Dustin Abbott on the topic of lenses, do you have any thoughts on the Irix series of lenses - have you tried them. FYI, your reviews and opinions helped me pull the trigger on the Canon 5D Mk4 during recent BlackFriday deals online.
I shot a nice dress with a lot of clear stones, I rented a classic zeiss planar for wide angle, and used my sigma 85mm for portraits. The glitter was looking all rainbow effect with the sigma and the zeiss shot were cold perfect. The client asked me to un-correct the fringes I removed with photoshop on the sigma shots, because he thought that those colour fringes looked fun and warm and joyful. This was also evident in the earrings shots, some red outlines made golden things look more goldent, and warmer. So yes it is an optical defect, but it can be desirable in some cases. The snow shot of the video really showed the huge superiority of the zeiss, the snow looked a lot more puffy, you could even see the shape of each flake.
You put a lot of effort into these reviews Dustin, congratulations. The Canon really surprised me here with it's creamier background and smoother highlight circles. On that metric alone I think it enters the big league.
DA is the Zeiss of reviewers. "A little bit sharper there", "a little bit more special here", "a whole more CS (common sense) there" :p Once again, thanks for the great review !
The comparison on 15'55" stunned me! That points out the importance of the IS! I borrowed the canon lens from my friend to use for a while, and I found it a nice portrait lens with beautiful bokeh. Though the CA was quite an issue on the canon one, the real use of this lens seemed to be acceptable to me. In my opinion, I think the canon 85mm f1.4 is would be a game changer of the 85mm lines, and as you said in the other video, there would be no true competitor due to the IS in such a fast lens. Considering the price of the lens in Asian market, I think it was quite a bargain for those who shoot portraits and wedding photography.
I was doing a fairly narrow series of tests. A lot of what I do as a reviewer (that takes time) is just use a lens to get a feel for real world strengths and weaknesses. Since I have spent a lot of time with both of these lenses in the past, I already knew what to look for.
Thank you Dustin for this review. I mainly shoot weddings and events and was looking for a fast lens for low light a great at blurring the background. I was undecided on the Canon 85mm f1.4 L IS and the Zeiss Milvus 50 or 85mm. Your closing comments and recommendations about using manual focus and where it’s suited was a massive help. While the Zeiss maybe in my kit one day, the Canon 85mm f1.4 L IS is what would suit my needs for work. In my opinion your reviews are in there own league. I’ve not found anyone as thorough, technical, and most importantly you advice is based from practical experience. Thank you so much, Chris
@@DustinAbbottTWI Do you have any tips for manual focus with the Zeiss lenses? I've just been practicing lots and using the focus yellow dot and beep and this seem to work most of the time. I have the Canon EOS 5D mkIV. Thanks.
The best technique seems to be to focus beyond the subject, get the point active, and focus back slowly until you get confirmation. Click the shutter the moment you hear the confirmation beep.
Thank you for the review Dustin! I am a wedding photographer and I owned both of the Canon 85mm F/1.4L IS and Tamron 85mm F/1.8 for my work and I am currently using both of them. When I compare both of these lens, I found that the Canon lens brings very nice warm & pink skin tones than the Tamron does. I always find the Tamron has a little bit green/yellowish color in skin tones. And also the Canon has milder micro-contrast as you mentioned in this video which I think is perfect for shooting portrait compared to sharp and high contrast lens like Sigma art or Otus. Maybe you can do some test on skin tone comparison as 85mm is commonly used in shooting portrait. Low contrast, good skin tones & smooth bokeh is what I need when shooting portrait pictures. One more thing I discovered is that the Canon 85mm F/1.4L IS AF accuracy is not very consistent especially in big aperture. The lens keep searching the right point of focus back and fore when you shoot a few shots at the same spot using the centre single spot AF. Surprisingly, the AF systems is much more accurate & consistent in the Tamron 85mm. (I have sent my lens to Canon CS for checking for AF accuracy and tried the other 85mm in their showroom also gives the same result). What a shame to Canon. I also found that some of the test shots in this video are not focusing on the same plane as the Otus. (shots in 06:23 & 11:23) It will greatly increase the CA to the Canon in the out of focus area and bring softer bokeh as the Otus did. So I think to be fair, you may need to compare both lens using Liveview + MF to ensure they are focusing on the same plane. Sorry for the long comments. Great appreciate to you works.
