The Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Has Started Shipping in North America

[mclaren777]

Great picture. Thank you for posting. Do you happen to recall the settings you used for this photo?

1/160, f/2.8, ISO 400, flash power 1/64

The lens was probably 30-36 inches from his face.

 

[Viggo]

Lucky me! Just ordered 85 IS and will have it by the end of the week, can’t wait to test it! The store got ONE, lol;D

 

[blobmonster]

@ mclaren77 regarding the photo of the homeless guy, I think that is a very penetrating gaze you captured there, it reminds me of the afghan girl photo. It and the subject seem hauntingly sad and relate-able, and I say this as someone who doesn't often show softness in such contexts. It ought to be published more widely, also the lens is obviously very capable.

To the person above who said they were still confused and considering Sigma, I don't get why you wait if you're in the market and have the money. The Canon f1.4 is obviously the better buy and investment. Everyone is saying the autofocus is fine on this; therefore get it, the f1.2 was otherwise a dream lens. Besides, buying off brand jeopardises your existing investment in Canon photography as it arguably impinges on Canon's profitability...

 

[SecureGSM]

... To the person above who said they were still confused and considering Sigma, I don't get why you wait if you're in the market and have the money. The Canon f1.4 is obviously the better buy and investment...

A.M.: no, not that obviously a better buy with Canon at A$2,250 vs Sigma Art at A$1,125 in Australia. Besides the Sigma 85 Art is a (much) better glass. rendition, sharpness, bokeh, vignetting, CA and rock solid AF (centre and peripheral AF points, good and bad light confirmed).

... Besides, buying off brand jeopardises your existing investment in Canon photography as it arguably impinges on Canon's profitability...

A.M.: ;D ;D ;D who buys expensive products just to support a vendor's profitability these days? We buy them to satisfy our professional or consumer needs. Healthy competition is good. Monopoly is a recipe for financial and technological stagnation.

 

[scottkinfw]

I cancelled my Amazon pre-order this afternoon and bought one at a store in Seattle instead.

Sweet pic.

I don't need this lens, but that pic sure makes it tempting!

Scott

 

[Wedding Shooter]

Besides the Sigma 85 Art is a (much) better glass. rendition, sharpness, bokeh, vignetting, CA and rock solid AF (centre and peripheral AF points, good and bad light confirmed).

rendition, bokeh, CA... For my part It's just to early to judge as to few Canon pictures are available to compare them

AF... Canon WON'T be worse

Vignetting... The sigma has some too... https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&LensComp=0&CameraComp=0&Lens=1122

sharpness... That's a big one. I read a photography book once saying: "A tripod is the sharpest lens you can buy". With Canon having 4 stop IS... well...

What about size, weight, weather sealing, resale value, future cameras compatibility,...???

And yes. The Canon comes with a price twice the Sigma, but lower then anticipated by most.

 

[SecureGSM]

Just a quick one in response : weight size can be an issue for some that never shot with Canon 70-200 F2.8L II + 5D combo. Trust me: Sigma 85 Art + 5D level body feels much lighter in your palms let along hanging of your shoulder or heaps as you run and gun. Yet, majority of events togs shoot with dual 5D bodies + 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 lenses attached.
Vignetting : Sigma 85 Art literary is vignette free stopped down to F1.8. Again, trust me I own the glass.
Resale value: I sold all my Sigma prime lens collection (but 85 Art) at profit and in a matter of days. Literary at profit as Sigma Art prices gone up in last year by nearly 30% in Australia. Definitely no problem in value department.

AF consistency:

the question is how consistent do you need the AF to be?

At centre AF point Sigma as consistent as Canon F1.2 glass
At peripheral AF points and in low light is nearly as consistent as the Canon F1.2 glass

IS: can be useful, there is no doubt about it.

I was thinking about upgrading to Canon 85 F1.4 IS for 2 reason:

1. IS
2. First party AF quality in low light

#2 - I proven (and documented ) to be non issue
#1 - is evedently an important Canon 85 F1.4 IS selling point

I am not prepared to shell out extra A$1300 for the IS along though.
I would rather crank up my shutter speed to 1/125s at least if I had to.

