|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
85mm 1.2
I rented a 85mm 1.2 on a canon 7d mk ii I was pretty bummed out on my results in form as sharpness in lowlight could it just be me or is this what I should expect in these situations ? I know the 5d is cropped but I would still expect to see some texture in the face I also used autofocus pointed at the eyes iso 500 f1.2 1/125  crop  iso 1000 f1.2 1/60  crop  Oct 26 15 09:40 am Link From shutter speed to lighting conditions, to choice in depth in field... it seems like you expected perfect results from difficult circumstances. Take it in low light on a tripod in your house to test and rule out user error in the field. Oct 26 15 09:53 am Link I had one of these for over 10 years when I was a Canon shooter. It was the best Canon lens I ever had. It does have focusing problems in low light (I think everything Canon does). Canon is notorious for disappointing performance in low light (noise, mainly). However, in more normal conditions, the 85mm 1.2 by Canon was a superb portrait lens in my experience. Oct 26 15 10:10 am Link Resendez Lavalais wrote: doesn't matter where you think the autofocus is pointed, it's whichever point or where and if the autofocus actually locks, you were not focused on the face or the focus didn't lock in. the final test would be on a tripod with a fixed, non-moving target. f1.2 has very narrow dof at short distances shown in these images. looks like the triangle of the hat is in better focus in the second image (with the highest contrast). Oct 26 15 11:10 am Link Don't forget you're shooting at f1.2; there is no margin for error. If you and your subject move just even just a little, then the subject will be out of focus. Not to be rude or anything, but in this situation I think it's the user and not the equipment. Keep practicing at wider apertures, and use it in better lighting scenarios and you will get much better results. Oct 26 15 11:43 am Link Resendez Lavalais wrote: Since the 7D is an APS-C sensor, the 85mm full-frame equivalent field-of-view is 130mm (give or take). Handheld at those shutter speeds with a 20Mp sensor would require perfect technique not to have image blur, let alone nail focus at f/1.2. Oct 26 15 01:57 pm Link Carbon Photographics wrote: Exactly Oct 26 15 02:12 pm Link Just illustrate with some numbers, on a 5d at 85mm f/1.2, focus point is 10 feet away, you'll have a focus window of about 3 inches. At 5 feet way that focal window is under 1 inch total. At 15 feet that window is almost 8 inches. In the dark, your ability to see the focus point is compromised significantly. Focusing on a nose could mean the eyes wouldn't be in focus depending on your distance. When shooting low light, stand back and crop if necessary, but also be aware, the farther you are the less bright (inverse square to the distance) the light is so weigh your options. f/2 at 10 feet gives you a 5 inch focal window versus 3 inches at f/1.2 but -1.5 EV. F/1.2 at 15 feet should be about the same EV due to distance as f/2 at 10 feet but almost 3 inches more on focus window. The math doesn't always work out like that. Oct 26 15 02:31 pm Link example Shutter Speed 1/49 second Aperture F/2.5 Focal Length 85 mm ISO Speed 400 http://orig02.deviantart.net/a478/f/200 … 8eabad.jpg Oct 26 15 02:51 pm Link I agree with some previous posts. You need to test it under ideal conditions to learn what it's capable of, then start to throw in tricky variables. Oct 26 15 03:40 pm Link You're expecting far too much from physics. I regularly shoot with an 85 f/1.4 and generally speaking, I miss focus about 60% of the time. SO much so that I've adjusted to shooting in burst mode while racking focus slightly in hopes that one of them will have one of her eyes in sharp focus. When I nail focus, it looks amazing. But that's the trick. It's not easy. This was shot at f/1.4, but the other 4 images I shot in this burst weren't so perfect.  If you look bottom left, her fingers are in sharp focus and her hip, which is MAYBE six inches behind them, are blurry as hell. Oct 26 15 04:02 pm Link There's a rule of thumb that the shutter speed should be 1/focal length. In this case your focal length is 136mm. With the shutter speeds you were using, you probably had motion blur. Personally, I prefer 1/2x the focal length. Also, you may have been closer than the minimum focusing distance. People get way too excited about the 1.2 aperture. Especially on a cropped sensor. You'll get plenty of bokeh without opening all the way, and opening all the way is going to give you a nearly useless DoF. What's special about the 85 1.2 is its flaws. It's got a lot of chromatic aberration and it's either that, or whatever causes it that does something the to colors. Try shooting it at f5.6 or f8 and you'll have better results. That's the only L lens that I've sold. I'd prefer a 100m macro over the 85 1.2 or 135 f2. Oct 26 15 04:36 pm Link When you blow the focus point, sometimes you're shutter speed is beyond your abilities and you blur out the image. I have shot at 60 handheld. I have shot also at 15. If you were on autofocus the lens didn't have enough light to focus. You