85mm: Canon VS Zeiss

[Dolce Moda]

I am looking at getting a new 85mm lens.

How does the Canon EF 85mm/1.8 lens compare to the Zeiss 85mm/1.4?
Is it worth the extra $600?

The 85mm/1.2L is outside my budget.

 

[bensonga]

I haven't tried the Zeiss 85mm, but I compared my Canon 85/f1.8 with a Leica 90/f2.8 ROM and truthfully, it was hard to see much difference between them (to my eyes). Shot the same film, same subject/day/time etc using a Canon EOS 1V and Leica R8 at various apertures. I was surprised at how good the Canon lens did when put up against Leica glass. Bottom line...I think the Canon 85/1.8 is an excellent performer, especially for the money.

Gary

 

[Jonas]

If you are looking for the extra half stop of speed and really want an 85/1.4 the Samyang (Vivitar, Bowen and many other names) is an interesting option. It beats, barely, the Zeiss wide open while the traditional designs are a bit better at the borders well stopped down. That's a nice budget surprise.

 

[wuffstuff]

I purchased a 85 1.2L yesterday from Park Cameras in England. I've been out today and brought this photo back. I can't believe a Zeiss would be any sharper or draw any better.

 

[Jonas]

I purchased a 85 1.2L (...) I can't believe a Zeiss would be any sharper or draw any better.

Hi wuffstuff,

What aperture did you use for that image?

@anyone,

One has to say the discussions at this Canon board are very lively, no...
I guess the OP will be back in a week...

Cheers, /Jonas

 

[Jack]

I think perhaps the way the question was phrased, anybody that has not shot both lenses will not respond -- which of course limits any "lively" discussion

I have not shot the Zeiss 85, but will respond thusly:

I have owned the Canon 85/1.8, Leica 80/1.4 R lens (with Canon adapter) and the Canon 85/1.2. My fist 85 was the Canon 1.8. It was very good, but then I got a 1.2 ver I. Wow! 1.2 is really different than f1.8! Then I got the Leica 80 Lux. Gorgeous rendering, very similar to the Canon 1.2 at f1.4, weighed half as much, cost a little less, and even manual focusing was not all that bad. So I sold the 1.2.... Then I got tired of manually focusing all the time, and re-purchased the 1.8 lens -- and lived happily with that until the faster focusing ver II 85/1.2 came out. Now I have the 1.2 ver II and love it.

ALL of the above is a long way to say, if you don't mind manually focusing and no exif, then the Zeiss is certainly worth a look -- and so is the Leica R lens. However, if you want AF, then IMO the 85/1.8 is a bargain. If you plan on using the lens a LOT and want the shallow DoF, then break open the piggy bank and spring for the 85/1.2 -- after all, it really isn't all that much more than the Zeiss...

Okay, my .02 on that ,

 

[Corlan F.]

FWIW - on the Zeiss front there's a strong disparity between the older 85mm versions and the recent Planar ZE/ZF. The latter is sharper and provides increased micro contrast, saturated color rendition, when the former had a softer general feel, with either " a more natural palette" or "somehow washed-out colors" depending on one's tastes.

(results from both Nikon and 5DII bodies)

 

[wuffstuff]

Jonas

Aperture is 1.2. Focus is on the centre flower.

 

[Jonas]

(...)
Aperture is 1.2.

Thank you. I like the rendering.

 

[Dale Allyn]

My experiences are the same as Jack has posted above re. the Canon branded 85s. I have owned both the f/1.2 L (v1) and the f/1.8. I owned them at the same time and finally sold the f/1.8 because I seldom used it after buying the f/1.2 L. However, if one is shooting indoor sports (i.e. basketball, volleyball, etc.) the 85 f/1.2 may focus too slow for one's needs, and therefore the f/1.8 which focuses very fast might be a better choice. (Even the f/1.2 mk II doesn't posses super-fast AF, though is faster than the mk I.)

I have not upgraded my 85 f/1.2 to the mk II version because I'm not bothered by the slower focusing for my needs. If the OP's budget doesn't allow for the 85mm f/1.2 mk II, then one could consider a used mk I version for much less money IF the slower AF isn't an issue.

 

[rayman68]

My 1.8 is on my camera 80% of the time. Love it! I'd love to try the zeiss, i'm just worried it may be too sharp.

 

[Jack]

The other thing to consider is AF is worth something IMHO

 

[spotmeter]

I am looking at getting a new 85mm lens.

How does the Canon EF 85mm/1.8 lens compare to the Zeiss 85mm/1.4?
Is it worth the extra $600?

The 85mm/1.2L is outside my budget.

I tested my Canon 85mm 1.8 against the Zeiss 1.4 and was surprised to see that the Canon resolved better at each f-stop. Surprised because all my wide angle primes are Zeiss ZF and I have been very happy with them.

I bought the 1.8 several years ago after seeing tests that showed its resolution was comparable to the 1.2

 

[Jack]

FWIW, the Canon 85/1.8 USM and 100/2 USM generally perform like L lenses even though they don't carry that label -- both are really great bargains in the Canon lens line.

 

[Henry Goh]

Agree with Jack about the Canon 85mm f/1.8 lens. It is a very good lens at a very reasonable price. I also have the 85mm f/1.2 L II and as much as I love the brightness and f/1.2, I find it heavy to handle. I also own the Nikon 85mm f/1.4. I find the Nikon has better micro-contrast but prefer the bokeh from the Canon lenses.

Sometimes I read about the 85mm f/1.2 L II being unsharp wide open. If you have a newer Canon body that has microadjustment of the AF, you should really do a very careful focus calibration because you'll find wide open DOF to be very very shallow and unforgiving.

 

[johnastovall]

The Canon 85/1.8 is the best non-L Canon makes but my 85/1.2 MkII from my cold dead hands. Until I shot it the all time sharpest wide open 85 I had ever shot was the Contarex 85/2.0 Sonnar (were there a way to use it on my 5D). Have prints from that 85 Sonnar that still take my breath away, 35 years later.

 

[RichardL]

The Canon 85/1.8 is the best non-L Canon makes but my 85/1.2 MkII from my cold dead hands. Until I shot it the all time sharpest wide open 85 I had ever shot was the Contarex 85/2.0 Sonnar (were there a way to use it on my 5D). Have prints from that 85 Sonnar that still take my breath away, 35 years later.

I would beg to differ. I believe the 100m f2.0 is, by a small margin over the 85 1.8, the best non-L lens Canon makes. Both the 85 1.8 and the 100 f2 are very similar in almost all aspects, but the longer lens wins for me:thumbup:

 

[dseelig]

I have had every canon 85 1.2 since the manual days great lens . I never shot the 85 f1.8 but when I tried the 100 f2 I thought it was a dog wide open that is . I shot concerts for my living when I tried it at f2 the 100 had no 3d effect I got from the 85 1.2 . Maybe I had a bad copy.

 

[Felipe]

i had the ze85 and the canon 85/1.8 at the same time (i also have the 90 TSE), sold the ze85 to finance a Sinar Hy6 camera system. Both 85mm are sharp, with the ze better at infinity, the ze also has nicer color and micro contrast but it had a lot more color aberrations (CA and purple fringing) wide open! that killed it for me. the canon has AF and is much smaller and lighter and i like rubber focussing rings (the ZE is all metall and wasn´t too comfortable to focus for longer periods).

Felpipe

 

[Andrew Gough]

Have you considered the Contax N 85mm F/1.4, after conversion to EOS, it is a spectacular portrait lens...