I gotta say, watching this vid makes me miss the versatility of the 70-200 a bit. That said, I’m with you. The 85 is one of my favorite focal lengths, though mine is not the Defocus Smoothing version. I love having a f1.2 lens and that balance of compression and natural look of subject’s facial features is quite appealing.
Verrrry well said! That balance between compression and an appealing facial structure is what makes that 85mm so good. I have a feeling if I get rid of the 70-200mm I'll regret it too! I'll have to decide. I like the idea of the 15-35mm f2.8 and the 85mm f1.2. Simple and covers most bases for what I do! 💯👍📸
I’ve seen other comparisons between these two lenses, and the 70-200 edged out the 85, plus it’s more versatile and can easily crop out distracting things surrounding the subject (and can do events, etc, etc). I actually bought the 70-200 and the 50 f/1.2 and couldn’t be happier. Thanks for doing this video.
85mm (1.2-1.4) will always win vs 70-200mm for portrait shots. The 70-200 has adv for versatility on the reach. As shown in the video, you'd have to shoot at 200mm to get a similar look to 85mm. Any shorter distance will alter the compression when shooting at 2.8 Aperture. Shooting 70mm at 2.8 is not close to the 85mm at 1.2-1.4. Needless to say, it is cumbersome to shoot at 200mm in the studio or any tight space, so the 70-200mm is primarily an ideal lens for outdoor. Buy the 85mm for portrait shots; buy the 70-200mm for needing extra reach.
Great video. Love the comparison shot. I've got the rf 85mm 1.2 and ef 200mm f2, still trying to decide the rf 135mm or thr 70-200 2.i for my sons sports. Ah first world problems
I tested once my self Canon RF85 1.2 and I love it, but once I bought Canon RF70-200 F2.8, I am more than happy to have it as a priority , where I can be in any distance faraway and make beautiful pictures. I love both of them, but happy with one I bought. Quality is TOP....On top of it, when I click on my body camera, with a white color and red ring around it, people say woooow.... :) Enjoy what you love....
The f/1.2 looks the same as the f/2.8 (aside from compression) because that's just the math (2.35 x 85mm = 200mm (focal length) means you can increase aperture by 2.35 times and get same bokeh 1.2 x 2.35 = f/2.8). Same as an 85mm f/1.2 will have identical bokeh to a 105mm f/1.4 (85 x 1.25 = 105, so 1.2 x 1.25 = 1.5). So the 85mm f/1.2 can't compete with a 105mm 1.4 --- but they will be close as well wide open. Same math applies to the 135 f/1.8. Mathematically the 200mm f2 will destroy any of these lenses, because the F stop isn't 2.8 --- it's a full stop less. Which means it will have FAR BETTER bokeh than the 85mm 1.2 or 200mm f/2.8. The 85mm would have to be an f/0.85 in order to match the bokeh on a 200mm F2. For reference, the 300mm f2.8 and 400mm f2.8 also have better bokeh by the math. This is both compression, and higher aperture to mm ratio.
Thanks for the number breakdown. However, as the video shows, you'd have to distance yourself from the subject to shoot at 200mm. I like the versatility of the 70-200, but in a tight space like a studio, it's not ideal for portraits.
The best portrait I shot was with the 70-200 f2.8 at 200 2.8. The colors and contrast were excellent but it was so true to what I saw without the camera. The shape of the face held up perfectly. You need a lot of room but for sniping at an event I love it.
First, kudos to your wife for taking portraits in the snow! Great shots! Second, I don't think one can go wrong with either fantastic lenses. My takeaway is that the 70-200mm will hold against a portrait prime lens. Therefore, I'd be happy with the versatility of the zoom, as you stated, and be happy making great photos with this lens. Brother, keep both, you’re amazing with both lenses!
This is exactly the video I was looking for so thank you. I have the RF 15 - 35 2.8 and the RF 70 - 200mm 2.8 but I was undecided whether to get the RF 50mm 1.2 or the 85mm 1.2 as my next lens. I'm still undecided but leaning towards the 85mm at the moment. Even though it's expensive I don't think I'd sell my 70 - 200mm, it's very useful for the runway shows, weddings and events I use but as a portrait photographer I think the 85mm is a must have. I'd be interested to know if you did sell the 70 - 200mm or decided to keep both.
Hello! Thank you for the comment 📸 I did end up selling my 70-200 mm. I have the 85mm for my portrait needs, and I use 28 and 35 primes for general street work and context portraits, too. The 70-200 mm is an absolutely great lens, but with the sort of photography I've leaned into, I found it sitting on the shelf more and more. Glad the video was useful and I wish you the best on your decision!!
