85mm or 105mm

Bobsyeruncle

Bobsyeruncle

Suspended / Banned
Messages
17,422
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
Been thinking about a new lens. Ive currently got a 17-50, 70-300 and a 150-600.
I don't think I'll use the 70-300 now I've got the 150-600 and may sell it on.
I'm thinking about a lens for portraits and was considering an 85mm 1.8 and the sigma 105 2.8 macro.
The appeal of the 105 macro is that I can use it for both macro and portraits.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
The appeal of the 105 macro is that I can use it for both macro and portraits.
Click to expand...
•

Hi Robert,

You've got the better arguments right there!
Just add that it is a great tool for street takes
as well and you got them all!
 
the 105mm is great for portraits as you can get in closer (physically) and get some amazing detail out of it though F1.8 is attractive, you are limiting yourself on the DOF for portraits and will probably end up closing that aperture anyway. I vote the macro lens for both.
 
I agree re the 105mm - I have the Nikon f2.8VR and use it a lot for "portraits' using FX ....... as well as Dragonflies and the like, 50% of the time with a V1
 
Last edited:
Bobsyeruncle said:
Been thinking about a new lens. Ive currently got a 17-50, 70-300 and a 150-600.
I don't think I'll use the 70-300 now I've got the 150-600 and may sell it on.
I'm thinking about a lens for portraits and was considering an 85mm 1.8 and the sigma 105 2.8 macro.
The appeal of the 105 macro is that I can use it for both macro and portraits.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Given that you list a 17-50 I'm guessing you use a crop body ... with that in mind the 105 "may" be a tad long, the 85 has an approx equiv f/l of 130mm on a crop which is very near to what m,any class as the best length for portraits. Having said that, I've seen many portraits shot @ 200mm and also @ 35mm so prob not much help here :oops: :$
 
They will have quite a different rendition wide open. That 1.8 gives a very special dreamy look; and the other one is obviously a macro. It just depends what you want a little bit more
 
The 105mm is excellent for portraits, in addition to the primary design to enable 1:1 macography. It's heavier than the 85mm which may or may not be an issue for you but given its duel functionality it's a very versatile lens and out of a choice of the two , personally I would opt for the 105mm.
 
PaulButler said:
Given that you list a 17-50 I'm guessing you use a crop body ... with that in mind the 105 "may" be a tad long, the 85 has an approx equiv f/l of 130mm on a crop which is very near to what m,any class as the best length for portraits. Having said that, I've seen many portraits shot @ 200mm and also @ 35mm so prob not much help here :oops: :$
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd have thought you can use any lens for portraits, but I don't think the same can be said about Macro.

Robert @Bobsyeruncle ... your profile says you use a Nikon DX 18-200mm .... same here!

I'm no portrait artist but I took THIS shot this morning with my 18-200mm at 200mm f.5.6 ... maybe not quite as hot as the 85mm f.1.8 but almost.

I'd go for the macro.
 
d00d said:
Yes, I'd have thought you can use any lens for portraits, but I don't think the same can be said about Macro.

Robert @Bobsyeruncle ... your profile says you use a Nikon DX 18-200mm .... same here!

I'm no portrait artist but I took THIS shot this morning with my 18-200mm at 200mm f.5.6 ... maybe not quite as hot as the 85mm f.1.8 but almost.

I'd go for the macro.
Click to expand...
Cool shot. I don't have the 18-200 anymore. Have updated my profile :)
 
Thanks for all the help guys.
Going with the 105mm macro.......just need to find a used one on here :)
 
Picked up a new one this morning from the local camera shop.(y)
Thanks for the advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top