stabilization, and no macro.
@@dmitriflorez agree, i love this one too rather the old 85mm with annoying chromatic abberation
@@vinvanid
The old one has better rendering. The RF 85 f2 has a digital appearance.
I wonder why Canon is producing these externally focusing primes, I do not get it. This will suck dust into the lens, especially if it is not weather sealed.
Have to agree, it’s a very strange design choice for these lenses. Even the RF 50mm 1.2L has a moving front element and that is a very expensive prime. I hope these lenses at least have a dust filter? Would like to see a lens rentals tear down for this one.
Canon going back in time by doing this. Thought by now everything would be internally focusing
@@cagf2013 but L series are weather sealed. Even with a moving front element it’s protected (you have the same in the RF 70-200 and 100-500). Unfortunately they only put the WS in the L series... probably making this a problem in this lenses.
@@leogc5300 yes L series are weather sealed but in the manual for the RF 50mm 1.2L it says you need to use a front filter to complete the weather sealing of that lens. They may be able to filter dust on that particular lens, but if you want water protection with a front element like that you do need the filter.
This is really my only problem with RF mount. I come from Micro Four Thirds where lenses like these stopped being released after the first couple years of the mount. I believe that the only reason why Canon gets away with it is because their DPAF is simply better than every other focusing system so it can rescue an ancient focusing system. But at least Canon has obvious, strict stratification between their affordable consumer-level primes and their expensive pro primes. Other lens systems often have premium f/1.8 or even f/2.8 lenses that really make the choices especially confusing. Take a look at how many Sony lenses exist for 35mm or 50-55mm focal lengths.
I just received my RP today!
Now start to save to get the budget holy trinity. 35f1.8, 50f1.8 and 85f2!
I have an RP and 35mm f1.8 combo it's awesome!
the squinting trinity maybe. maybe you live in a small country where everything is close by?
@@godsinbox lol what the heck are you talking about?
@@MarquezDaniel The dude's a troll.
@@cardiacade yeah I figured lol
This is an RF lens that I didn't like that much, small and light, effective IS, very good image quality, but the AF is just not quick enough. The RF 35/1.8 focuses faster.
I have that lens. It is the best 35 mm I have ever used. The USM RF range is quicker for autofocus. But to shoot better video then the STM does better for video as it is less noiser and a bit of focus breathing can be used for good effects.
Thanks for this review as I have been considering this lens for a while now. I might pick one up now.
That sloth speed AF really makes me think about getting the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 or the good old Canon 100mm f/2 instead 😕
All macro/semi-macro-lenses tend to be slow, when looking at the entire zoom range, but in practice much smaller movements are required most of the time, so depending on your usage pattern it may, or may not, be an issue
@ to be honest I want a bright all rounder short telephoto lens which is good for portrait photography, doesn't cost a fortune, but can be used for sport photography, such as extreme mountain biking (to shoot my friends), and sometimes I visit rally races too. Maybe even a 100mm lens is a bit short for this kind of usage, but I managed to get some OK shots with my Samsung NX 1000 paired with 20-50mm kit lens.
@ I have the Samyang lens and have been very happy with it. I am curious that Chris says the Canon is sharper since I have had no issues with sharpness with the Samyang lens actually can't see how it could be much sharper
@@staLkerhu Have you considered the EF 135L lens, it is in many ways a brilliant lens and it can be found used for reasonable amounts
Just buy the canon rf 85mm 1.2🤷♂️!
Canon could've done a lot more with this lens. It's a regression from the EF mount version in almost every way. Louder and slower autofocus, external focusing vs internal, slower aperture, more expensive, plastic build vs metal, etc. It's a little sharper and controls aberration a little better, but not by much. Pretty disappointing IMO.
I think the reason they did this is to give APS-C R10 R7 a 1xxmm macro lens
Looking forward to the RF 100mm macro, a true macro lens.
yeah good, this 85 one is hot garbage. bokeh is the opposite of macro, cant shoot above f11 - wow.
@@godsinbox "Hot Garbage" ? It's a great lens provided you know the limitations. The f/11 limitation is down to the camera sensor, not the lens. This is a very good 85mm standard portrait lens with the added benefit of being able to focus down to 1:2 magnification with great image quality. That's pretty damn good.
@@cardiacade why would they write 'macro' on the box if that is its actual limitation? clever marketing by canon. if it also becomes sharp at 2 stops above advertised then...