I too have found the Tamron to be a surprisingly strong lens for focus accuracy, too. As far as the skin tones and facial rendering, I do think that you are right - I too prefer the Canon. The focus in all tests between the Canon and Otus are 10x Live View Manual Focus and are all within a fraction of each other - certainly not enough to negatively impact defocused regions.
I feel like this is a lens Canon has designed to shoot faces. It seems geared to be used wide open primarily, with less improvement stopped down than lenses usually show. The MTF shows it resolves well at 30lpmm, but not at 10lpmm - it will resolve features but not pores, which is ideal for shooting a face. Just a thought I had when I first saw the MTF charts. Still waiting for my copy of this lens to arrive to see if this bears out.
Dustin, another excellent review. Thank you. I'm retired engineer, serious amateur for many years (1Dx mk2, Canon Pro-1000). The Otus for me would be pure pretension. Don't need it and not crazy about the onion ring bokeh. My decision now is between the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS and Zeiss Milvus 135mm f/2.
I'm considering buying the Otus 85. I use Nikon, and Nikons own 85mm f/1.4G is a mess when it comes to CA. It's ridiculous. And I can get a good price on the Otus second hand - almost half of the price from new.
When using neat image or newer algorithm to correct for noise, I always shoot with higher ISO that I would normally, because noise is like vignette : its so easy and good result to correct in post processing. It's always good to have shorter exposure, like underexpose a little to have those perfect clouds. Each photographer should have his own and different priorities.
IS is really game changing feature. I can see that on the Tamron G2 27-70 : a lot less post-processing work on the images coming out of it, because it is sharper out of camera. For my kind of photography, this makes a strong case for the Canon with IS. (or use a sony camera with in-body IS if one day I change system) even knowing all the problems, longitudinal CA being the most problematic.
"Onion Bokeh"! I need a t-shirt with that! Great review and I appreciate your balanced and logical approach when reviewing products. I just got the Canon 85mm IS and I'm loving it precisely for the reasons you mentioned. By the way, has anyone told you that you kinda look like Steve Carell?! That's a compliment! Cheers!
In the last comparison I was sure that the right picture was better, had more contrast. I was surprised you said different, but then again felt confirmed, when I saw the solution.
Matt Kim He did make a comparison between Canon 85 with Tamron 85 vc. Check it out. Dustin has become one of my trusted reviewers because of his approach.
Ok, there is optical perfectionism; but there is also real life.... The thing that prevented me to try another 85mm to replace my old Sigma HSM is autofocus. OK I see a lot of problems in my images like fringing, front or back focus, general lack of sharpness (since it took a bump on the front element); but when I was tempted to try the Samyang I did another photoshoot with the Sigma and noticed that with subject moving and with the obligation to deliver on that work I could not work without autofocus. Even if for some static work I prefer to manually focus (on a tripod) and always get better shots in manualn if I have to choose a lens, first I look only at autofocusing lenses, and then I choose into what is available and other details like... price. And I don't want to have a lot of lenses.
Outstanding review Dustin. No doubt about it, the Zeiss is simply perfect optically but those bokeh circles having onion rings is somewhat offputting. The importance of stabilization cannot be understated. Both my Tamron 24 - 70 f2.8 G2 and 15 - 30 f2.8 feature IS,. Given I handhold the majority of my shots ( often in poor light ) I'd take these lenses over technically sharper alternatives without IS.
Do you think you have a bad copy of the Canon 85 f1.4? I really wanted to buy a copy of that lens but after seeing you reviews now I'm stuck deciding between the sigma 85 1/4 arts or the Tamron 85 1 8.
I don’t think it is a bad copy (I see no issues with it), but I do think there are slightly sharper copies. My results are not really off what I’ve seen fro other photographers, and they not actually bad results!