Even when you match the framing with both lenses, I think it's worth mentioning that the difference in working distance with your subject does become an issue if you do portraits regularly. I find it hard to communicate with my subjects when shooting portraits with the 70-200mm.
Very cool comparison. I have EF versions of both and trying to decide which one to trade in for RF version so I can stop using the adapter which adds a bit of weight and length.
You inspired me to pick up the R5 this past week! A night and day difference from the R! Can’t believe I waited this long lol! Keep crushing the content👊🏼
Yeah, I don't think you mentioned it but there is definitely tonality differences too between the 85 and 70-200, at least for what you shot I agree I like the 85 more as there seems to be more tonality giving it a bit more 3D almost. Thanks for the comparison.
Good observation! I noted the 70-200 was a little warmer than the 85. I agree! I'd say the 85 is the perfect portrait lens. I'd like to compare it to the 50 f1.2 and the 135 f1.8!
@@MilmidStudios That would be great - thanks in advance! I also noted that my RF 70-200 has a little less saturation then some other lenses, but it can be easily adjusted at taste in 'post'.
@@MilmidStudios I rented the 50mm f/1.2 over the holidays and founds its best utility is outside. We went to NASA and the 50 was just not good in there to get any environment... My 28-70 just barely cut it for width. Where it really shined was outside in parks, portraits special closeups etc. I think the 50 would be a more "useful" lens than the 85mm, but that 85 stands alone! ha ha. Can't wait to see how it compares to the nikon z version. Canon may have to come out with a mark ii.
85 F1.2 , Full face not on focus compared to 200mm F2.8 where the full face is in focus. So the 70-200 F2.8 is a go to lens, due to versatility and full focus in subject, not leaving ears or hair in blurriness
This is a great comparison; two great lenses at about the same price. I would likely go with the 70-200 for versatility, but the 85 seems perfect for portraits of faces. So, you have confused me even more. Yes, I am more informed, but as for one or the other; I now want both.
Oh, I missed the last part of your video. I would advise you not to sell your 70-200! These 2 lenses are very, very different and serve different purposes. Sure, you can use a 70-200 for portraits, but it can be used in so many more situations than the 85. I think they complement each other more than anything else.
Amazing ! I think the 70-200 colors and compression is more appealing; as well as the backgrounds. I’m convinced. Thanks ! OK I’ll say it ! The 85 mm looks more clinical which it has been accused of…go 70-200 !😊
This is such a good video! I’m torn between these two lenses and I am not sure which one to invest in because both are ridiculously expensive for a hobby but my GOD, they’re so good!
Thanks for watching!!! The price tag is indeed steep for a hobbyist, but if you do invest in either, both lenses are extremely capable and you really can’t go wrong 📸🎯💯 every now and then you can find them discounted on the used market 👌🏽
Im a straight up prime shooter, I even returned the EF 70-200 because it was soft to me (Prime shooter eye), but when I shoot with my RF 70-200 2.8 its hard to take off, the Sigma 135 1.8 is my favorite but... maaannnnn...my last 2 portrait sessions ive ONLY used the RF 70-200 (R6 Shooter btw)...Awesome Video, you have new subscriber!
Thanks so much for the sub my friend! And thanks for sharing your experience. The 70-200mm is such a solid, versatile lens! You get great compression and bokeh.📸💯
I have the 85mm, and you will need to prior it from my cold dead hands. This lense is exceptional. Yeah a 70-200mm is versatile. But the quality and look of this 8m lens is outstanding.
I am stoked I found you on here via suggestions.. I am angry I didn't find you in time for your challenge!!!!! I just upgraded all my EF glass to rf 15-35 2.8, 50 1.2, 70-200 2.8 to round out my version of the trinity on my eos r. I figured having 1 low light lens that is great at portrait but also covers that middle range was a solid bet instead of a 24-70 2.8. Cheers to your content man and as a big time hunter in North Idaho, I loved your film you did about it. Its incredibly important to have that meet the eyes of some non hunters to understand what its actually all about!
Love this comment man!!! Thanks for sharing your appreciation for that project. I had a great time following those guys and have great respect for the craft. You have a GREAT lineup of lenses, my friend. I'd love to try that 50mm f1.2. Thanks for stopping by! 📸💯👍
The 85 is lovely. I wanted the 70-200 initially but then they released the 135mm. so 85 (non DS) & 135 will do it for me :) As a bonus I won't have to deal with step-up (or down:P) filter rings as 15-35 85 and 135 are all 82mm thread :) Thanks for another great upload.
That's what I did. Once I decide on a wider lens Im covered for everything I would need. Everyone complains about lens but I personally can do everything with 2-3.