@@godsinbox most of the lenses which available for mortals can not reach maximum sharpness wide open...
@@godsinbox I suggest you ask Canon! Most lenses, even primes, aren't at their maximum sharpness wide open, especially at this price point.
I would choose ur review on any given day..thnx
i don't understand how the new RF line has extending front elements, noisy motors (for this one) and cheap plastic bodies when even cheaper EF lenses had internal focusing with ultrasonic motors and bodies that did not show every fingerprint and scratch. For every RF review i'm thinking of buying the EF version to save an enormous amount of money and do not have to deal with focus by wire and extending barrels. Sometimes even gaining that cute window with the distance indicator...
If the AF would be double as fast this would be fine for me shooting dynamic photos. But for slower occasions, it has marvelous colors and contrast and is super sharp. Adapted the EF100mmf2.0 is faster.
This lens is so feature packed that reaches exceptional averageness in almost all regards! Highly recommended!
Exactly...
Great review. I use the EOS R and since the more affordable RF lenses came out I been wondering which lens is best out of this RF 85 vs the 100mm EF macro L series. I know the EF uses adapter which I have and use, but which of the 2 do you recommend? Thanks.
You all prolly dont give a damn but does any of you know of a way to log back into an instagram account?
I was dumb lost my password. I love any tips you can offer me!
@Jude Gary instablaster :)
@Kaison Dante I really appreciate your reply. I got to the site through google and im waiting for the hacking stuff now.
Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will reply here later with my results.
@Kaison Dante it did the trick and I now got access to my account again. Im so happy:D
Thank you so much, you really help me out :D
@Jude Gary no problem :D
Brilliant review as always! Thanks!
Now that I have watched this and other videos related to this lens I've gone back to the idea of getting the Samyang 85 f1.4 instead. Thank you Christopher for your great videos. I now have ordered the Samyang with a faster, more silent no focus hunting AF and not moving in and out barrel unlike the Canon 85mm f2 does. Luckily the Samyang dropped in price on Amazon Germany to 607 Euros plus I got an Amazon voucher from my phone carrier to drop the price by another 100 Euros. Since I don't do macro photography and only shoot people between 5,6 and f11 in a studio setup and rarely shoot outdoors where I might be tempted to shoot open wide, I think this is the best option for me as corner sharpness is absolutely not relevant, when you shoot people.
Did you every get the Samyang? And how do you like it?
@@charismaticrell4206 Yes, I have received the lens and use it often for photo shoots. I'm very happy with the lens, its color rendering, image sharpness even wide open. When portraying people wide open and both eyes of the subject are parallel to the camera sensor aka in the plain of focus I'm super happy with the results. I can recommend this lens to who needs a 85mm. And it's way sharper than my old 85mm f1.8 by Canon which is why I love to shoot with the Samyang and going to sell the Canon lens together with my trusty old 5D MK III.
Is there a chance that we will get a Christopher Frost review of the new Tamron 17-70 2.8? :)
Eventually yes
Lets compare the list prices of a couple of lenses (NL includes 21% VAT):
- EF 85/1.8 €375
- EF 100/2.8 macro €460
- EF 100/2.8 IS L €1000
- RF 85/2 IS Macro €715
If you take into account the 1/3 stop slower than the 85/1.8, but 1 stop faster than the 100mm macros, add IS and an RF mount, the RF lens is priced where it fits in the lineup. Quite good value for the money. Ypou always have the option to use a second hand EF lens with an adapter, and save +/- 25-35% compared to the list price.
FINALLY!!! Been waiting for this review.
I think the samyang 85mm f/1.4 rf will be more interesting for r5/r6 owners
Yeah if you have a camera with IBIS it makes sense to get the Samyang more. Especially if you already own a true macro lens.
@@LuigiVN Or even just some extension tubes, since 1:2 macro is easy to achieve with any short-tele lens and a single, very cheap tube.
Thanks for the valuable information 👍🏻
Hi Chris,
Good Review as always :). You could add a Sunstar test to ur Reviews its maybe interesting for some People i think ;)
"Its speed is somewhat pedestrian" I love this guy
wowww, since a week I jus waiting for this video to come! thanks!
Where is the link to download the samples? that is the most useful.
That ET-77 lens hood is $59.99, but the flaring is unbearably strong with backlit portraits. I am very close to purchasing it.
