I think the EF has less contrast so it has a brighter more diffused look which for portraits isn’t a bad thing.

I have to honestly say that I run all EF lenses on my Canon EOS R.. it was going to be temporary until I would one by one purchase the RF lenses. But I can honestly say that I have achieved such great results with my EF glass that I haven't really wanted to spend the $15,000 to switch over

I pretty much never comment on KZfaq videos but I have to thank you for your comparisons!, based a few lens purchases on them, in my opinion the best Canon comparisons I’ve managed to find so far. I like that you generally use people as objects and your presentation is great, video is crisp and you come across as a nice person. Waiting for the 50 1.8 :) I hope it is up next;)

Thats why im keeping the ef version.

Great review, I needed to see this!

Thanks. Answers a few questions for me. Great work.

Beautiful Video! Well illustrated!

Thank you so much for your clearly detailed video!

but i just love the hazy 85mm f1.8 more, it looks somehow vintage and dreamy compares to good contrast modern coating lens

Exactly the right topic that a lot of EOS R line buyers are searching in KZfaq, including me :) Thanks for the video!

At first glance, before reading which lens was which, I immediately liked the portrait taken with the EF better. I was really surprised. I do see the the RF has more detail, but the slight softness of the EF is actually much more pleasing for photos. Clients don't want to see all their skin imperfections anyway and you would just have to soften in post if you use the RF. However... the macro capabilities makes the RF more versatile so it's a hard choice. And today in 2022 the price has dropped on the RF and there isn't much of a gap anymore between the old and the new, making it an even tougher choice.

The EF lens was made for contrasts the dynamic range films of those time could handle. Beside of contrast it is still incredible good for this time of start of production.

Hey love ur work true inspiration 🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽

Holly Cow enough about the lens being twenty eight years old. I got my Bachelor of Applied Arts degree in photography from Ryerson University in 1985. I shot on everything from a basic Nikon F3, to a Hasselbad 500C to a Sinar F 4x5 and a Deardorff 8x10 . The lenses were plenty sharp back then and we didn't need computers to clean up aberrations. Thanks for the comparison. Too late for me I got the EF 85 F/1.8 too soon. Just picked up an R7 .

Perfect video, perfect comparison. Thx.

Thanks....I probably will have to suck it in and go for the RF 85 1.2 when the time comes.

Sweet review brother. Any review coming for the 35mm? Perhaps against sigma 35?and the 50mm? Those would be great 🙏

A used RF 85mm 2.0 costs $600, a used EF 85mm 1.8 + original adapter costs $300. The video does not say that RF 85 2.0 has strong distortion, you will have to constantly adjust. I bought an EF for my RP.

I've been using the EF 85mm f/1.8 with the EOS R and EOS R5 and it has been great. You're absolutely right, I've found that my old EF lenses work better on the R-series bodies than they ever did on the 5D Mk4. But I just got the new RF 85mm f/2 macro IS and I'm really happy with it, although I still plan to get the 85mm f/1.2L next year.

Loved this video, Alex! I'm moving very soon to the Canon EOS R (price point for me just works) and one fine day, the R6 or R5! The Canon EOS RF 85 2.0 is my new "love." Of COURSE I want and covet and drool over the RF 85mm 1.2. One fine day, I shall own that as well. But for my portrait photography, once I own the RF 2.0, I feel that my IQ will definitely go up. And that excites me. Thanks again for your excellent work here. It's helping shape and form my "going forward" with confidence!

Am I wrong do you dorgot to mention differrnces in size and meter focus guide?

Can you compare the RF85mm F2 to the RF50mm 1.8? I haven't seen anyone done a bokeh/ sharpness test yet..Thanks!

How’s the RF 85 f2 focusing speed compared to Ef 85 1.8 in Photo mode?

Did you test Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L IS II lens on Canon R5/R6 body? I am thinking to purchase that lens. Thanks.

I have the EF 85 F/1.8 and love it. At f/2.2 and beyond it is nice and sharp (of course maybe in could be a focusing issue for me any narrower depths of fields!).

