Help deciding if I really need an 85mm prime

iplaysnowboards

iplaysnowboards

Active member
So my big debate right now is if I am planning on getting a 70-200mm f4 canon lens for my 7d , then would there be a need for the canon 85mm 1.8??

Obviously the prime as two huge ups on the 70-200 as it is lighter/ more compact and a much faster lens.

Other than that is there any real need for it? I would really like to hear peoples opinions.
 
It depends what you are shooting. If you are shooting stills and want the bokeh from a prime then yes. With me shooting narrative short films / drama etc I use a zoom for my close ups (portraits) mainly because I often need to reframe and I don't want to move the whole tripod, I can just change the focal length by a few mm on the zoom and I'm good to go.

Also if you are cropping your frame to a more cinematic aspect ratio you wil lfind you might be doing your close ups at 75mm, 70mm or even 65mm
 
Well right now i have a tamron 17-50 and i'll be getting the cannon 50mm 1.8 soon for sure.

And besides snowboarding I'm in school for film and am doing shorts. I'm thinking wider lenses for shorts would be more beneficial as I could always push the camera in if i needed to be closer.
 
Hmmm…

If you have the 17-50 range, and you're adding the 70-200 range, I don't think I'd get the 85mm f1.8. It's a nice lens, but you're not gaining much in the way of low-light performance there.

I'd look at the Sigma 30mm f1.4, if you want a great, fast, all-purpose lens for the 7D. If you really want wide, the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 is a great lens, but I'd go with a faster prime lens like the Sigma.

You could also explore your options in terms of older Nikon manual focus primes and adapters (Nikon to EOS-mount). Plenty of possibilities, but like I said, I'd go with a good, fast prime lens of medium focal length (30mm or 35mm).

--SM
 
Stephen Mick said:
Hmmm…

If you have the 17-50 range, and you're adding the 70-200 range, I don't think I'd get the 85mm f1.8. It's a nice lens, but you're not gaining much in the way of low-light performance there.

I'd look at the Sigma 30mm f1.4, if you want a great, fast, all-purpose lens for the 7D. If you really want wide, the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 is a great lens, but I'd go with a faster prime lens like the Sigma.

You could also explore your options in terms of older Nikon manual focus primes and adapters (Nikon to EOS-mount). Plenty of possibilities, but like I said, I'd go with a good, fast prime lens of medium focal length (30mm or 35mm).

--SM
Click to expand...

Definitely was eying the sigma 30mm heavily as it had awesome reviews, super fast, and would be a about the same as a standard 50mm full frame. The tokina was also the other.

Ideally if I had the money now I would add the 11-16mm Tokina, 30mm sigma, getting the 50mm 1.8 canon, and the 70-200mm f4 canon. That seems to me like it covers my focal ranges pretty nicely?
 
If you're considering the Canon 70-200 f/4, I highly encourage you to consider the IS version. In addition to having IS, it is sharper. If you buy non-IS now, there is a good chance you'll upgrade within a year.

That being said, once you've been bitten by the L bug, you may find, as I did, that lenses such as the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 just don't cut the muster. The Tokina, however, is a fine, very sharp lens. Outside, it works great with a CPL. I only wish they made a manual version for a couple hundred less. Try to be certain that that focal length (at $600) will really be of use to you.
 
I bought the Samyang 85mm f1.4 lens. It's awesome for video work. Great focus and filmic image. Recommended.
 
Jordan_S said:
If you're considering the Canon 70-200 f/4, I highly encourage you to consider the IS version. In addition to having IS, it is sharper. If you buy non-IS now, there is a good chance you'll upgrade within a year.

That being said, once you've been bitten by the L bug, you may find, as I did, that lenses such as the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 just don't cut the muster. The Tokina, however, is a fine, very sharp lens. Outside, it works great with a CPL. I only wish they made a manual version for a couple hundred less. Try to be certain that that focal length (at $600) will really be of use to you.
Click to expand...

I would love to have the IS version of the 70-200 but I really don't think I can afford it. And besides I would only be shooting with it on a tripod...so i figured the money I saved going non-IS could go towards a better tripod.
 
Just last night I used a 70-210 f3.5, which worked really well, but at f/3.5 I couldn't throw the background out of focus as much as I wanted to. I put on a Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 and shot between 1.4 and 2.0 and was able to get the look I wanted. Yes, it takes more work to physically move around with a prime, but when you have the time and ability to move, it can be well worth it for certain situations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top