JJC offers great alternative lens hoods and I own one for every lens that I use...love them!
@@Vlay76 i had a jjjc hood for my ef-m 32mm break in the bayonet mount. it would still slide on, but it wouldn't lock into place. not that it is bad, but it was a bit annoying. but thank you for the help !
@@paulyeung6608 I use them on RF lenses and they perform fine 🤠
If you compare the Canon RF 85mm to the 90mm Tamron Macro VC USD (F017) which one is better?
Hello, thank you for your informative videos. Comparing this lens to the Samyang 85mm f/1.4 you reviewed earlier, which do you recommend? Or do you have another better option even?
Depends. You want sharpness and macro? This. Would out of focus backgrounds? The Samyang although it's very hard to find on Canon RF these days
Interesting that Canon has gone budget with their f1.8 lenses while Nikon have gone for optical excellence. All of Nikon’s f1.8 lenses are weather sealed too.
Canon is playing the same game again unfortunately. Mediocre AF in 85mm lens is a no-go. The R system bodies follow the pattern of their EOS DSLR - which is unfortunate, given Nikon Z5 offers quite some features and great sensor while costing not so much. And Nikkor lenses are more appealing to me - most are handy, good quality and quite affordable. Canon gives us record-breaking lenses that only some will really buy, like 50 and 85 1.2 and that crazy 28-70.
FYI: ruclips.net/video/qoXCuNEJpCA/видео.html
According to this test by Chris of the Z 85 F1.8 above, the RF is a little sharper and a little more contrast in the middle and corner at equivalent AV vs the Z equivalent. Personally though, I’d take the RF’s cheaper price, Image Stabilizer and 1:2 macro capability all day and night, if I were to choose a mount eco system. The RF’s budget F1.8-2 line up will provide way more keepers than the Z F1.8 line up equivalents because, it widens the shooting envelope by providing IS(indoors & after sunset) and macro capability, PLUS it’s cheaper.
@@vivalasvegas702 z 85 only $100 more than the RF in Canada right now. Id take the z for weather sealing, silent af motor and better build quality. Also once you factor in the lens hood price you'll have to spend on the RF, pricing becomes moot. Shooting backlit portraits with the z will be better as well it seems
@@vivalasvegas702you only need IS in Canon lenses because unlike the other companies, they release bodies without IBIS. You can get a stabilized Sony or Nikon for the same price or less money as the EOS R/RP, get IBIS and wider aperture. I’m doing lots of low light and it’s a no brainer for me.
@@mattbite The Z5 unfortunately won't do it for me because of the cropped 4K.
Thank you, excellent review as always!
In getting a feel for a lens like this without actually buying/renting it, I'm using a nifty fifty in crop mode. Similar aperture and min focus distance and effectively 80mm vs 85mm, just less clarity. Is this valid? Or would there be other major differences?
IS a well
Good afternoon. You talked about the Canon 85mm f2 RF lens. I bought the same one, but I wanted to ask: the retractable lens is a little backlash both in the extended and in the original state in relation to the main body, perhaps because of the stabilizer, perhaps structurally. The backlash is approximately 0.5 mm. Is this how it should be?
Lens zooming coming out , I want to fix stability
I think the only thing keeping this from being an L lens is the more expensive coatings to preserve contrast when working against bright lights.
Weather sealing!!! It’s so annoying having to carry an L heavy lens to have it...
You forgot autofocus.
Manual focusing is sluggish on my copy of the lens as well
I assume the results are extremely sharp, but can you tell me how bad or ok the AF is? Does the focus lock helps enough to make the lens good, and not a pain in the *ss?
@@staLkerhu For portraits and slow walking shots, it keeps up just fine, but if it misses focus then it will take a while to go back to that distance.
@@staLkerhu AF hunts too much in macro mode. I prefer to place the lens in manual mode and physically move the camera back and forth until focus is sharp. Aside from that The AF is fine when photographing regular subjects.
Hey, thanks for this video. Can i suggest another video? A comparison between RF 85mm f/2 Macro against EF 85mm f/1.2 L with adaptar on a mirrorless camera? Here in Brazil, an used 85mm EF 1.2L has a price similar to a brand new RF 85mm f/2. Thanks!