I shoot with R5c now and am only rocking the 24-105 my main photo and video lens. I also have the 50mm 1.8 which I’m still extremely happy with. I’ve owned so many EF lenses in the last 85mm, 400mm, 70-200, 50mm ect so I’m super picky now when it comes to my next purchase. ESP how $$$ RF lenses are, but I know they are the future. I’d love to pair the 100-500mm lens with the 24-105 and those two would give me quite the focal range. Have the nifty 50 for those headshots but then MAYBE toss in the 85mm or 135mm as a last option. I think for me the 70-200 is a hard sell just for the fact it’s essentially a 105-200 being that I already have the 24-105. I don’t shoot a ton of sports or wildlife for my actual job so even getting that 100-500 idk how often I would use it over say a dedicated 135mm ect. To get first. I do like taking telephoto landscapes ect and it be good to just have it on the arsenal
Some people say 135mm or 150mm or even 200mm is the best for portraits but I never done a side by side test. Once you go past 85mm you have to bring up your voice so the person can hear what your saying. Every time I do a wedding and I'm doing portraits I tell the bride and groom I'm going to have to speak up so you can hear me but I'm not yelling at anyone.
I think it will come down to whether you like a zoom lens or a prime lens, because both are excellent lenses! If I had to choose what I would use as a wedding lens, I would pick the 70-200mm f2.8 because of the versatility of the zoom function. However, for the reception, that 1.2 comes in handy! All the best! 🙏🏽📸🎯
I have the R6 with a bubble on the shutter curtain and I prefer selling it than repair it. Should I get the 3 years old R5, get the R3? Sadly can't want end of the year for the R5ii (if this will have stacked sensor.) Yea for wha I shoot I prefer. the R3 but love the compact body of the R5. Or should I get a R6ii?
When comparing sharpness I would recommend using a tripod. When hand holding it adds a second variable. Which is probably why your sharpness test was inconclusive.
Great video, very nice comparison! All of the side-by-sides were super helpful. Both are beautiful lenses so, it would be an agonizing choice. I like the 85mm better for portraits. To my eye, there was also a very small difference in skin tone that seemed slightly more natural with the 85mm. Most lenses tend to be sharpest at their widest apertures so, the difference in the eyebrow sharpness between the 70-200 at 2.8 vs the 85 at 1.2 might have been a little boost for the 85 going from 2.8 to 1.2. The background comparison was very interesting as well. It makes you think about how to best handle a given background. For backgrounds with a big prominent feature, you might be better minimizing it with 85mm instead of magnifying it with 200mm. There is no way I'd give up either of those lenses. I'd lean toward the 85mm for portrait but, the 70-200mm has so much versatility. The fact that its sharpness so closely rivals the 85mm prime is testament to how impressive a lens it is.
Thanks for stopping by and leaving a comment! I agree withy your assessment completely.. both lenses have definitely earned their spot in the photographers camera bag. I appreciate you sharing your insight!🙏🏽📸
As much as I like my 85mm (EF 85 1.4L in my case), the RF 70 - 200 2.8L is better suited for events: it has a faster, almost silent focus motor (dual nano-USM vs USM at the 85mm) and provides more flexibility with it's variable focal length, while rendering almost like a prime. Keep both :) ...
Thanks for that assessment, Tom. The 70-200 is definitely a worthy lens. Also thanks for bringing up the focus motor, it is indeed very quiet, so you aren't distracting people at weddings or other events! You make a good argument for keeping both! 👌 💯📸
The point of the 85 is to shoot wide open. Testing at 2.8 defeats the purpose. The shape of the face was not mentioned. Focal length distortion is real. I guess the 200 looked the most accurate to me but brings out another consideration. Working distance is super important. In most small room and studio I’d pick the 85 1.2
The RF 70-200 really is a phenomenal lens. The falloff into the out-of-focus areas is so smooth. Have you compared the bokeh of 85 DS with the 70-200 by chance? The shots in your video make it seem like it's very similar.
You should give Luminar NEO a try it has A.I. bokeh so you can get even more bokeh with the 85mm f1.2. Also Photoshop also have A.I. bokeh now but Luminar is very easy to use. Only thing you might have to do is take the brush and clean up the outline because it some now get single hairs right. So what I do is use a big brush and there are two circles in the brush and only use the outside of the first brush to bring back the single hairs. Luminar NEO works most of the time.
If we're talking strictly image quality, I much prefer the 85mm 1.2, personally. But if we're talking autofocus into account, then the clear advantage goes to the 70-200mm 2.8.