Thank you!

The EF 85mm f1.8 has pretty bad chromatic aberration with backlighting at f1.8, but performs pretty ok at f2, but is otherwise optically pretty good, I'm not surprised that it keeps up with the 45MP sensor pretty well, if you have the 85mm f1.8 and are happy to adapt and don't need the macro feature it might not be worth upgrading. The EF to M adapters also work well, particularly with DPAF cameras, often with more accurate AF than their native DSLR's.

Very nice, thank you Alex!! I m still curious to see a 85mm 1.4 sigma DN for canon. Until then I m happily using my Canon Ef 85mm 1.4 is lens. It works better than on my 5dmk4!

In every single image the subject was bigger on the fram e with the EF. I was wondering if that's human error (you moved between shots) or if they actually have slightly different effective focal lenghts.

I bought the 50mm rf nifty fifty and the Ef 50mm 1.4 for portraits realized when working with both the same thing I’m noticing here; while the RF lens provides more depth, color, sharpness, and contrast - for portraits, these ultimately are not as complimentary for models as the EF lenses. The more complimentary lens between these two is far and away the EF lens. With the RF lens, every single minor imperfections is show cased and I would even say augmented whereas the photos with the EF lens, the model generally looks better. More appealing. Less harsh. It took me a while to realize this. I wanted the RF lens to be the lens because the colors were so vibrant and everything but every picture of a model I took with it looked less attractive than the Ef lens. I would say if you’re shooting food, or scenery, or still images, the RF is the way to go. But if you want complimentary portraits, go with the EF.

love you videos thanks

The macro version doesn't seem to focus fast enough in video mode for fast running toddlers.

Can you do a comparison of rf 85mm vs samyang 85mm

Thanks. I will keep my old , light and not expensive very good EF version.

I have many EF and EFS lenses and I like to adapting on Sony, Nikon Z and Canon R. The flexibility of good old EF lenses is for me more important.

Please make a review comparison of the Samyang 85 1.4 vs Canon 85 f2 pls pls pls

I have long thought that the old EF is amazing value. I use it ALL the time for commercial headshots with studio lights. Looks awesome

Good review. I wait for Samyang RF85 F1.4 compare.

How about a comparison of the RF 85 1.2 with the EF 85 1.4?

Great comparison already have the EF version looking to upgrade to the RF. But likely to get the RF 70-200 F4 before the 85 just because it’s more flexible.

For portraits definitely the ef 85mm looks more pleasing, that low contrast hazy look gives to the lens a nice character

Hi Alex - thanks so much for posting this, I'm mostly concerned about focusing speed - the EF version (that I have) has ring AF, is the new lens capable at focusing as good on fast moving subjects? My biggest use for this would be snaps of my kid and her friends, and mostly as a budget and light weight alternative to when I don't want to pull out my RF 1.2L. Camera is EOS R and RP with latest firmware. Thank you!!

Samyang ... do your thing. Make our dreams come true!

Geez, you just saved me a wad of cash! I don't have to be ashamed of my 85mm f/1.8.

Any plans to do a comparison of the Canon 50mm F1.8 lenses for RF vs EF?

Someone please send him the Samyang lens to test!

Alex I know this is off topic from this video but I have a quick question. I currently own the EOS-R can you tell me if you think there is a drop in sharpness with a small crop using the R6. I so want the autofocus of the new bodies but I'm worried I will feel like the R6 will lack sharpness with a small say 15 to 20 percent crop. Or so you think I should wait and save more for the R5. Thanks and appreciate your videos.

Can you redo the test with bad lighting

I have the EF but already ordered the RF F2 versión. Good video just confirm I made a good choices.

Can you compare the 85mm f2 with the 50mm 1.8 rf? Interested to see the difference in bokeh and if it's worth the price difference

Useful review. The old EF 85 1.8 lets more light in than the f2. I downloaded your samples. The EF 85 1.8 needs -0.38 EV in Lightroom to be on the same level as the RF 85 f2. I think that for many people that don't need macro, the older EF85 1.8 might be a better fit for only half the price. It has the fast USM motor and is smaller and lighter without, but with the adapter comparable to the RF lens.