Hi Christopher, another great video! Is there a chance that you will test the new lens from NISI, NiSi 15mm F4? It looks very interesting =)
Yes, I'm testing it at the moment
Is that an RF Lens?
Would this be worth getting if I already have the 100mm f2.8 L macro?
I have/had both and suffice to say my RF 85 just got traded in to MPB while the 100mm f/2.8L is still on my work shelf. The RF is a tiny fraction sharper stopped down to f/2.8 than the EF is wide open at f/2.8 but at macro & product apertures they're identical in IQ and the EF is better in every other way.
great review, you talked me out of it. I might pick up the 100mm L instead
I feel it way too slow to focus, is it posible to make the focusing faster?
Question about your video stabilisation test - was that done on the R5 which activates both ibis and lens IS with the lens switch?
Yes, although the difference between that and a non-IBIS camera will be minimal
i don't know where exactly in UK you live, but it looks like the most beautiful town
Which is best viltrox rf 85 mm f1.8 or cannon 85 mm f2 ?
Nice, althought I might wait for a 1.4 version a compre then.
35mm 1.8f or 85mm 2f please pick one for my street photography.
I currently only have 24-105 f4 L for my R6.
Go for the rf35mm 1.8. I have this along with the rf24-105mm f4 and it’s a great and versatile lens combo for street photography
What is the difference between Focus hunting and focus breathing
@@wafferphotography5923 thanks 👏
What lens for the Canon R for a portrait. I don't know that anymore. Up to 700 euros
i felt dustin abbots review was a bit more accurate
True
You need to do an update of this review on more modern Canon body's like the R7 in 2023
r7 is an aspc body, you have a crop with this lens for ff. The r5 is better for testing ff lenses.
@@marcoblondus3204 no one said it was a ff lens so SU
So basically if you don't need the pseudo macro capabilities, get the Samyang 85 1.4 for RF instead.
Hi Chris, I'm just curious how much roughly Canon service removing clicks from control ring would cost?
Kind regards
I daren't ask
Extra features are: too short for macro (barrel extending and reducing work distance) ,not a macro,slow AF and whole bunch of plastic.The lens is closer to 400 euro then to what Canon ask.
Should have written to Santa about this one!
Do you think that 100% compatibility to the RF protocol and thus IS+IBIS is also an advantage to this lens if one has an R5/R6 since it's a .5 macro? Or does it not matter as much? I love my 3rd party lenses but I don't think they'll ever be fully compatible with lens IS+IBIS, just partially compatible.
If you still think that then you've been reading out of date news. The Samyang 85mm f/1.4 for example was updated a couple of months ago and works 100% with the new systems. And just look at any camera system and how Sigma, Tamron etc always get their lenses fully working, it's just a matter of time.
@@sebastianmatthews1663 I'm talking about lens full IS+IBIS compatibility. You are correct that the samyang RF works perfectly well with IBIS but it doesn't have lens IS. But EF lenses with IS (3rd or 1st party) mostly but don't fully work with IS+IBIS. I don't know of any 3rd party RF lenses with lens IS. It's a marginal advantage for sure. I'll edit the last sentence of my question to make sure it reads as lens IS+IBIS like my first sentence.
@@geoffreyenriquez Fair enough.
For what it's worth, at 85mm and shorter in my experience there's really no difference between IS, IBIS, or IS+IBIS. IBIS is good enough for 3-3.5 stops at 85mm (or more for shorter) and how often does anyone try to take a photo with an 85mm at 1/10th or slower? For 100-200mm is where IBIS+IS has really made a difference; I've shot 6 stops below reciprocal with the RF 70-200 on the R5, not that 6 stops of stabilisation is ever really necessary, which is a definite improvement over the ~4 stops I got on the R with the lens IS alone. Over 200mm it feels to me like only lens IS is useful, since I get an identical keeper rate with the 300mm f/2.8 IS II on both the R5 and R and once I throw on a 2x tele converter the R actually winds up being better. (Lower resolution is easier to handhold; the R5's IBIS doesn't help.)
@@sebastianmatthews1663 Right, the most benefits of IS come from longer focal lengths and most of the time shutter speeds have to be faster than 1/125 for portraits/people. And even then at longer focal lengths using a shutter speed faster than 1/1000 reduces the benefits of IS if one is photographing a bird in flight. I was just curious about the .5 macro and IS+IBIS since one might stop down to f4-f8 for say a mushroom in the woods and might have to use slower shutter speeds.