Both are great portrait choices. The 105 will give you a tad more compression but I think the 85 makes the face look most attractive! And that f1.2 is killer 👍🎯📸
I think it may be that the Optical stabilization of the 70-200 is allowing a sharper image that the 85 mill. The 70-200 is a focus beast as well- wicked fast. Not worth a reshoot, but a tri-pod may have changed the outcome. Both images are stunning though.
That's a good point! I was kicking myself when we got out and I realized I forgot my tripod! We may need to revisit this experiment, maybe with the 135mm f1.8 and the 85mm f1.2.📸💯
Great comparison. Me for myself shoot the RF85DS 90% wide open at 1.2, 5% at 1.4 and 5% 1.8. That's why I bought it. And therefor it's a dream lens. As well as the RF70-200 2.8. But in my opinion they have different use cases.
70-200 was a darker frame (1/1250 instead of the 1/800) the extra darkness on eyebrows could make it look sharper. Later the 85 had the faster shutterspeed 1/2000.. instead of the 1/1000 so it's not a perfect comparison
The versatility of the 70 200 is unmatched as you can shoot the either lens at 85mm and the IS is helpful. Theb85mm can not shoot at 70mm or 200mm.. But to each their own. An 85mm 1.8 for the times you dont need context in your image and 70 200 for event or outdoor portraits. To each their own
The final conclusion was inconclusive. There should have been a comparison between 85mm 1.2 V and 85 mm from 70-200 2.8 zoom lens. Otherwise, it's a useful video. You have done at 4th minute but not compared at the end.
Unfortunately your comparison was in an environment where they were always going to struggle to stand apart with such a distant background, at 200mm even the f4 lens would look the same with a head-and-shoulders close crop like this. A more useful comparison would be in a town, or park or forest, anything really with a more interesting background - maybe resting against a wall as it fades into bokeh, that would really show the compression of the 200mm over the 85, and the buttery smooth DS version of the 85mm bokeh. And setting focal length and aperture to the same settings to compare lenses was a total waste of time in this video - of course then the characteristics are going to look identical, and it's going to come down to your over-exposing more slightly more than the other to set them apart, then say one has more contrast?? Nonsense.
I gotta say, watching this vid makes me miss the versatility of the 70-200 a bit. That said, I’m with you. The 85 is one of my favorite focal lengths, though mine is not the Defocus Smoothing version. I love having a f1.2 lens and that balance of compression and natural look of subject’s facial features is quite appealing.
Verrrry well said! That balance between compression and an appealing facial structure is what makes that 85mm so good. I have a feeling if I get rid of the 70-200mm I'll regret it too! I'll have to decide. I like the idea of the 15-35mm f2.8 and the 85mm f1.2. Simple and covers most bases for what I do! 💯👍📸
And 100-500 🎉
I’ve seen other comparisons between these two lenses, and the 70-200 edged out the 85, plus it’s more versatile and can easily crop out distracting things surrounding the subject (and can do events, etc, etc). I actually bought the 70-200 and the 50 f/1.2 and couldn’t be happier. Thanks for doing this video.
6:21 - YOU ARE HERE BECAUSE OF THIS
85mm (1.2-1.4) will always win vs 70-200mm for portrait shots. The 70-200 has adv for versatility on the reach. As shown in the video, you'd have to shoot at 200mm to get a similar look to 85mm. Any shorter distance will alter the compression when shooting at 2.8 Aperture. Shooting 70mm at 2.8 is not close to the 85mm at 1.2-1.4. Needless to say, it is cumbersome to shoot at 200mm in the studio or any tight space, so the 70-200mm is primarily an ideal lens for outdoor. Buy the 85mm for portrait shots; buy the 70-200mm for needing extra reach.
Great video. Love the comparison shot. I've got the rf 85mm 1.2 and ef 200mm f2, still trying to decide the rf 135mm or thr 70-200 2.i for my sons sports. Ah first world problems
I tested once my self Canon RF85 1.2 and I love it, but once I bought Canon RF70-200 F2.8, I am more than happy to have it as a priority , where I can be in any distance faraway and make beautiful pictures. I love both of them, but happy with one I bought. Quality is TOP....On top of it, when I click on my body camera, with a white color and red ring around it, people say woooow.... :) Enjoy what you love....
The f/1.2 looks the same as the f/2.8 (aside from compression) because that's just the math (2.35 x 85mm = 200mm (focal length) means you can increase aperture by 2.35 times and get same bokeh 1.2 x 2.35 = f/2.8). Same as an 85mm f/1.2 will have identical bokeh to a 105mm f/1.4 (85 x 1.25 = 105, so 1.2 x 1.25 = 1.5). So the 85mm f/1.2 can't compete with a 105mm 1.4 --- but they will be close as well wide open. Same math applies to the 135 f/1.8. Mathematically the 200mm f2 will destroy any of these lenses, because the F stop isn't 2.8 --- it's a full stop less. Which means it will have FAR BETTER bokeh than the 85mm 1.2 or 200mm f/2.8. The 85mm would have to be an f/0.85 in order to match the bokeh on a 200mm F2. For reference, the 300mm f2.8 and 400mm f2.8 also have better bokeh by the math. This is both compression, and higher aperture to mm ratio.
