EF 85mm f/1.2L USM / EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by n, Nov 1, 2004.

  1. n

    n Guest

    I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.
    n, Nov 1, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. n

    GT40 Guest

    On 1 Nov 2004 08:23:16 -0800, (n) wrote:

    >I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    >I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.


    I like the 50 1.4, but can't afford the 85 1.2L. You can also look at
    the 85 1.8
    GT40, Nov 1, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. n wrote:

    > I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    > I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.


    This is an SLR related question..

    Please take this to:

    rec.photo.digital.slr-systems

    If your news provider hasn't added it, you'll have to request they do..

    Thanks
    Keith Weinstein, Nov 1, 2004
    #3
  4. n

    Skip M Guest

    "Keith Weinstein" <> wrote in message
    news:wIthd.892$...
    >n wrote:
    >
    >> I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    >> I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon
    >> d10.

    >
    > This is an SLR related question..
    >
    > Please take this to:
    >
    > rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
    >
    > If your news provider hasn't added it, you'll have to request they do..
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    >

    In the meantime, are we to not discuss DSLR issues, here? That's pretty
    silly, and one of the reasons that the split was a bad idea.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
    Skip M, Nov 1, 2004
    #4
  5. Skip M wrote:
    []
    > In the meantime, are we to not discuss DSLR issues, here? That's
    > pretty silly, and one of the reasons that the split was a bad idea.


    Any migration like this will take a number of months, I would guess. Some
    tolerance is called for in the intermediate period, and of course you can
    continue to discuss DSLR issues here.

    But over the course of time, plan to move the discussions to the new
    groups so that a more focussed community can be created, and this
    newsgroup volume can be reduced to more reasonable levels.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 1, 2004
    #5
  6. n

    Dave Guest

    You can discuss DSLRs here. Ignore the attempts to redirect your post.

    There is no "migration" to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems. It was
    created as a (badly reasoned) addition to r.p.d., not as a replacement
    for the DSLR part of it.

    Dave
    Dave, Nov 1, 2004
    #6
  7. n

    Mark B. Guest

    "Keith Weinstein" <> wrote in message
    news:wIthd.892$...
    >n wrote:
    >
    >> I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    >> I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon
    >> d10.

    >
    > This is an SLR related question..
    >
    > Please take this to:
    >
    > rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
    >
    > If your news provider hasn't added it, you'll have to request they do..
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    >


    It's still perfectly valid to post it to rec.photo.digital.

    Mark
    Mark B., Nov 1, 2004
    #7
  8. n

    Confused Guest

    On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:45:18 -0600
    In message <wIthd.892$>
    Posted from Association of Digital Photographers
    Keith Weinstein <> wrote:

    > > I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    > > I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.

    >
    > This is an SLR related question..
    >
    > Please take this to:
    >
    > rec.photo.digital.slr-systems


    This is a lens related question - user happens to own a D10 - but lens
    information is a digital photography related subject. I.E. ON TOPIC.
    Just because YOU want to break up this group, the majority does not.

    MOST OF US DO NOT WANT MANY GROUPS.

    MOST OF US DO NOT WANT TO CHANGE USENET PROVIDERS.

    ---------------------------------

    Back to the topic posted:

    Everyone else, please answer the Q's.

    Personally, I have found the 50mm f1.4 lens to be sharp, in focus, and
    gives near perfect rectangle image on a 300D.

    Jeff
    Confused, Nov 1, 2004
    #8
  9. n

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <wIthd.892$>,
    Keith Weinstein <> wrote:
    >n wrote:
    >
    >> I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    >> I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.

    >
    >This is an SLR related question..
    >
    >Please take this to:
    >
    >rec.photo.digital.slr-systems


    Oh brother. Notice that *this* newsgroup is not called,
    "rec.photo.digital.anythingthatisnotanslr". Get a grip.
    Chris Brown, Nov 1, 2004
    #9
  10. "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <wIthd.892$>,
    > Keith Weinstein <> wrote:
    > >n wrote:
    > >
    > >> I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    > >> I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon

    d10.
    > >
    > >This is an SLR related question..
    > >
    > >Please take this to:
    > >
    > >rec.photo.digital.slr-systems

    >
    > Oh brother. Notice that *this* newsgroup is not called,
    > "rec.photo.digital.anythingthatisnotanslr". Get a grip.


    Or just an addition to the kill file. I don't recall ever seeing a post from
    this person before in this newsgroup, so you won't be missing anything.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Nov 2, 2004
    #10
  11. n

    George Kerby Guest

    I find it amazing that NO ONE has answered the OP's question. This place
    STILL is as goofy as it always has been.


    On 11/1/04 5:27 PM, in article , "Chris
    Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote:

    > In article <wIthd.892$>,
    > Keith Weinstein <> wrote:
    >> n wrote:
    >>
    >>> I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    >>> I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.

    >>
    >> This is an SLR related question..
    >>
    >> Please take this to:
    >>
    >> rec.photo.digital.slr-systems

    >
    > Oh brother. Notice that *this* newsgroup is not called,
    > "rec.photo.digital.anythingthatisnotanslr". Get a grip.