 

[edoorn]

the thing is, with Sigma you never know if your copy focusses right or not. I used to have a 35A which was fine! (not as good as the 35 II but still good enough). But I have also tried sigma lenses where that particular copy was just a miss. I know people who also have the Sigma art but don't have as much luck (problem seems to be outer focus points, in particular in less than ideal light - mind you, they use the lens in real world applications such as weddings, events, etc. - no tripod tests). So it is not proven at all that this lens performs as well as a first party lens.

Another thing is that you might need to rely on service responsiveness. Depending on where you are, Sigma's turn around can be long . Speaking from experience, because before said 35A was sold, it broke twice (different problems) and it took weeks before I had the lens back.

Ps: have not yet seen a good extensive review where both lenses are pitted against each other so your conclusion seems very premature.

 

[slclick]

the thing is, with Sigma you never know if your copy focusses right or not. I used to have a 35A which was fine! (not as good as the 35 II but still good enough). But I have also tried sigma lenses where that particular copy was just a miss. I know people who also have the Sigma art but don't have as much luck (problem seems to be outer focus points, in particular in less than ideal light - mind you, they use the lens in real world applications such as weddings, events, etc. - no tripod tests). So it is not proven at all that this lens performs as well as a first party lens.

Another thing is that you might need to rely on service responsiveness. Depending on where you are, Sigma's turn around can be long . Speaking from experience, because before said 35A was sold, it broke twice (different problems) and it took weeks before I had the lens back.

Ps: have not yet seen a good extensive review where both lenses are pitted against each other so your conclusion seems very premature.

The 85, 135 and the 11-24 I believe use a different AF motor with much more power. The AF accuracy and speed of these 3 Art lenses is up to par with Canon. True the 35 Art had those issues, I had two copies. The 24-35 was much better but these new 3 are supposed to be amazing.

 

[SecureGSM]

Wow I, premature conclusions... not proven facts.

Sigma 85 Art peripheral AF consistency in low light is 95.6%. Well in excess of what one calls even acceptable. This is a very good result.

You are referring to some people that allegedly have experience with or unhappy with the Sigma Art peripheral points consistency?? Right, do you have an evidence to support your claim? I guess no
I have first hand and extensive commercial level experience with Sigma Art and Sport lenses AFMA calibration.
I offer this a service. I have for hundreds of them in recent years. I can tell you much more about the Sigma glass even from that perspective. In fact 35A lens is the most AF inconsistent out of the bunch. 85A has 0 AF consistency issues. I produced very detailed AF consistency test report jus recently and made it available to forum members.
54 shots were taken in a very low light. Peripheral AF poiny was used. All of shots were in focus.
That is why I call my point being proven and documented.

Sigma service turnaround: yes, may be an issue same as Tamron or any other third part lens manufacturer.
I am living in Melbourne and only a short drive from Sigma service centre. Therefore my circumstances are not typical.

the thing is, with Sigma you never know if your copy focusses right or not. I used to have a 35A which was fine! (not as good as the 35 II but still good enough). But I have also tried sigma lenses where that particular copy was just a miss. I know people who also have the Sigma art but don't have as much luck (problem seems to be outer focus points, in particular in less than ideal light - mind you, they use the lens in real world applications such as weddings, events, etc. - no tripod tests). So it is not proven at all that this lens performs as well as a first party lens.

Another thing is that you might need to rely on service responsiveness. Depending on where you are, Sigma's turn around can be long . Speaking from experience, because before said 35A was sold, it broke twice (different problems) and it took weeks before I had the lens back.

Ps: have not yet seen a good extensive review where both lenses are pitted against each other so your conclusion seems very premature.

 

[Viggo]

I’ve read about AF issues with all Art lenses, including the 85 and 135, and all the five Art’s I had, so for me it would never ever matter what Sigma does, I will never buy one again

 

[neuroanatomist]

Wow I, premature conclusions...