Thanks for the number breakdown. However, as the video shows, you'd have to distance yourself from the subject to shoot at 200mm. I like the versatility of the 70-200, but in a tight space like a studio, it's not ideal for portraits.
The best portrait I shot was with the 70-200 f2.8 at 200 2.8. The colors and contrast were excellent but it was so true to what I saw without the camera. The shape of the face held up perfectly. You need a lot of room but for sniping at an event I love it.
Woah.....this comment helped me underrated thank you I really appreciate it
Most wanted thing that I wanted to know. Thank you ✨️
First, kudos to your wife for taking portraits in the snow! Great shots!
Second, I don't think one can go wrong with either fantastic lenses. My takeaway is that the 70-200mm will hold against a portrait prime lens. Therefore, I'd be happy with the versatility of the zoom, as you stated, and be happy making great photos with this lens. Brother, keep both, you’re amazing with both lenses!
David! Thanks for your kind words and insight!!! 📸🎯💯
Great video! I never was aware of the magnification effect on the background when using a zoom lens..
Thanks so much for watching!!! 📸💯🎯
This is exactly the video I was looking for so thank you. I have the RF 15 - 35 2.8 and the RF 70 - 200mm 2.8 but I was undecided whether to get the RF 50mm 1.2 or the 85mm 1.2 as my next lens. I'm still undecided but leaning towards the 85mm at the moment. Even though it's expensive I don't think I'd sell my 70 - 200mm, it's very useful for the runway shows, weddings and events I use but as a portrait photographer I think the 85mm is a must have. I'd be interested to know if you did sell the 70 - 200mm or decided to keep both.
Hello! Thank you for the comment 📸 I did end up selling my 70-200 mm. I have the 85mm for my portrait needs, and I use 28 and 35 primes for general street work and context portraits, too. The 70-200 mm is an absolutely great lens, but with the sort of photography I've leaned into, I found it sitting on the shelf more and more. Glad the video was useful and I wish you the best on your decision!!
Even when you match the framing with both lenses, I think it's worth mentioning that the difference in working distance with your subject does become an issue if you do portraits regularly. I find it hard to communicate with my subjects when shooting portraits with the 70-200mm.
@@imramugh very good point! Thanks for sharing, friend 🎯💯📸
Very cool comparison. I have EF versions of both and trying to decide which one to trade in for RF version so I can stop using the adapter which adds a bit of weight and length.
Thanks for checking out the video!! Honestly no matter which one you choose, you’ve made the right choice! Both are such solid lenses!! 💯📸
I love the 85 but 70-200 has in body stabilization.Just ordered the 85 f1.2.
Awesome team. Nice comparison. Looking back at 85@2.8 vs. 70-200@100f2.8, facial feature look nice and slimmer on 70-20@100f2.8.
Thanks so much for the comment , and thanks for your insight! 📸💯🎯
Thanks for this showdown! I'm about to buy another lens, and this was really helpful!
2.8!
Glad it was helpful!💯📸👍
You inspired me to pick up the R5 this past week! A night and day difference from the R! Can’t believe I waited this long lol! Keep crushing the content👊🏼
That's awesome!!! That is a GREAT upgrade. Congrats on your new R5 my friend. And thanks for the support and kind comment! 📸💯👍
what's the main difference you noticed?
Yeah, I don't think you mentioned it but there is definitely tonality differences too between the 85 and 70-200, at least for what you shot I agree I like the 85 more as there seems to be more tonality giving it a bit more 3D almost. Thanks for the comparison.
Good observation! I noted the 70-200 was a little warmer than the 85. I agree! I'd say the 85 is the perfect portrait lens. I'd like to compare it to the 50 f1.2 and the 135 f1.8!
@@MilmidStudios That would be great - thanks in advance! I also noted that my RF 70-200 has a little less saturation then some other lenses, but it can be easily adjusted at taste in 'post'.
@@MilmidStudios I rented the 50mm f/1.2 over the holidays and founds its best utility is outside. We went to NASA and the 50 was just not good in there to get any environment... My 28-70 just barely cut it for width. Where it really shined was outside in parks, portraits special closeups etc. I think the 50 would be a more "useful" lens than the 85mm, but that 85 stands alone! ha ha. Can't wait to see how it compares to the nikon z version. Canon may have to come out with a mark ii.