This or an Ef 24-70 f4 L?
How did this lens get highly recommended with so many compromises? (While the Nikon Z 85 is only recommended for instance). I see some inconsistency (in other word: bias) here.
I’ve been watching his videos for years, he’s always admitted having a preference for Canon. And less expensive lenses.
It really seems a “little “ biased.
@Viktor Nagy Simple. This Canon lens was very slightly sharper in my tests, a little less expensive, and has the extra features of image stabilization and macro ability, both of which are highly valuable to many photographers. But hey, it's all subjective: if the only important thing to you is autofocus speed then obviously I wouldn't recommend the lens so much.
@@DJLazinator I've often said I have a preference for lenses that are good value for money - that's not always the same as 'less expensive'. And I've never 'admitted having a preference for Canon' - can you let me know where you think I said that? I started with Canon at the beginning but I actually almost totally migrated to Sony for a number of years.
@@christopherfrost To your credit, you’ve made so many videos I don’t quite recall exactly which one you stated your preference for Canon in, but before you added Fuji and Sony cameras to your testing arsenal, you did state only using Canon in this video: ruclips.net/video/vAWX326Fy0E/видео.html But again, to your credit, the last 3 years or so seem to be the most unbiased and well rounded I’ve seen. And I value your reviews and opinions.
Im still unsure because of the slow and external focus system... 100$ more expensive but with usm? No-Brainer but with this... i dont know.
not a bad lens 85 mm lenses are good in resolution tests pretty often tho
F2 for a 85 mm lens is not that fast for 85 mm lenses often go up to f1.4
it seems to be always * 1.41 (sine wave) forward and * 0,707 backwards
that would unison the sine calculations aswell
i like the possiblity going for f1.4 instead of going from f2 or going from f1.4 to f2
Hello, ignoring other factors that only care about the sharpness and color of the image, Canon RF 85 f2 is still very good, isn't it, I don't need bokeh and background removal. Thank ( Google Translate)
I always wonder: is your test chart built into a wall, I mean, is it a very big massive chart , or is it just the size of a sheet of paper ?
It's a large, metallic chart
Can someone tell me what size extention tube i need to make this lens 1:1??
So, having used both, how would compare the user experience between this and the Nikon Z 85mm?
But the nikon isn't macro...
@@Poli-IX That and the lack of IS are advantages for Canon, sure, but I'm asking for input because I cannot judge how much those would or would not impact the average user's experience.
@@nicolask.3825 unlike Canon’s, all Nikon’s FF bodies have IBIS, so the lack of IS on their lenses doesn’t really matter.
@@gabrielkarczewski4453 you're writing it allover the comment section and it's not true, only first two eos R and RP did not have ibis, canon R5 & R6 bodies have ibis
@@andyfink4419 I wrote it twice, seemed relevant to both comments. I didn’t say none of them have it, of course the R5 and the R6 do, I just said that not all of them. The lack of IBIS on the EOS R and the EOS RP are major drawbacks (at least for me).
That AF speed is probably one of the slowest ive ever seen from a canon lens. Some of the cheaper EFS lenses put this to shame and thats saying a lot. Im not even referring to the video AF but for stills
Should’ve made it a 1.8
like lens cannon for macro
Can it be use for canon m6?
No.
No weather sealing is a deal breaker
You were a little biased here, Chris. That focusing system is so horrendous that the lens not worth what they ask for it.
Nope, mine is ok as long as you switch the focus limiter to the apropriate working distance, don't bother to use ALL range switch !
Chris, which one would be sharper in between this and Sigma 85 mm f1.4 Art on an EOS R5 at same apertures ?
Sigma 85
The Sigma
The autofocus seems very slow and noisy...
I think for portraits the Samyang is a better deal.
if only it was still for sale
It's almost like Canon are _trying_ to push people to Sony with their cheaper lenses. This costs the same as Sony's 85mm f/1.8 and the only thing this really has going for it over the Sony is the focus distance, if we don't include the camera body itself in the equation. So here's hoping for Canon's sake that they come out with an 85mm f/1.8 for about $700 before Sigma has a chance to port over their mirrorless-specific 85mm f/1.4.
Not exactly, it is also image stabilised, which is very effective. When it is as 'old' as the Sony lens, it will get a good bit cheaper.
