Find a bargain lens or camera at MPB: bit.ly/3ULU9yL The EF 85 f1.2L II bokeh-monster costs the same used at MPB as a new RF 85 f2, so why not treat yourself? See how they compare! 00:00 - Introduction and pricing 02:23 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 size, weight and build 03:51 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 controls 04:42 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 stabilization 06:19 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 focusing 08:35 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 focus breathing 09:34 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 landscape quality 11:54 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 portrait quality 14:01 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 bokeh quality 14:42 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 macro close-up quality 15:21 - EF 85 f1.2L vs RF 85 f2 verdict
I use the RF 85mm f/2 all the time for macro b-roll and product images, and it’s plenty sharp and magnified for my needs. The EF is likely a stronger portrait lens, but macro shooting with the RF is quite good for the price (even though it isn’t 1:1 - it’s close enough for me).
I use the f/2 also. It is very useful and much more usable on aperture than the EF 85 1.8, which I "had to" used with f/3.5 or more. I did 3 sample pictures and immediately sold the EF 85 1.8... And I like the macro too and sold my EF 100 L also. I take photos of butterflys or flowers, for this is 1:2 magnification good enough. I like these comparison-videos. Gordon always do a great job to compare with existing lenses, also the "new" 100-500 to the existing 100-400 ones etc. It helps a lot for buying decisions.
@@davidc6417 thanks! To further confirm your choice, you might enjoy my earlier RF 85 f2 video where I compared it against my old EF 85 1.8 which didn't do very well.
I own both 85mm 1.2L II EF and 85mm 1.2 RF and I have to say the difference is noticeable. Sharpness and chromatic aberration is very much improved on the RF version. Ultimately, I use the EF version at f1.8 and above but the RF at 1.2 without issues. But I agree I would buy the EF instead of the RF f2 lens.
I've tested the RF 1.2 - in my original RF 85 f2 review - and you're right, it is amazing, but that one is the best part of 3k now, so quite a different proposition!
Used on an R5 or equivalent focusing body, how is the tracking of the EF ii lens? I’d have preferred to see tracking of the face in the video since the re-focus speed was already demonstrated with the bottles.
@@stephennowlan2637 I use these lenses on the R6, tracking is very good on both. The newer RF one has about 2x faster AF speed so it has less problems to keep up with moving subjects but the older one is also quite good, especially for portraits where the subject is not moving very much. I have took the RF to multiple soccer games and it was extremely good in tracking sports action...
If I was primarily a portrait shooter, I might consider the EF 85 f1.2, but as portraiture isn't my main thing, I opted for a new (Canon refurbished) RF85 f/2 with it's IS and macro capabilities, not top mention the warranty. I hike a lot, so I appreciate the much lighter weight and smaller size of the RF lens. I also like that it has macro capability (albeit not 1:1) and thus a much closer minimum focus distance. I'm not saying the EF version isn't a good lens, it's a great lens. But for me the trade off of giving up a bit of background blur for a much lighter, native mount lens was worth it. In the future, who knows, I might buy a used EF 85 1.2 but still keep the 85mm for easy carry but pull out the "big gun" in situations that need it.
I've got a 85 f1.2 II, and I'll never sell it. So unique at 1.2 for portraiture. It has never focused better (it's achilles heel on DSLR's off centre with a mirror box) now we have mirrorless, just stunning on the R5/6.
Interesting. This is what I always do when a new lens comes out. Compare it to a used better one. Considering the L is not internal focus, isn't weather sealed, is a prime, and isn't much sharper than a USM f1.4 50mm, I find the used price STILL ridiculous for what it is. and a 50mm on an R7 is roughly 85mm with good pixel density. I never found these lenses worth the outlay. I bought 2 L lenses that are zooms for £300 each. 24-105 f4 and 17-35mm f2.8. And they are in excellent condition. It's always hit and miss though and I've sent plenty of lenses back with defects that weren't mentioned.