85 F1.2 , Full face not on focus compared to 200mm F2.8 where the full face is in focus.
So the 70-200 F2.8 is a go to lens, due to versatility and full focus in subject, not leaving ears or hair in blurriness
Agree with you. But the problem is 200mm 2.8 image Looks flatter.
85mm image has more 3D look.
This is a great comparison; two great lenses at about the same price. I would likely go with the 70-200 for versatility, but the 85 seems perfect for portraits of faces. So, you have confused me even more. Yes, I am more informed, but as for one or the other; I now want both.
Great assessments, friend!! They are both absolutely stunning lenses. You can’t go wrong!👌🏽📸
Oh, I missed the last part of your video. I would advise you not to sell your 70-200! These 2 lenses are very, very different and serve different purposes. Sure, you can use a 70-200 for portraits, but it can be used in so many more situations than the 85. I think they complement each other more than anything else.
Amazing ! I think the 70-200 colors and compression is more appealing; as well as the backgrounds. I’m convinced. Thanks ! OK I’ll say it ! The 85 mm looks more clinical which it has been accused of…go 70-200 !😊
This is such a good video! I’m torn between these two lenses and I am not sure which one to invest in because both are ridiculously expensive for a hobby but my GOD, they’re so good!
Thanks for watching!!! The price tag is indeed steep for a hobbyist, but if you do invest in either, both lenses are extremely capable and you really can’t go wrong 📸🎯💯 every now and then you can find them discounted on the used market 👌🏽
All time fav lens is the 70-200 F4 is. Unbelievable sharpness, plus lighter weight, plus sgill amazing bokeh. Its the winner
Im a straight up prime shooter, I even returned the EF 70-200 because it was soft to me (Prime shooter eye), but when I shoot with my RF 70-200 2.8 its hard to take off, the Sigma 135 1.8 is my favorite but... maaannnnn...my last 2 portrait sessions ive ONLY used the RF 70-200 (R6 Shooter btw)...Awesome Video, you have new subscriber!
Thanks so much for the sub my friend! And thanks for sharing your experience. The 70-200mm is such a solid, versatile lens! You get great compression and bokeh.📸💯
I have the 85mm, and you will need to prior it from my cold dead hands. This lense is exceptional. Yeah a 70-200mm is versatile. But the quality and look of this 8m lens is outstanding.
I agree with you sentiment regarding the 85mm!! I don’t see myself ever getting rid of it!💯📸
I am stoked I found you on here via suggestions.. I am angry I didn't find you in time for your challenge!!!!! I just upgraded all my EF glass to rf 15-35 2.8, 50 1.2, 70-200 2.8 to round out my version of the trinity on my eos r. I figured having 1 low light lens that is great at portrait but also covers that middle range was a solid bet instead of a 24-70 2.8. Cheers to your content man and as a big time hunter in North Idaho, I loved your film you did about it. Its incredibly important to have that meet the eyes of some non hunters to understand what its actually all about!
Love this comment man!!! Thanks for sharing your appreciation for that project. I had a great time following those guys and have great respect for the craft.
You have a GREAT lineup of lenses, my friend. I'd love to try that 50mm f1.2. Thanks for stopping by! 📸💯👍
That's really a perfect setup! I had the same until I got G.A.S., and bought more lenses than I really need LOL
my question though is, would the face look wider on the 15-35 at 35mm if taken further away from the subject ?
The 85 is lovely. I wanted the 70-200 initially but then they released the 135mm. so 85 (non DS) & 135 will do it for me :) As a bonus I won't have to deal with step-up (or down:P) filter rings as 15-35 85 and 135 are all 82mm thread :) Thanks for another great upload.
Good thinking on the filter ring 👌👌👌 I'm really interested in trying that 135mm f1.8 out. It could be a good medium between the 85mm and 200mm FL. 💯📸
@@MilmidStudios propably too new to rent 🙁
I went for the 50mm 1.2 and the 70-200 to not overlap the focal spectrum, but if i could I'd love that 85mm 🔥🔥
Those are smart lens choices! I really want to get my hands on the 50 f1.2 to try it out. The 85 has my heart for sure! Thanks for the comment! 💯📸
That's what I did. Once I decide on a wider lens Im covered for everything I would need. Everyone complains about lens but I personally can do everything with 2-3.
Thank you for saying bokeh correctly, you're 1 in a million on RUclips
I shoot with R5c now and am only rocking the 24-105 my main photo and video lens. I also have the 50mm 1.8 which I’m still extremely happy with. I’ve owned so many EF lenses in the last 85mm, 400mm, 70-200, 50mm ect so I’m super picky now when it comes to my next purchase. ESP how $$$ RF lenses are, but I know they are the future. I’d love to pair the 100-500mm lens with the 24-105 and those two would give me quite the focal range. Have the nifty 50 for those headshots but then MAYBE toss in the 85mm or 135mm as a last option. I think for me the 70-200 is a hard sell just for the fact it’s essentially a 105-200 being that I already have the 24-105.