can shine a light on the subject which will help autofocus. While I'm okay at handheld I am a mere mortal with a 105mm 2.8 macro lens. On a beauty shoot on the eyes I only achieved focus properly one out of five times. I had better light than you So for a macro shots concentrating on things like the eye I realized that for the next one I would have to go tripod on macro closeups for beauty. You were using one of the great lenses and all that happened was that while you were financially prepared, you were not really prepared to use the lens to its full potential. Some lens are best on full frame. Take the 105mm 2.8. I first tried it on the Nikon D7000. It was okay on full-length but not so hot on the beauty shots. Finding its sweet spot was difficult. Put it on a full frame and it rocks. It's now my new favourite lens. If you rent that lens again, do research on it first. There's Doxmarks, there's forums that will give you the opinion of professionals that use the lens. A lot of photographers raved about the 105mm 1.8f but doxmarks wasn't that high on the performance. I went with the photographers and in the beginning it looked like Doxmarks had the angle. But once that lens was on a full-frame it just executed so beautifully that I no longer thought about selling it. Oct 26 15 05:25 pm Link Your images are backlit, and dark. To be honest, I think the focus is pretty good considering those things - especially if you used AF. Oct 26 15 05:29 pm Link Use a tripod, use an external continuous light source to focus in live view, and shoot. I had a 85mm f/1.2 that had problems with the outer points on a 6D and the 85mm f/1.8 performs great on all points on the same 6D. Oct 27 15 11:43 am Link I own about a dozen Canon lenses and I have to say the my 85 1.2 is my least favorite. Because of the bulk of the glass, the lens focuses very slowly. Because of this I only use it in a studio situation when things are not moving very much. If I am out and about, which is the majority of my shooting, I will reach for my 135 F2 before I grab the 85. In the studio, the 85 is a wonderful lens but it is not a lens in low light or when the subject or the camera is moving around much. Oct 27 15 12:46 pm Link Daniel-Smith wrote: Bingo. Oct 27 15 01:07 pm Link The AF on the 85L, especially the original version is useless when shooting at F5.6 and below. Experience will teach you that statement is fairly accurate with all AF lenses. Factor in the lighting conditions, lack of contrast, no tripod, a moving subject, degree of user error, a high number of unusable images is to be expected. The images would improve greatly if you used a tripod, a shutter speed of about 1/125 and let the ISO fall where it needed. I've found that you can underexpose about 1.5-2 stops and adjust it in post with usable results. I think of it as judging clip tests on E6 or exposing for shadows on C41. Oct 28 15 06:19 am Link Working with low light, I have found the best way to focus is to switch to screen view, magnify by 5, then manually focus. In screen view you can increase the ISO and the f stop as 1.2 does give you a lot of light but the DOF is razor thin so not much is ever going to be completely in focus. Oct 28 15 07:56 am Link Appears to be front focusing. Can be because of the lens or due to actual shooting. Here is a related example - shot at ISO800 I believe (can't be 100%) with Rokkor 58/1.2 WO - slightly back focused in this case.  At f1.2 your margins are tight. Nov 01 15 01:45 am Link tcphoto wrote: On DSLRs with lenses whose apertures are controlled by the camera, when using the viewfinder, the phase-detect focus system is engaged. The aperture setting is irrelevant, as the camera will focus at the widest aperture the lens is capable, and stop down to the set aperture when the picture is taken. Nov 01 15 02:19 am Link At f1.2 I wouldn't trust anyone's AF. I shoot often with the Nikon 50 f1.2 on my D800 and Fuji XT-1. Focus peaking works great on the Fuji, but it's pure manual focus on the D800. Nov 01 15 03:53 am Link It seems you shooting all focus or center weight =That's the problem! Nov 01 15 01:07 pm Link tcphoto wrote: This is the second time I believe I've heard you spout this in the forums. Simply not true. Maybe you require experience with better lenses. I can autofocus accurately with my Nikon 800E and either my 70-200 2.8 or my 24-70 2.8 all day long at between 2.8 and 4. Nov 01 15 01:55 pm Link Good for you, I have not had the same experience. Nov 01 15 02:39 pm Link Mikey McMichaels wrote: Agreed. I shot the Nikon 85 1.4 for years, but never bother with actually buying one for my Canon- I much more prefer the Zeiss 100mm makro f2 over other options. Despite manual focus, I find the lens to be far more versatile. Nov 01 15 10:05 pm Link J O H N A L L A N wrote: Agreed 100%. When shooting at the wider apertures, I'm usually manually focusing anyway. You're right about the 70-200... you can shoot at f2.8 all day long with excellent focus. One thing people should do is to get to know their focus points and where they're *really* located as opposed to where they just light up in the view finder. Nov 01 15 10:15 pm Link |