Fantastic vid and comparisons. I have been following you Gordon, since the Canon 40D days, and still you deliver great thoughtful/balanced content. Thanks!
As always Gordon an amazing video! I like the subject matter. I won a 85mm f1.2L II on eBay back in 2019 for $1050 CAD which is probably around 700 quid. It blew my mind. So many people complain about the slow autofocus and such but its really a portrait lens and a lens you use on an Action figure to blow out the rest of the table. Its an amazing lens and I miss it.
I used the EF 85/1.2 with R6 for a couple of years. Great lens, but the weight balance in the hand is terrible. Sold it and bought RF 85/2. Handling is perfect now. But I miss the micro contrast of L series. Well well, will probably sell this one too. So an RF 85/1.4 might be the perfect compromise when this time comes!
Since switching to mirrorless Canon I've collected quite a few of the beloved old EF L lenses. 20-35mm 2.8L, 50mm 1.2L, 85mm 1.2L II, 135 2L, 100-300 5.6L, 80-200 2.8L and even an nFD 80-200 4L. Wait for nice offerings at MPB, ebay or even your local dealer.
@@jordanamorasin1840 just received the 80-200 today from Japan, absolute mint condition :-) It's so nice how many people have kept their used gear in top notch condition over the years.
It's awesome how much of that amazing glass is getting more and more affordable, now that more people are switching from EF to native RF lenses. The best time to pick up some great oldies...
Interesting I don't have a use for a 1.2 lens, today's cameras has great iso capabilities so 1.8 or in this case 2.0 works great for me! Keep up the good work!
I always suspect digital enhancement on RF lenses. When comparing the corners, it might be interesting to see the result from DPP with lens compensation.
I own the RF 85mm f2 and it’s an amazing lens for its size / weight which I’m happy to carry around with me on a walk. I’m getting some phenomenal shots with it on my R8. It pairs so well with the other RF macro lenses - 24mm & 35mm 1.8. It’s really sharp and that focal length is perfect for portraits.
Great videos as always but I notice lots of RU-vidrs are promoting the used market through keh mpb etc. I think the videos are going where the money is-the used market. Given the state of the world the camera fans are turning to used cheaper items vs the outrageously expensive new mirrorless stuff.
Love my EF 85, but this comparison really highlights the portability/AF speed/IS improvements. Been plenty of times the EF has been slow to commit to focus during dimly lit events, which can be frustrating. The RF would be much more of a pleasure to balance/mount on gimbal too. You’ve got me thinking now sir! 🙃 as always, appreciate the informative content ✅👍
Another awesome video from you. I think you’re the first one to compare these 2 lenses side by side. Definitely, each has its pros and cons. If I had this choice before, I would have chosen the EF 1.2. Thanks for this video
I shoot Canon and Sony with the R7 and A7iv. I really love the Sony 85mm 1.8 for its light weight, silent fast focusing, image quality, soft backgrounds and it's feel and balance on the camera. It's just such a joy to shoot with and I wouldn't want a larger, heavier,more expensive, and wider version.
I’ve had the ef 85mm canon and sigma art for my R5. Both have a front focusing issue. Focusing on the tip of the nose frequently, when targeting the eyes :(
I only do indoor or daytime portraits for my business's IG for work, and; I take photos of my WH40k miniatures for leisure. F2 is large enough for me and I would not trade away the Macro for bigger aperture. The RF 85 definitely is perfect for me. Great affordable lens. (I am not a photographer and, TBH, I sometimes would get parts of my subject out of focus with aperture larger than 1.8 with most lenses. I guess I'm having more fun riding a donkey than a stallion with my skill level. 😂)
@@cameralabs Nope, didn't know him before. Just watched a few clips over there. He's really great. Although I only paint WH40k, for which I don't think he creates content, he displays a very wide and solid range of skills to learn from. Instant sub.