I don’t shoot a ton of sports or wildlife for my actual job so even getting that 100-500 idk how often I would use it over say a dedicated 135mm ect. To get first. I do like taking telephoto landscapes ect and it be good to just have it on the arsenal
135mm 1.8 is king
Some people say 135mm or 150mm or even 200mm is the best for portraits but I never done a side by side test. Once you go past 85mm you have to bring up your voice so the person can hear what your saying. Every time I do a wedding and I'm doing portraits I tell the bride and groom I'm going to have to speak up so you can hear me but I'm not yelling at anyone.
Excellent. Might be nice to see 85 vs 85
Which one is the best for wedding photographer I should buy?
I think it will come down to whether you like a zoom lens or a prime lens, because both are excellent lenses! If I had to choose what I would use as a wedding lens, I would pick the 70-200mm f2.8 because of the versatility of the zoom function. However, for the reception, that 1.2 comes in handy! All the best! 🙏🏽📸🎯
Thanks this was great would love to see the rf 135mm
I have the R6 with a bubble on the shutter curtain and I prefer selling it than repair it. Should I get the 3 years old R5, get the R3? Sadly can't want end of the year for the R5ii (if this will have stacked sensor.) Yea for wha I shoot I prefer. the R3 but love the compact body of the R5. Or should I get a R6ii?
If you can, get the R3!! Yea the body is bigger but I think there are more pros than cons. You will not regret it! 🙏🏽📸🫡
When comparing sharpness I would recommend using a tripod. When hand holding it adds a second variable. Which is probably why your sharpness test was inconclusive.
I appreciate your suggestion. You are absolutely right 🎯🎯📸
Great video, very nice comparison! All of the side-by-sides were super helpful. Both are beautiful lenses so, it would be an agonizing choice. I like the 85mm better for portraits. To my eye, there was also a very small difference in skin tone that seemed slightly more natural with the 85mm. Most lenses tend to be sharpest at their widest apertures so, the difference in the eyebrow sharpness between the 70-200 at 2.8 vs the 85 at 1.2 might have been a little boost for the 85 going from 2.8 to 1.2. The background comparison was very interesting as well. It makes you think about how to best handle a given background. For backgrounds with a big prominent feature, you might be better minimizing it with 85mm instead of magnifying it with 200mm.
There is no way I'd give up either of those lenses. I'd lean toward the 85mm for portrait but, the 70-200mm has so much versatility. The fact that its sharpness so closely rivals the 85mm prime is testament to how impressive a lens it is.
Thanks for stopping by and leaving a comment! I agree withy your assessment completely.. both lenses have definitely earned their spot in the photographers camera bag. I appreciate you sharing your insight!🙏🏽📸
As much as I like my 85mm (EF 85 1.4L in my case), the RF 70 - 200 2.8L is better suited for events: it has a faster, almost silent focus motor (dual nano-USM vs USM at the 85mm) and provides more flexibility with it's variable focal length, while rendering almost like a prime. Keep both :) ...
Thanks for that assessment, Tom. The 70-200 is definitely a worthy lens. Also thanks for bringing up the focus motor, it is indeed very quiet, so you aren't distracting people at weddings or other events! You make a good argument for keeping both! 👌 💯📸
I've never been able to love the 70-200 2.8. It just looks more 2D to me over the 85 and the focus fall off is nicer on the 85 1.2.
Interesting and very helpful comparisons. Many thanks.
The point of the 85 is to shoot wide open. Testing at 2.8 defeats the purpose. The shape of the face was not mentioned. Focal length distortion is real. I guess the 200 looked the most accurate to me but brings out another consideration. Working distance is super important. In most small room and studio I’d pick the 85 1.2
Sheesh her blue eyes and your edit are killer!
Respect!!! Thanks friend! 📸💯🙏🏽🎯
70-200 2.8 is my favorite lens. For me its the goat.
Making me happy about my 70-200mm
Have you tried a nd filter or polarizer with the 85 DS? I was reading the coating doesn’t play well with filters
I have only tried it for video but I have a VND filter 2-5 stops and ill test it out for photos! cheers!
The RF 70-200 really is a phenomenal lens. The falloff into the out-of-focus areas is so smooth. Have you compared the bokeh of 85 DS with the 70-200 by chance? The shots in your video make it seem like it's very similar.