@@p_adam19 Sony cameras have IBIS and you can fairly easily get shots down to 1/20th of a second with it. The lens having stabilization at this point only really covers it for use on the EOS R and RP. That said, you're probably not wrong with the price thing.
@@RealRaynedance This lens gets down to 1/10 second on an EOS R, haven't tested it on the R5 but I think it can do even better. Also excellent for video (I guess the Batis with OSS is similar but more expensive), where you don't want the focus to jump, it does its job smoothly, although not silently.
Again I really don't think this lens makes or breaks a system choice, they are different systems for different people as or right now, there is just more lens options for native E-mount lenses including 3rd party options, some of them will also come to RF-mount this year.
But the bodies handle EF lenses with EF adapter so there is an even wider range of lens options available with even cheaper lenses.
@@p_adam19 "But the bodies handle EF lenses with EF adapter so there is an even wider range of lens options available with even cheaper lenses."
Cheaper but not breathtaking lenses. Sharpness is not the strongest quality of them. If this would be different then I could simply rush to purchase an EF 85mm f/1.8 or 100mm f/2 instead of this RF 85mm macro. 50mm EF lenses seems like worthless to touch, the 1.8 and 1.4 have serious bokeh and CA issues in addition.
Maybe the Sony FE 50mm f/1.8 has no better bokeh, but at least it is very sharp and CA is not an issue while the lens is cheap. The EF 50mm 1.2 is probably better, but it is crazy expensive, and still has awful contrast wide open.
So yeah, Canon definietly has bigger lens park, the question is, do you really want to buy any of those old EF lenses? Because they are either on the "not so good" or "crazy expensive" side. I bought an EOS RP in kit with the adapter, paired up with the truly good and affordable 35mm f/1.8 macro before I realized I will have a hard time picking acceptable lenses with different focal length 😣
@@staLkerhu Well I don't think smaller and cheaper lenses are about being breathtaking on test charts. They work perfectly and they do the job of taking pleasing images very well. But you can also get newer Sigma, Tamron etc. lots of options to choose from and they all work well. This RF 85/2 lens works well as long as one is not shooting action with it and uses the appropriate AF settings, which minimises the chance of focus hunting.
Sometimes I use vintage glass like the Olmypus OM Zuiko 50 1.2 which I guess performs worse than the Canon EF 50 1.2 regarding CA, etc. or even the Canon 85 1.5 LTM which is the worst lens I've used regarding sharpness or CA but the images simply look very good with them, if anything the bokeh looks worse (more boring) with lenses that are better corrected, some of these newer, "better" lenses start to have less personality.
I think FE 85 1.4 GM looks way better in comparison to the FE 85 1.8 even though it has more CA so from that aspect it is not as well corrected and the AF motor is not the most refined. (But I could also mention the old A-mount Planar 85 1.4 lens which has way more CA, that looks better to me as well.)
0.5 m to infinity it's a nonsense. 0.8 m to infinity would be better (faster Af performance). This type of lens isn't usefull for fast work.
Nope! Whirling noise and slow AF in 2021 is a no go.
Little and sharp, uniquely versatile, just about reasonably priced, I want to say, typical Canon.
Is it just me, or all new non-L RF lenses are dull, loud, cranky, plasticky, and overpriced? If you don't like it, you can pay 2000 € for an L lens that's at least not loud 😅
Can they not design one with no moving front element? It reminds me of old 90s Tamrons, the ones that go for 50 € now.
rf 85 and rf 35 is much sharper than rf50 stm.
Canon keeps their tradition by producing very loud lenses. What a shame. It is annoying. Very annoying.
People complain about the Sony FE 50mm f1.8 for being noisy but let this slide?
Noisy and slow af, extending during focusing, no lens hood, busy bokeh for my taste, pricey and average build. Same goes for RF 50stm and 35stem... That turned me away from Canon to Sony, after 20 years of hard core devotion to Canon and L sect...
I prefer Canon because of the color science but their affordable RF primes are terrible. Nikon has the best affordable primes and Sony has some good ones too. Sony has the most lenses when you include 3rd party ones.
@@kifley19 Lumix S prime lenses look incredibly good too. That affordable 85mm f1.8 is stellar and both 35mm & 50mm are coming soon.
@@HarryPowerColt I like Panasonic cameras. They have the best IBIS but their auto focus is still terrible.
Can you review the RF 28mm pancake please!