Canon 50 1.4 vs. 85 1.8

[Geoff Wittig]

Well, you are approaching the issue from the wrong viewpoint, I think. There is a big difference between the 50 and 85mm focal lenghts. You have to decide first on the focal length you need, rather than worrying about tiny possible differences in performance between the two lenses.

They are both excellent lenses, so you are garanteed in that respect.

I think that's exactly right. Most of us have a very particular way of 'seeing', which leads us to specific focal lengths. I have access to lots of lenses from 16mm to 500mm, but I find that I end up taking 90% of my photos with 2 lenses and about 97% with just 3 lenses. When it comes to indoor and people pictures, I have a goodly selection of fast lenses to choose from, but I almost always end up defaulting to the 85 f:1.8 or occasionally the 135 f:2 L lens. Seems like every time I use something wider, I can't get a composition I like. I love the look of images taken wide open with the Sigma 50 f:1.4, yet I just can't seem to use it effectively. With the 85 mm lens I get a very high proportion of keepers, and lots more really good shots. Other people get beautiful images from their wider fast lenses, God bless 'em. But a 35 mm f:1.4 would be totally wasted on me.

[Jonathan Wienke]

I recently purchased a used Canon 5D and a 17-40 f/4L, but the 17-40 is now my only lens. I need something with a little more reach than 40 mm for certain landscapes, and something much faster for indoor shooting. I want to know which of the two Canon primes are a better choice. I know 85 would give me the extra reach I want, but I feel the 50 is a more usable lens. Or would it be better to save up for the 85 1.2L?

Which wrench is "better", a 9mm or a 10mm? Which screwdriver is "better", a #1 Phillips or a #2 Phillips? The correct answer is "whichever one fits the bolt/screw you're trying to turn." The same is true of lenses; you use the one that best fits the FOV you need for the shot you're trying to capture. You need to sit down and figure out what best FOV fits what you shoot the most often and purchase accordingly; there's no way a total stranger can answer this question for you intelligently on an internet forum. Figure out what bolt you're trying to turn, and the question of what tool to use will answer itself.

[Pelao]

I hope the OP has gained from this thread. I know I have.

I too have a 5D, and count the 17-40, 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 among my lenses.

For my purposes the 50 is my most used walk-around lens. I like the composition I get with it, and enjoy the way it makes me think about the image I want. It also works very quickly with autofocus, which is often important with candids.  I sometimes use it for portrait work.

The 85 is mostly used for portrait work. It suits my style and ability very well. With or without grip it is comfortable hand held.

If I had just the 17-40 and used it mainly for landscapes, I feel I would grab the 85 first. The 17-40 can be a great general purpose lens. The 85 would give reach and thus flexibility and is small enough to carry easily with the 5D and 17-40.

[sojournerphoto]

I think that's exactly right. Most of us have a very particular way of 'seeing', which leads us to specific focal lengths. I have access to lots of lenses from 16mm to 500mm, but I find that I end up taking 90% of my photos with 2 lenses and about 97% with just 3 lenses. When it comes to indoor and people pictures, I have a goodly selection of fast lenses to choose from, but I almost always end up defaulting to the 85 f:1.8 or occasionally the 135 f:2 L lens. Seems like every time I use something wider, I can't get a composition I like. I love the look of images taken wide open with the Sigma 50 f:1.4, yet I just can't seem to use it effectively. With the 85 mm lens I get a very high proportion of keepers, and lots more really good shots. Other people get beautiful images from their wider fast lenses, God bless 'em. But a 35 mm f:1.4 would be totally wasted on me.

That is a good summation - I like working with a 50 or 35 on full frame, particularly indoors, as it gives me a bigger field of view and so more gets included in the composition. I probably get more failures or 'near misses', but I like the ones that work out. The 85 feels long indoors, but I do get very consistent results with it - probably helped because I used my FD85 a lot in past years on my AE-1.

Mike