That is why I call my point being proven and documented.

Besides the Sigma 85 Art is a (much) better glass. rendition, sharpness, bokeh, vignetting, CA and rock solid AF (centre and peripheral AF points, good and bad light confirmed).

Where is your proven and documented evidence that, compared to the Canon 85/1.4L IS, the Sigma 85A has, "...(much) better glass. rendition, sharpness, bokeh, vignetting, CA."

Yes, 'premature conclusions' certainly applies.

 

[SecureGSM]

Sharpness: You aren’t really questioning the fact that Sigma Art is sharper than Canon 85 F1.4 IS wide open Are you?

CA: there quite a few images that were taken with the new Canon 85 F1.4 IS were posted here by lens owners and an excessive CA levels are so obvious that one has to be blind not to notice. There is less CA in Sigma 85 Art images. Still a fair amount as I have mentioned but not as much.

Bokeh: again, quite a few images are available that point to bokeh quality of the new Canon lens being not superb. Again, I see what the bokeh is like in Sigma 85 Art images taken wide open.

And finally Vignetting: Sigma 85 Art is known to be nearly vignetting free wide open due to its super large front element. Stopped down to 1.8 the lens is virtually vignetting free.
If you don’t believe my words, then ask Bryan of The Digital Picture or some one else who’s opinion you can trust.
In fact, Sigma 85 Art is Bryan’s favourite 85mm wide aperture prime and this is for reason.
Do you think this may be an indication of what Sigma 85 Art performance is like?

In conclusion, I would like to stress the point that Canon 85 IS is a solid performer just not as exciting as Canon 35 F1.4 II for an instance.
Speaking of which, I recently acquired slightly used Canon 35 F1.4 II and by the time I was done with initial lens optical tests, my jaw literary dropped when I looked at the results. This lens is insanely sharp and perfectly AF consistent. CA levels are virtually non existent, fast, contrasty and vibrant. Easily the best glass in my bag at the moment.

Wow I, premature conclusions...

That is why I call my point being proven and documented.

Besides the Sigma 85 Art is a (much) better glass. rendition, sharpness, bokeh, vignetting, CA and rock solid AF (centre and peripheral AF points, good and bad light confirmed).

Where is your proven and documented evidence that, compared to the Canon 85/1.4L IS, the Sigma 85A has, "...(much) better glass. rendition, sharpness, bokeh, vignetting, CA."

Yes, 'premature conclusions' certainly applies.

 

[SecureGSM]

Not trying to convince anyone. I made my decision to keep Sigma 85 Art in my bag based on sold facts and first hand experience and what images owners of the new Canon lens have made available here and other resources.
One thing I can tell you for sure: there is a lot of noise on internet. You have to be careful about what information you can trust. In case of Sigma 85 Art I was skeptical about its peripheral AF points performance in low light as I have never took a time to verify that. I alway run centre AF point test as by default.
It appears that reality is that Sigma 85 Art being a decent AF performer. Not the best but very very solid.
I totally understand that you may dislike Sigma products based on you personal experience. That’s fine. But objectively, Sigma 85 Art is a very good glass.
Canon is a sure, no risk bet. Is it an exciting glass as your Canon 35 F1.4 II though? I seriously doubt it.

I’ve read about AF issues with all Art lenses, including the 85 and 135, and all the five Art’s I had, so for me it would never ever matter what Sigma does, I will never buy one again

 

[neuroanatomist]

Sharpness: You aren’t really questioning the fact that Sigma Art is sharper than Canon 85 F1.4 IS wide open Are you?

Yes, I am. Mostly because I have not seen any testing of the 85/1.4L IS. You aren't really relying on the theoretical MTF charts published by manufacturers, are you? Those theoretical MTFs are calculated from the optical designs without any consideration for lens construction or design implementation, and different manufacturers calculate and report them differently, so they are not directly comparable.

CA: there quite a few images that were taken with the new Canon 85 F1.4 IS were posted here by lens owners and an excessive CA levels are so obvious that one has to blind to not notice. There is less CA in Sigma 85 Art images. Still a fair amount as I have mentioned but not as much.