Excellent Comparison ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

I'm still learning, so what is IS and what makes it so important?

The EF Lens is Look Nice it is More Light Bcuz of 1.8 and More Professional Look the RF is More Sharp.. . i will Choose EF.. . 😊

can we get a comparison between the Samyang RF 85 f1.4 vs the Canon RF 85 F2

A secondhand Sigma Art 85mm is great value and 90% of the Rf 85mm f1.2

This is tough. This lens is primarily a portrait lens, and I think I like the EF lens's output better than the RF's. It's got creamier bokeh. The RF lens almost seems too sharp. If I already owned the EF lens, I wouldn't upgrade. But one new (to me), I don't know. I might still pick up an EF version since they are cheaper used.

You’re gonna turn into the 85-guy! Also... another one of super interesting one is tamron 85 f1.8 (with IS) ...also the ef f1.4 IS... I think soon the ef 1.4 is gonna become a real option to people too. I see them on Craigslist all the time now for $1000. Just some thoughts! But these 85 comparisons are compelling!

Have the EF. This video, and your video with the 1.2 convinced me the F2 isn't worth the upgrade (not enough of a difference between my EF). My clients love the portraits I take with the 1.8. The 1.2 is absolutely worth the upgrade. And I will save up for that. The difference is jaw-dropping.

thanks for these comparisons. I'm on the fence about the EF 50mm 1.2 versus the RF 50mm 1.2 - did you do a comparison on those? Seems like you did, or someone did... I'm losing my mind maybe lol

Should have shot them both at F2. Other than that great review. I love the EF 85 1.8 i use it a lot for sports usually shooting at f2.8 and the images are amazing. 👊🏼

Hello Master Alex: Please help and give me some advice, The camera I am currently using is Canon EOS R10, The kit lens used with it is (RF-S18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM) My main subject matter is toy photography. The secondary shooting content is street photography or portrait photos. Now I want to buy new lenses, after watching your video, Want to compare between Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM and RF85mm F2 Macro IS STM After making a choice, I would like to ask you to give me some advice on which lens is more suitable for me? Thank you.

You convinced me to keep my EF 85er. In my opinion the differences aren´t big enough.

Size comparison of the RF vs EF with adapter?

i have he EF 85 and the EF 100mmF2..the EF 100mm is a better lens than the 85..a little sharper and less purple fringing and i think you will find the 100 much closer to the RF 85..both EF lense do benefit from a hood even in not charging lighting..i did think of trading my EF 85 and 100 for the RF lens but i like the 100mm FL better

Thre is nothing wrong with ef lenses. They work fine, and do just as good a job. I still use film, it is just as good and not so complicated as digital and it works. Without loads or buttons to turn on or off

I shoot portraits all the time with the R5 and EF 85....OR EF 100 OR EF 24-70 OR 70-200...ITS what I have and use...

There is a lot of chromatic abrasion on the rf 85 f2 compared to the ef 85 1.8

I think you have a nicer than average copy of the EF 85/1.8 :)

I use my EF 85 with my R5 and love it! It makes me want to buy used old CHEEP EF stuff just to try it!?

I prefer ef 85 f1,8. Its brighter. I can use lower ISO. If you lower your exposition to same value for both lenses, you would get the same color....The better value is samyang rf 85 f1,4 than rf 85 f2 , unless you need macro 1/2

i ran tests on both the rf 2 and the ef 1.8 and the sharpness is much much better on the ef 1.8 than the rf 2. If you compare a brick building for example the corners and edges look more rounded on the rf 2 which is completely unrealistic compared to the ef 1.8 while the ef 1.8 has sharper edges and corners on brick buildings. The reason you're seeing a color difference between the rf 2 and the ef 1.8 is because the rf 2 is color saturated. You're right about the lack of light coming in the rf 2 which made it frustrating for me to photograph buildings this morning and yesterday. I noticed the severe lack of details in the rf 2 compared to the ef 1.8 because of this. More light better images. Granted the color saturation in the rf 2 looks better for sky portraits of clouds and blue skies but at a cost of it's surroundings and clarity of objects