Please compare the new Canon to the Sigma 85 and the Canon 1.2. Tamron...Zeis...most people will be debating on the former options, not the ones you've compared already. Love your content. Keep it up.
I'm looking for 85mm for canon to do street photography, and this sealed my decision. The IS matters more than sharpness. While handhold on the street the Canon will net in better sharpness and better bokeh in the end. Thanks so much!
Mr. Abbott, will you now reconsider the new RF 85F1.2 “an OTUS with AF”? I’m curious to see if it is so. Can you do a head2head match between the OTUS vs RF?
I would say that it is very close to that. I can't promise any kind of head to head, as I've got a huge demand for reviews that outstrips my time to give.
Hi Dustin, you didn't mention if you used Canons' DPP, ie, Canons' referred software tool for CA correction ? Only Canons' enginners know how to get the best from Canons lenses. Lightrooms' lens correction just doesn't cut it at all. To get the best out of a Canon lens you have to use Canons DPP raw converter tool. Yes, it is an extra step for some, but 100% worth it, imo, and I always use DPP as DPP will gives back micro contrast with the associated illusion of greater resolution. I suspect the Canon lens will match the Zeiss lens in microcontrast and apparent detail, once Canons DPP tool has been correctly used on the canon Lens.
I disagree on your last point. You cannot correct that LoCA without destruction to the image - no matter what software you use. No 85mm lens produces as much contrast as the Otus...because you don’t have to correct any aberrations.
Hi Dustin, now that Zeiss has discounted Milvus 85mm f1.4 for 2 weeks they put it at the exact same price as Canon 85mm f1.4 L IS USM. May I ask for your opinion which of them would you recommend? I shoot portraits - outdoor and indoor, mainly natural light, static poses as well as during model acting a scene. Thanks, appreciating all your effort and excellent videos. Peter
If you have time to focus manually, I love the results the Milvus produces (very special). The Canon is the more practical lens for many shooters, though.
Hello Dustin, may I ask: on what screen do you review these pictures? i have the feeling that my screen might not be as accurate as yours in the color representation ( i guess you have an Eizo or something along that range), to where i sometimes don't see differences as prominent as you might describe them. Thanks for such informative content throughout your channel!
Another very helpful comparison. Can we download the RAW files from this video - would be interesting to see what Lightroom does with the CA. Also I saw an interesting VLOG on another channel where a Canon 24mm T/S lens was used. This is the first time I have seen a T/S lens been used and thought the results looked very good - so it would be interesting if you can get your hands on one to review it.
Great review Dustin. As per previous comment exchanges I have decided to go for the Zeiss (predominantly a tripod shooter for images that I would use this lens for), if I want IS I will use my 70-200 f2.8 II, after all I would never shoot lower than f2.8 even at an event because I would find the focus zone far too narrow. I have also decided that I will go for the Otus rather than the Milvus as I believe I would regret not doing so. However I have heard rumours of a major exposure problem on the 1DX mark ii, is this something which you know anything about?
interesting and good work. i ve the 85 1.2 and i m considering to switch for for this new 1.4 IS, i miss IS with the 1.2, i ve lot of blurry shot, even at 1/200
Hi Dustin! I really like your videos. I was rewatching this video and came up wondering where would you place the milvus 85 compared to these 2 lenses? pros and cons?
The Milvus is actually sharper on the edges than the Otus, but is a little less sharp in the middle and has (very) slightly more CA. Nicer bokeh, though. It’s optically very strong.
If you look back at Dustin's previous reviews of the 85mm Milvus you will get most of your information from them, but having owned the 85mm Milvus I can safely say that it is slightly softer than the Otus under f2.8 but sharper than the Canon, it has very mild green fringing in out of focus areas compared the Otus, but way less than the Canon, Bokeh is extremely clear with no 'Onion rings' which again is in between the Otus and the Canon. As Dustin has previously mentioned in other reviews, the Milvus is more similar than dissimilar to the Otus and has more vignetting also, hope this helps answer your questions.