    --
    "At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
    miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
    demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
    Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke



    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    George Kerby, Nov 2, 2004
    #11
  12. n

    Confused Guest

    Chris Brown wrote:

    Oh brother. Notice that *this* newsgroup is not called,

    "rec.photo.digital.anythingthatisnotanslr"

    I just wanted to see that again. VERY funny. :)

    Jeff
    Confused, Nov 2, 2004
    #12
  13. n

    Confused Guest

    On 2 Nov 2004 01:48:03 GMT
    In message <BDAC436F.9D77%>
    Posted from Uncensored-News.Com $6.95 Uncensored Newsgroups.
    George Kerby <> wrote:

    > I find it amazing that NO ONE has answered the OP's question.
    > This place STILL is as goofy as it always has been.


    I answered the question re the lens I use...
    you are not reading and most likely a bit goofy... :)
    I said:

    Everyone else, please answer the Q's.

    Personally, I have found the 50mm f1.4 lens to be sharp, in focus, and
    gives near perfect rectangle image on a 300D.

    Jeff
    Confused, Nov 2, 2004
    #13
  14. n

    Confused Guest

    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote:

    > Or just an addition to the kill file.
    > ...


    Being fairly new I didn't notice that. A Googling YaHoo *would* most
    likely be killfile material. Thanks!

    At the risk of repeating myself :) the 50mm f1.4 is highly recommended
    by many people I've spoken with who owns one.

    It's also tough: I recently dropped it and it bounced hard... still
    works just fine. (However, I'm still going to drop it off at Canon
    Service and pay to have it aligned and checked out. Better safe than
    sorry, eh?)

    Jeff
    Confused, Nov 2, 2004
    #14
  15. "n" <> wrote:

    > I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    > I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon d10.


    The 85/1.8 is on my wish list. The 85/1.2 gets great reviews, but (a) so
    does the 85/1.8, (b) the 85/1.2 is seriously expensive, (c) the 85/1.2 is
    seriously heavy. If you can afford and lift it, the 85/1.2 is, according to
    all reviews/reports, a great lens.

    I have the 50/1.4 for the 300D. Lovely lens. Apparently it has a bit of
    barrel distortion when used on a full-frame camera. But less so on 1.6x and
    that's less of an issue for portraits anyway. In all other aspects, it's an
    improvement on the 50/1.8, so worth it, IMHO. Unlike the price and weight of
    the 85/1.2, the price and weight of the 50/1.4 are within my budget and
    biceps.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Nov 2, 2004
    #15
  16. n

    Eric Gill Guest

    "David J Taylor" <> wrote in
    news::

    > Any migration like this will take a number of months, I would guess.
    > Some tolerance is called for in the intermediate period, and of course
    > you can continue to discuss DSLR issues here.


    "Tolerance?"

    Just what, exactly, are you going to do as we keep discussing DSLR issues
    here? Wet yourself?
    Eric Gill, Nov 2, 2004
    #16
  17. n

    Eric Gill Guest

    (n) wrote in
    news::

    > I would like to hear your comments about these lenses.
    > I would use them for portraits, especially in low light, with a canon
    > d10.


    Both yield utterly excellent images. In addition to what's been said
    already, the 85 has the most godawfully slow autofocus you've ever
    experienced.

    Also, it's hard to recommend the 85 over the 50 if price is any
    consideration at all.
    Eric Gill, Nov 2, 2004
    #17
  18. Eric Gill wrote:
    > "David J Taylor" <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> Any migration like this will take a number of months, I would guess.
    >> Some tolerance is called for in the intermediate period, and of
    >> course you can continue to discuss DSLR issues here.

    >
    > "Tolerance?"
    >
    > Just what, exactly, are you going to do as we keep discussing DSLR
    > issues here? Wet yourself?


    As a non-DLSR user I will be interested to see how long it takes folks to
    move to the new slr-systems newsgroup. I intend to visit there myself to
    follow some of the topics that are being discussed.

    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 2, 2004
    #18
  19. n

    Eric Gill Guest

    "David J Taylor" <> wrote in
    news::

    > Eric Gill wrote:
    >> "David J Taylor" <> wrote in
    >> news::
    >>
    >>> Any migration like this will take a number of months, I would guess.
    >>> Some tolerance is called for in the intermediate period, and of
    >>> course you can continue to discuss DSLR issues here.

    >>
    >> "Tolerance?"
    >>
    >> Just what, exactly, are you going to do as we keep discussing DSLR
    >> issues here? Wet yourself?

    >
    > As a non-DLSR user I will be interested to see how long it takes folks
    > to move to the new slr-systems newsgroup. I intend to visit there
    > myself to follow some of the topics that are being discussed.


    That assumes such will happen.

    And you didn't answer the question.
    Eric Gill, Nov 2, 2004
    #19
  20. Eric Gill wrote:
    []
    >> As a non-DLSR user I will be interested to see how long it takes
    >> folks to move to the new slr-systems newsgroup. I intend to visit
    >> there myself to follow some of the topics that are being discussed.

    >
    > That assumes such will happen.
    >
    > And you didn't answer the question.


    You asked what I am going to do and I told you.

    David
    David J Taylor, Nov 2, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mac

    85mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.4

    Mac, Nov 9, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    720
    Stephen M. Dunn
    Nov 11, 2005
  2. Philip Bailey

    Canon EF-S 17-85MM f4-5.6 IS USM

    Philip Bailey, Jan 25, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    980
    Philip Bailey
    Jan 25, 2006
  3. Wayne

    Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

    Wayne, May 7, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    649
    John Ortt
    May 14, 2007
  4. Bob Williams

    Re: 50mm 1.4 vs 50mm 1.8

    Bob Williams, Jan 13, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    449
    David Ruether
    Jan 13, 2009
  5. M-M
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    31,148
Loading...

Share This Page