Actually if you notice, the RF has less image compression. The RF is more equivalent to a 75-80mm focal length compared to the EF. The contrast issue difference isn't exactly contrast either, as the EF clearly has some fraction of a stop more exposure. Lower the exposure while viewing both side by side and I bet you'll see the contrast start to match. But the problem is also rooted in if you take a shot slightly overexposed, it can lose contrast forever regardless of what you do. RF is obviously a superior lens, but they can't really be compared 1:1. And then there's another factor: Do people want extra sharp portraits? Probably not. I guarantee it's going to be much more difficult to soften a tack sharp portrait because of the contrast of soft face vs other sharp things in the frame, it will look like you missed focus. Where with the 1.8, you wouldn't need to do any skin smoothing at all, and less post work in general. In other words, it's not a deficiency, it's a feature. If you crop it'd make a difference, but if you're using the whole frame to make an image, the extra sharpness is functionally useless. The macro on the RF is nice, but again it falls short of a true macro lens quality. You could also throw a macro filter on the 1.8 and get just as close, or even just a weak macro filter to reduce the minimum focus distance a bit. Even a 1x macro filter will reduce the minimum focusing distance down to 1ft on the 1.8 and give it a DOF equivalent to an f/1.2 or 1.4. One last thing: Even at f/2, the EF has a smaller DOF than the RF. That can also play into sharpness perceptions. You might be thinking "Oh her shirt should be in sharper focus! Therefore it must be soft on the 1.8", when in reality the DOF between them isn't the same. You can also tell this at 3:39, look to the left and right of her head. The bokeh is much smoother on the EF, despite being at the same aperture. Honestly, I feel like if these lens characteristics were mostly reversed and the EF was the newer lens, people would be saying the EF is better and has the "medium format look for full frame". People should check their preconceived biases. In the end, is the RF 2x better than the EF? Not really. But it is 2x the cost. Whether you're putting it on the web or printing in a typical size, most of the extra resolution would go to waste. Only for heavy cropping and pixel peeping would a difference be worthwhile. But not for instagram or flickr or youtube or a billboard or even an 8x10.

Should of reviewed both at f2

Is it me or I what, but i actually thought the EF was more sharp in her face when he zoomed in.

I am not sure how the RF 85 f/2 compares to my Tamron EF 85 f/1.8. But it might replace my Tamron 85 and Canon EF 100 f/2.8 . And Samyang, send Alex the lens!

The EF have character

I wanna start off with that i like the video comparison. this may be me just nitpicking personally but the one thing that kind of drove me nuts is the audio being almost too crisp. what I mean by that is that I can almost depict your spit making a noise every time you say something. it kind of reminds me of asmr tbh

Yes a good comparison, but calling it 28 years old might very likely not true. Canon improved their coatings all the time. so if you have a younger version than it might be better than an old version of the old model 1.8.

The much less popular EF 100mm f2 was actually optically better than the 85mm. Especially wide open.

My EF glass works better on my R5 & R6 than it did on my eos 1D and 5D systems.

The ef is much more flattering on her

The Samyang 85 1.4 looks really good and value :)

i would say the RF85mm is slower than EF85mm f1.8

Maybe it’s me but doesn’t the girl look slimmer on the RF version???

EF wins!

Oh look they both have the same focal length this time.

Though.. if you're doing video... Stick with the older 85mm

I don't get why the cheaper RF85mm F2.0 has Macro and mostly IS but the wayyy more expensive F1.2 doesnt even have macro or IS, like WTF seriously? If I have to sell 1 kidney to get it, then I want all the features at the same time! Therefore the only interesting 85mm so far is the Samyang 85mm F1.4 but big shame it's not even stabilized. Only Tamron seem to understand that it is a must have feature in 2020 and on a lens over 50mm or 800$+