I did the same with Minolta Gold series lenses, I bought the spiciest of the bunch (35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4, 80-200 f2.8) so that in a future i can couple them to the Sony mount converter adaptor. These lenses all ranged around 300 euro (that's like a fourth of the price when they came out) but the customs from Japan to Spain costed me 150 bucks each At least i'm very proud that all my lenses are Gold (Sony G/ Minolta G and tamron SP) and they all range from 2.8 (except the 600mm 6.3) 72+mm lens gauges are so satisfying to stick your eye into. I love spending a whole minute peeping the diaphragm blades of these thingies. Great video!
@@cameralabs Lol. I think. I did try the RF 85 1.2 (both versions), but I found it too critically sharp for my use which is primarily portraits at this FL. I started doing all kinds of skin work in post that I never did with the EF version which didn’t make a whole lot of sense. Not to say that the RF versions aren’t brilliant lenses, however.
I wish I'd bought the RF 85/f2 instead of the RF 100/f2.8L. I don't know how I overlooked it. Or, saved and put the money toward the RF 85/1.2. The EF 85/1.2 isn't my cup of tea... With an adapter on an R8, it's just doesn't feel good to use; I feel clumsy with it. The EF looks a little too soft/dreamy like I have a slight diffusion filter on it. All the non-L RF lenses have a 'technical look' to them, and unfortunately the 100/2.8L shares that trait. For an 85 prime, I'd rather be able to soften the look with a filter or in post rather than start with an already soft look. BTW, You do look better with the 1.2 EF lens... as would I, or most people our age (in general)... but for babies, pets, and other subjects that don't need a little softer look, I'd rather have the RF lenses. But one other thing: the L-glass seems to change the color a bit too.. like there is a bit of a 'glow from within' that I like. To get the best of both costs $2500 USD. With some improved lighting and post skills, I'll do the $500 USD 85/f2 lens and get a little closer for the light/color. But there's no comparison between 1.2 and 2. You either got it or you don't! :) I'll probably sell my 100 and just start saving for the 85/1.2.
Great review! I would like to see a comparison of the EF 100mm F/2.8 and the RF 85mm F2.0. The question is do I need to buy the RF 85mm F/2.0 if I have the EF 100mm F/2.8 macro? I shoot mainly portraits.
Yes, it's an interesting lens, although still expensive on the used market - I saw one recently in Japan, boxed. I'd probably do it on my my vintage DinoBytes channel though
These lenses were top of the line 10 years ago with every canon Explorer of Light telling us they were perfect. Now canon wants us to pay 3x for lenses that might be clinically sharper, but lets face it they wont' make most pros more money. We need to focus more on making art, and not on the gear. we live in a wondserful time where old pro lenses are so cheap used and more affordable to artist to use.
You may enjoy my review of the Voigtlander 50 f1.0 - not for its price (!) but for its non-clinical approach. PS as I'm sure you know, ambassadors are paid or recompensed for promoting their brand, so they're rarely the best source of unbiased reviews.
I own the RF85 F2 and did a shooting for the company i work for, just badge pictures so basically tripod and flash mode, but i chose f8 just ... ya know .. its a picture on a badge and maybe on a wall and with the backdrop forced to be pure white, no need of creative DOF was needed... those pics will get a screenspace of max like 3x5cm :D On the other note... ill soon have birthday and i noticed the 50mm f1.2 to go on sale for 1750$ ... so... i decided to get that. Still have to wait until i can unpack it (rules are rules) but looking forward to using it, especially the corner-corner sharpness wide open impressed me. But the 85f2, after using it for that shoot... i see no point in upgrading really, its an excellent lense albeit at the slower end in focussing but thats probably just a design issue to keep the price where its at. anyhow - interesting comparison, liked it !
At time 10:57, when viewing the bottom right corner and both lenses at f2, I disagree with you about the RF being sharper. Look at the 4 lights on the pole. The lights look much better through the EF lens.