Thanks! Yes, i've watched almost every video of Dustin, I remember the Milvus line review. But just curious to watch some side-to-side comparison between these 3 wonderful lenses, and I think the one who can do it with this quality is Dustin.
Cesar Harretche Yes I know what you mean and if Dustin had all the lenses in question available I’m sure you’d see a mass comparison, but I’m sure availability and time are the restricting factors for him unfortunately
Is this the same Canon 84 1.4 IS you tested before and found faulty, or did you get another copy to put it up against the Otis? Another interesting comparison would be the Tokina 85 1.8 vs. the Otis, too. You own that lens, maybe you could compare it as well?
I’m still using the same copy, which I didn’t really find to be faulty. Are you referring to the Tamron vs Otus here? That’s not really what I’m working on - I’m more reviewing the Canon
Hi, Dustin! Thank you for your fantastic reviews (that almost invariably put me into the Buridan's ass situation). Is there any chance you could provide some tutorials/tips on using manual focus lenses on DSLR bodies (Canon 5D M4 specifically).
Unfortunately the 5DIV (and similar bodies) are not nearly as friendly to MF lenses as they could be. I vastly prefer using MF glass on Sony due to getting the image stabilization and all of the focus aids. Hopefully Canon does full frame mirrorless right and also has a good platform for MF. Focus confirmation works best if you focus past the subject, hold the shutter down halfway, and then focus back towards the subject. As soon as you get the "beep" of focus confirmation, take the photo. The most reliable results come from using Live View and focus magnify, though.
The biggest problem with going back to older lenses is that I have a schedule that is filled for several months ahead of me already...and there is new stuff coming out all the time. I only have so much time!
images taken with Zeiss lenses have this quality in their images, which is '' I'm coming to get You '', yes, your subject is always isolated even if you're shooting closed down, no need for bokeh when the lens renders an image that separates every element in the image from its environment, not smash them all in a 2D rendering. that's one thing that once You see it, You'll always look for it and won't be satisfied with anything else because now You know...
Very interesting comparison, the Zeiss is very impressing but for most situations i actually think that the Canon will bring home the best results....😇
I was expecting a comparison between portraits taken by canon 85 mm versus the Zeiss variant since 85 mm is a focal length for portraiture. Sorry this review has not helped me
Gary nailed it. Even f/2.8 at macro distances is physically impossible (the effective aperture even on an f/2.8 lens is smaller than f/2.8 at macro distances)
Honestly the Zeiss Otus 85mm is a lens Canon can easily equal if not surpass unrestrained by price, limited by AF, and of course, size. But in a realistic world use, how many out of focus pictures occur with a very fast lens with no AF? I don't care how good your eyes are, how fast your reflexes are, nothing beats a work class AF system compared to human focus.
No argument on your latter point, though I’m not so sure on your former point. If it were so easy to do, then Zeiss wouldn’t be in business or able to charge a premium for their lenses.
You really don't believe Canon given a $4500 selling point, no restrictions on size, and AF, couldn't come up with a lens that matches or exceed the Otus? BTW, I have owned dozens of Zeiss lenses on my Hasselblad 500, 900, and Contax 645 cameras. Great lenses, no doubt. But you make it seem like they have some magic sauce that Canon, Leica, and Nikon, can not match or exceed.
I don't believe that they could, actually. The Otus series is special for a reason, and I don't think building such a lens is just as easy as spending money.
The abberation test is just insane. I mean the Otus really has no abberation at all. I would love to own the Otus 28mm for landscapes, but the pricetag is a bit out of my league. I got the Milvus 135mm APO second hand (and really cheap) because I got really lucky and it is also quite impressive, but this Otus seems to be even better? Do you know if it is also an apochromatic lense?
Is CA a problem in de digital world? Did you use lens corrections on? In most cases CA is easy to correct in a RAW converter, but yes it costs time...........
when you correct it, you will see a reduction in the quality (resolutions / edge contrast). You can see it very easily when the CA is huge. But my most concerne about CA is when you have a very colorfull images, the CA correction most of the time mess the colors.
There are minimal 5 different techniques to remove CA. I also use DxO-elite with sometimes more or less succes. Yes it cost time en it needs skill to improve an image with CA, but it can be done, I think.
