which one should i get? 70-200 or 85
 

Im debating on which lens is best for my needs...
70-200mm f2.8L IS MKII or 85mm f1.2L II
I am currently using my 5D MKII.
most of my work will be product/food/still portrait photography.

I shoot mostly indoors but would also like the luxury of having a fast AF lens now and then.
would the 70-200 II be good enough to completely replace the 85mm in terms of sharpness and picture quality (color, contrast, etc..?)

or... please share with me your personal opinion on these 2 lenses... i just need more ideas and opinions for both lenses...

right now im leaning more toward the 70-200 because its more versatile.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/85mm-f12.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/len...0mm-f28-is.htm
(yes, it's the mark I, but similar other than the minimum focus distance)

As with all "which one should I get" questions, you seem to have already made up your mind on the 70-200. Just save up your pennies and get the 85mm later.

if your doing portrait, 85 is like the best ever lense arguably. get it. lol

I should ban you for even mentioning Ken Rockwell! :p That guy is such a tool.

...but seriously, the 70-200 mkII is slightly sharper overall compared to the mkI, and much faster in acquiring focus. You'll definitely see the difference with the 5DmkII. The 70-200 will be more versatile, but if you're doing mainly portraits, then get the 85mm f1.2. It's a phenomenal lens, but it'll probably take you a while to calibrate the focus properly. I spent 30 minutes doing micro-focus adjustments the day before a wedding shoot, and because the DoF is so narrow, my bride's eyelashes were in focus, but her pupil was already starting to go out. Of course, the 70-200 will not totally replace the 85, but it will give you more options. If you're doing product & food you shouldn't be using any of those lenses. Use the 45mm TS-E or the 90mm TS-E instead - I use the Nikon PC-E 85mm f2.8 Micro tilt/shift with an EOS-Nikon adapter.

I agree with Levitron - get the 70-200 first, and then buy the 85 later.

Here's what I mean by thin DoF. FF cropped to a square:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...-29-copy-1.jpg

100% crop of her left eye. Sharp eyelashes, but her pupil is already OoF.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...IMG_4202-1.jpg

Exposure for the image was 1/125sec, f1.2, 1600 ISO. The room was quite dark, as it was a basement suite. If I was using a 70-200 f2.8 here, my exposure at 1600 ISO would have been a useless 1/30sec @ f2.8 - a shutter speed that low would have showed motion blur even with IS, as the subject would have moved.

This shot was taken with the 5DmkII + Nikon PC-E 85mm f2.8 Micro. Exposure was 1/200sec, f5.6, 100 ISO with the lens tilted 12 degrees forward so that just the surface of the rice was in focus. With a normal macro lens, you'd have to stop down to f32 or so to be able to get the DoF for a similar shot, and even that might not be enough and you'd lose sharpness due to diffraction. Notice the bottom half of the bowl is starting to go OoF
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...140-Edit-1.jpg

Hope this helps.

I was making the same decision as well. at the end I bought the 85mm. It's an excellent lens, the best thing that I 've ever bought so far. What made me go with 85 instead of 70-200? I mainly shoot portrait and landscape and the weight issue.. I wouldn't carry the 70-200 around.. that being said 85mm is not a light lens as well. If I have to choose a lens to bring around that would be it. DOF is incredible!!

For food, Tilt shift lenses are the way to go.
If you want fast autofocus on a 5DMII, 70-200mm 2.8 is your man! I could bake a pizzapop faster then a 85L II can do a full rotation.

The 70-200mm f2.8L IS II you mean! The version I is slow

Version I is slow'er', but still quick in it's own right.

For weddings and event photography it's fine, but for sports and wildlife, the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VRI seems faster at least in my experience.

manual focus 85L ftw