I prefer the sharpness, contrast, fps, and IS of the RF f/2 I just wish it was faster focusing. Was the EF f/1.4 L any faster at focusing? Cause the 3K for the RF version are way out of my league, esp. as a I already have a 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8. This is just extra.
My tip: get the EF 85 1.4 IS instead of any of those two. even if you dont really need the IS on a modern camera body its a much better lens than the 1.2 in basically any regard. much faster focusing, sharper wide open, better (albeit not perfectly) controlled CAs and the bokeh is in fact better than the 1.2 because it does not has that lenses extremely nervous rendering at mid to far distances (example would be a full body shot with foliage in the background where the 1.2 can get really ugly wide open). i used the 1.2 for many years and i loved that chunk of glass a lot until i traded it for the 1.4 IS to have stabilized video on the R5C. the 1.4 IS is often overlooked but it bridges the gap between the old EF lenses and the newer, much better but extremely expensive RF counterparts quite well.
...and you said that you won't make a review video of Nikon Z9 because it was released quite some time ago...! I ask you, when was Canon RF 85mm f2 released?
Great video and I am definitely a fantasiser like you and eyeing this 85mm 1.2L II lens. In DXO Mark the original 1.2L from 1989 has a higher score with Canon 5D IV .. what do you think?!
Hi Gordon, for the Sony A7RV, which are best G Master lens suited to architecture photography? I only have the 16-35mm GM and 24-70mm GM and 24mm GM prime, anything else you recommend? What do you think of the 12-24 GM?
Gordon, I have been watching / following your channel since back in 2008 and for that, I bought my first DSLR because of your great reviews about photography gear in general. You’re the best mate!!!!
I hope, there is a comparison of the old EF135 to the new one soon. But because of this heavy pricetag (I bought the EF also used) I propably stay with the EF135 forever. As for my TSE17 i wont change to anything RF. All other EF lenses I have sold or want to. The EF 70-200 2.8 II is still remaining, because the current market price really hurts to give it away so "cheap"....
I seem to recall there being some benefit of the version I the EF 85 f1.2 lens. I think either it was optically better, or the focusing was faster... I forget...
Prefer the look of the EF lens, but I sold mine when I got a good price on the EF 200mm f2, which gives even better background separation and is much, much sharper than the 85mm. That is IMHO the best lens Canon has ever made.
You can get a used sigma art 85mm f1.4 for several hundred pounds and it is almost perfectly sharp across the frame, but it is really big as well as heavy. However it is well corrected as well as fast. I suppose the canon ef f1.2L still has the "edge" in bokeh though. Then there are the zeiss options for sony..
Thanks MPB and thaks Gordon 🎉 I would find an all old vs new comparison using an older EF body really interesting, maybe a 5D Mark 2 There are plenty of them on MPB and would make an amazingly great first camera for someone starting to take up photography seriously.
Talking about great bargains, I recently got me that one lens (85mm f1.2 ii L ) from mpb for $480 only because it had a minor defect which doesn’t bother me . I am very happy with it !! 🎉 👍
@@Tomek1Oko don't worry, I wear it to keep warm. Most bald people do, especially in colder countries. I also like how they look. Is it unusual where you're from?
Great comparison! I'd be very interested in more comparisons like this, e.g. with the mentioned 85 1.4 or with the 35 1.4 vs the RF 35 1.8. Or the old 50s.
@@cameralabs Yes! At least if they keep up reasonably with cheaper new lenses. I really thought about buying the EF 35 1.4 because I want a fast lens, but I'm very unsatisfied with the cheaper RF models being not weather sealed and having no lens hood. Stil arguing with myself, since the new one is Macro, opticaly actually not that bad and cheaper still.
Yes, either the Sigma MC-11 or the Metabones adapter will allow for AF with Canon glass. Here’s a video of a guy using the Metabones on his A7 III: m.ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aH9mZvMrLDs.html
@@cameralabs yes it's vignette free, astounding. The other winners are the 40mm pancake ef, and 3 Nikon af-s 58, 85 and 105mm. I see you're in Brighton, I'm in Rye, can have a lens meet if you like!