The Sigma does handle CA well. Jury is still out on the Canon. Bear in mind that most RAW converters have lens modules to correct things like CA, and while those modules are available for the Sigma 85/1.4A, they are not yet available for the just-released Canon 85/1.4L IS. So, you're comparing images from the new Canon lens where the CA has likely not been corrected, or at least not properly/completely, vs. those from the Sigma with empirically-derived lens-specific corrections applied.

Bokeh: again, quite a few images are available that point to bokeh quality of the new Canon lens being not superb. Again, I see what the bokeh is like in Sigma 85 Art images taken wide open.

Comparing a limited number of different images is not the same as a head-to-head comparison. I should think that would be obvious.

And finally Vignetting: Sigma 85 Art is known to be nearly vignetting free wide open due to its super large front element. Stopped down to 1.8 the lens is virtually vignetting free.
If you don’t believe my words, then ask Bryan of The Digital Picture or some one else who’s opinion you can trust.

Looking at Bryan's testing, the Sigma 85/1.4A has 1.5-2 stops of corner vignetting wide open. You just stated it is, "...known to be nearly vignetting free wide open." Since I do trust Bryan, and you are stating something quite different from his findings, that means your statements are not worthy of trust. Or to put it more colloquially, you're full of crap.

In conclusion, I would like to stress the point that you are drawing completely premature conclusions, and telling some outright falsehoods. I'm not saying the Sigma 85A is a bad lens, it looks like a solid performer. I am saying that concluding anything about the performance of the Canon 85/1.4L IS, alone or relative to other lenses in the class, is not rational at this point in time. Of course, there are plenty of irrational people out there who jump to conclusions at the drop of a hat lens hood.

 

[Viggo]

I suspect the 85 IS better than the 1.2 in a lot of areas, and here’s a comparison between the 1.2 and Art at 1.4, doesn’t exactly show the Sigma as the big winner.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=1085&Camera=979&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=397&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

 

[SecureGSM]

Neuro,

In regards to vignetting levels wide open. I said nearly. See the difference?
Yes, 1.5EV and 2.0EV in the extreme corners. Stop it down to F1.8. Now what?
To your knowledge and since you trust Bryan:

What other 85mm wide aperture prime lens are you aware off that exhibits such a low level of vignetting at F1.4 or F1.8? Zeiss Otus, Milvus, Tamron, Canon 85/1.2, Nikon, Sony GM?

In regards to sharpness issue: what MTF charts are you talking about?
There are tons literary tons of images are available out there lens is on sale in Australia for much longer than in North America. Can’t you see that there is not much sharpness there wide open to call home about? If you cannot see, then wait until Bryan will put the test results up for you. I am sure it is not much time to wait now. Lensrentals will be another resource to trust when it comes to optical sharpness tests.
When their results are up please do yourself a big favour and stop calling people names it is a non brainer or is it?

And can I say this is conclusion: my 13 y.o. son knows that call someone “full of crap” is a misnomer.

 

[Viggo]

What other 85mm wide aperture prime lens are you aware off that exhibits such a low level of vignetting at F1.4 or F1.8? Zeiss Otus, Milvus, Tamron, Canon 85/1.2, Nikon, Sony GM?

Yes, the 1.2, see link above...

 

[SecureGSM]

Viggo, 0.5EV difference at the edges of the frame left and right. Look at extreme corners.
But..... this is what I was referring to Sigma being compeltly vignette free by F2.0:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=1085&Camera=979&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=397&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

If this is not vignetting free for you then i don’t know what else is.

Neuro, is this vignetting free for you to at least apologise for calling me names?

I suspect the 85 IS better than the 1.2 in a lot of areas, and here’s a comparison between the 1.2 and Art at 1.4, doesn’t exactly show the Sigma as the big winner.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=1085&Camera=979&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=397&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

 

[Viggo]

Try this:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?Lens=1085&Camera=979&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2&LensComp=397&CameraComp=9&FLI=0&API=1