At first the Zeiss really seemed like THE lens to get if you were shooting commercially for jewelry, high end watches, and other small luxury items -but that rather extreme "onion" bokeh, in my opinion, really ruines it for those markets. Now I'm not really sure who the customer for this lens is. (By the way, I'm still very happy with my Canon 85mm f1.8. :) )
Remember that onion bokeh only exhibits itself in a few situations. In most situations the bokeh rendering for the lens is magnificent. I would still happily own the Otus, myself.
Randy, the Otus only shows 'Onion bokeh' with direct pinpoint back lighting, if for instance the pinpoint lighting was slightly diffused then the onion effect disappears and rendering is beautiful!
It’s impressive what Zeiss did with this lens, but the real world benefits are minor. More a lens for wine sniffers than a practical tool for professionals.
It's nice to play and measure it with a microscope, but the difference is so minor that is will not affect 99.99% of shooters and 100% of clients :) And for 3 times less money you get IS, autofocus and less weight, much more important and usable things than less contrast which can be done in post in one second, and aberrations which can be removed in one second, so in real world Canon wins hans down. And btw, there is a front focus on Canon in almost all of the shots..
There is no front focus. They are 10x Live View manually focused. As I said, for many people the Canon is the more practical lens. The Otus is a specialist lens, but it is also very special.
Ok, but the focus is not in the same place, looks like Canon has shallower DOF which is impossible, so that means your focus is in front more than Zeiss in most of the examples, or maybe the camera is not in the exact same spot. Some people will think it is that soft, but it is really not when you look at the brick wall..
Gush.... Except Canon's soap bubble bokeh vs Zeiss' onion cut bokeh, Zeiss is SOOOOO MUCH better! I say, when money not an issue, choice is very obviously clear.
It’s all about perspective. This is the reason why people are sometimes surprised by my results, as reviewers sometimes choose one attribute of lens performance and really push it...leading people to believe that the lens or camera is “better’ based on that one attribute.
Great review Dustin, but the Zeiss cost 4,500.00 compared to Canon at 1,500.00.....I do not see any real world Zeiss bettering the Canon for that kind of money.......Does the Zeiss come with a microscope?....Thats a joke!
It is a phenomenon you will find in nearly any good or service. The last percents towards perfection start to cost increasingly more, often going exponential with their costs. In some way this has to be like that, otherwise why would anybody not buy perfection, if it just costed 5% more than 95% perfection? So calling this a joke is uncalled for, I'd say it is somewhat naive to expect something different, especially if you consider that you should have encountered this already in any other product/service. At least Zeiss actually delievers. If you watched the other reviews of the 85L, you wonder why this lens has to be 1500$ at all. If anything, it is the Canon that is overpriced.
English must not be your first language because you totally missed my point......Oh, i am sorry, i authored the language but you know better.....Smile.....
Yes, and i am one of them......."More assumptions".......Smile........You guys should use a competent translator before you embarrass yourselves in another language......my inner feelings tells me same guy different screen name.....smile
Mike, first of all I didn’t conclude that the Tamron “trashes” the 85L IS. Secondly, as I said at the beginning of this review, I was responding to people making false claims about what an Otus lens was actually like. This review was really about showing how special (and why) an Otus lens is, and also a little about showing how it is impractical for most shooters.
hahahahaha who ever said that this Canon is close to the mighty Otus 85 is either acting stupid or is really stupid, they have no clue what they talking about or what are they comparing between. I can say with confidence that there is not a single lens that can beat Otus 85 1.4, and when it comes to image quality it is simply beyond perfection.
@@DustinAbbottTWI - Yes, some like to boast of what they have. There are many elements in IQ that different would like. So, many horrible pictures are loved by many horrible people. They suit them. So, in many cases it is not what lens is best, but instead, what IQ delights what kind of souls. Thanks for your review. The data is important for comparison. I would use the data you provide to select tools for particular purpose and expression. Selling pictures is very much a matter of selling to certain taste. Of course some have terrible taste who love terrible pictures.