After shooting with the EF 85 f/1.2 L II since its release for portraits and now adapted to the Z9, this video keeps me informed what's going with Canon's new lenses. Nevertheless, it is too late in my journey to replace it with Nikon's new Z 85 f/1.2 S. 🙂
How are you liking it adapted onto your Z9? Does it work as well as native lenses for things like focus, or at least similarly to the performance I show here?
@@cameralabs Love it, especially before the release of the Z 85 f/1.2 S. As well, now I can consolidate my Canon & Nikon lenses and get IBIS, with the latest Nikon AF technology. Performance wise, it's well known slow AF speed is no where near my Z 50 f/1.2 S and Z 24-70 f/2.8 S, but matching what I had experienced with my Canon DSLR. Otherwise, AF such as eye-tracking is similar (with low expectations of course).
@@bfs5113 yeah, it's great having the benefit of IBIS and broader AF with old lenses on new bodies! Do you have any restrictions with the top burst speeds when adapting to Nikon?
@@cameralabs lol, true. I actually had the 85/2, but sold it as I figured my 28-70/2 was similar enough at 70mm, and I also have the 70-200/2.8. I'm saving for the 135/1.8 as another portrait lens/indoor action option, but I wish Canon would make a more premium, but small and light as possible 85/1.8 or 1.4, the size, weight, price and even extreme shallow dof of the 1.2 is excessive in my opinion.
Do you mean the coma comparison? No, I just double checked and it's correct, the RF version on the right is showing more coma at f2 than the EF did at f1.2, although I agree it is surprising.
After buying some RF glass (50mm 1.2, 28-70, 15-35...) , I sold them all and bought several fast EF L lenses to use with my R5, they are cheap in the used market here in Brazil, and they are great! The 85mm ii 1.2 is wonderful!
Gordon, man I miss you on the channel. Have you done a review of the Sony a7 iV? And can you do a review of the undisputed Hasselblad H2D please. Thanks and nice to hear your voice again:)
Are you subscribed with notifications? I publish a new video almost every week! And yes, I did the A7 IV when it came out, although Hasselblads are a bit high-end for me.
Nice video. I owned this lens many years ago when I was shooting Canon (5D Mk II). It's an amazing portrait lens for adults, the bokeh is amazing and dreamy. I believe lens barrel size contributes to the bokeh size so when shooting at f2 the 85 f1.2 with a 72mm filter will have bigger bokeh balls (!) than the narrower 85 f2 with 67mm filter size. This effect can also be seen on the recent comparison videos of the Sony 50 f1.2 vs 50 f1.4 when both at f1.4. The problems with the Canon EF 85 f1.2 were (a) the weight, so I wouldn't carry it with me, (b) it was relatively slow to focus on the DSLR, and (c) the 95cm shortest focus distance made it hard to get really tight portraits on small children and babies. I currently shoot with the great Sigma 85 f1.4 on a Sony a7IV, but I occasionally miss the f1.2...
I apreciate how thorough you are, so it just seemd strange to me to be doing review on something not previously thoroughly used, outside of the test. Just thinking outloud.
As clearly stated at the beginning of the video, it's sponsored by them, so yes, I will be mentioning them. If you're not happy with sponsored videos, the other option for a channel is to go bust and close like Amazon has done with dpreview. Or to charge a subscription model, would you be willing to pay a monthly fee to watch these videos? if the answer is no, then you should expect some videos to be sponsored, and in the grand scheme of things I only generally do it for one per month vs many channels who do it on every single video.
@@andrewmckenley5355 get the RF 85 f2 unless you really want the effect of a 1.2 aperture. The f2 will still be shallow and much more forgiving at an event. The 1.2 is more for staged portraits.