Good call, I will do abokeh comparison sith the DS and 70-200 @ 200mm. Cheers! 💯📸👍
I saw many vids comparing bokeh, and 85 1.2 is around 140mm 2.8, so at 200mm u getting smoother, more pleasing bokeh.
You should give Luminar NEO a try it has A.I. bokeh so you can get even more bokeh with the 85mm f1.2. Also Photoshop also have A.I. bokeh now but Luminar is very easy to use. Only thing you might have to do is take the brush and clean up the outline because it some now get single hairs right. So what I do is use a big brush and there are two circles in the brush and only use the outside of the first brush to bring back the single hairs. Luminar NEO works most of the time.
If we're talking strictly image quality, I much prefer the 85mm 1.2, personally. But if we're talking autofocus into account, then the clear advantage goes to the 70-200mm 2.8.
which one sigma 105mm 1.4 or canon 85mm 1.2 for portrait bro???
Both are great portrait choices. The 105 will give you a tad more compression but I think the 85 makes the face look most attractive! And that f1.2 is killer 👍🎯📸
I think it may be that the Optical stabilization of the 70-200 is allowing a sharper image that the 85 mill. The 70-200 is a focus beast as well- wicked fast. Not worth a reshoot, but a tri-pod may have changed the outcome. Both images are stunning though.
That's a good point! I was kicking myself when we got out and I realized I forgot my tripod! We may need to revisit this experiment, maybe with the 135mm f1.8 and the 85mm f1.2.📸💯
@@MilmidStudios Yes! Great idea!
Great comparison. Me for myself shoot the RF85DS 90% wide open at 1.2, 5% at 1.4 and 5% 1.8. That's why I bought it. And therefor it's a dream lens. As well as the RF70-200 2.8. But in my opinion they have different use cases.
Having IS on the 70-200 is worth using the 70-200. If you know how to use the 70-200 it is the better portrait lens!
70-200!
Here from a year in the future, I love the 85
I do find the 70-200 RF
2.8 quality dissapointing compared the 85 1.2... The 70-200 feels a little soft to me at 100% + zoom in lightroom
The 70-200 2.8f compress the face abit more than the 85 1.2f att 200mm
Great comparison
Thanks so much for watching! 💯📸🎯
70-200 was a darker frame (1/1250 instead of the 1/800) the extra darkness on eyebrows could make it look sharper. Later the 85 had the faster shutterspeed 1/2000.. instead of the 1/1000 so it's not a perfect comparison
Have you seen the R8 and new Rf lenses?! They are cool!!!
I have! I'm always pumped about new kit! 📸💯 the R8 is supposed to be a worthy upgrade for RP users.
The older 85 1.2 wasn’t the sharpest but that gave it its unique look. It’s also a very slow focusing lens. Nonetheless it creates amazing portraits
I love the look of the 85 1.2
太粗了，右手指甲容易经常划到镜头
I'm with you on that! 💯📸
15mm best one
The versatility of the 70 200 is unmatched as you can shoot the either lens at 85mm and the IS is helpful. Theb85mm can not shoot at 70mm or 200mm.. But to each their own. An 85mm 1.8 for the times you dont need context in your image and 70 200 for event or outdoor portraits. To each their own
@@anthonyrock5039 good insight! Thanks for your comment 📸🙏🏽🎯
85 f1.2 subject jumps out.
Great video.
Thanks so much!! Glad you enjoyed it!
The point of f1.2 is to shoot in low light
The final conclusion was inconclusive. There should have been a comparison between 85mm 1.2 V and 85 mm from 70-200 2.8 zoom lens. Otherwise, it's a useful video.
You have done at 4th minute but not compared at the end.
Yall are both so gorgeous. You both should be in front of the camera not behind it!
😭😭😭😭😭😭😭gooood❤
300mm f2 I use is a killer portrait lens
This is like comparing a Ferrari with a Mack truck. Yes they're both vehicles, but that's where the comparison ends...
85 is sharper 70200 is not sharp at all I have both
Unfortunately your comparison was in an environment where they were always going to struggle to stand apart with such a distant background, at 200mm even the f4 lens would look the same with a head-and-shoulders close crop like this. A more useful comparison would be in a town, or park or forest, anything really with a more interesting background - maybe resting against a wall as it fades into bokeh, that would really show the compression of the 200mm over the 85, and the buttery smooth DS version of the 85mm bokeh. And setting focal length and aperture to the same settings to compare lenses was a total waste of time in this video - of course then the characteristics are going to look identical, and it's going to come down to your over-exposing more slightly more than the other to set them apart, then say one has more contrast?? Nonsense.
Thanks for your feedback, will look to improve on the next one I do. Cheers 👌