Maybe it's just me- but, I prefer the portraits with less fussy backgrounds; if too fussy a background, I'd rather take that out of the equation, by moving around , light changes, etc.,.

The first photo looks more flattering *possibly* cos of wayy more light? I actually find the middle photographs better to look at, but hey, ymmv. Or maybe just your preferred model! :-P

On my Nikons I prefer the 135mm if I want good enough bokeh and to be at a distance to subject, I have also shot with 35mm and 50mm depending on what I needed. I suppose you've to decide what you like and go with it.

I have a 105 f2.8 e and I find it ridiculously bad to use. Maybe it's just my copy.

Quote Originally Posted by momus View Post
I have examples. These I like. The first is w/ a Leica R 90 Elmarit, the next three are w/ the 85 2.0. I'm warming up to the 85 2.0. Maybe I just had some flat light on the first roll yesterday. I looked at some old photos from the 105 2.5's I owned (the old design seems razor sharp!) and I did notice that I was able to just get the front of the face in focus, but wow, it's too sharp for my tastes. The last one shows the occasional weird bokeh w/ the 85 2.0.

Perhaps I don't need another lens, I just need another model like the first gal :}


Attachment 75590
Attachment 75591
Attachment 75592
Attachment 75593


Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk