ARC8809 Loc: Carrollton, TX

What's your take on the 105/2.8 VR; the 105 DC D/2.0; the 135 DC/2.0?
Or the 85/1.8? Will be using on a D200 but in the future will use also in FF when I buy a FF body...

Any insights?

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I own the Canon counter part of the 135/f2.0 (don't know how they compare, but I like that lens a lot and it makes for a great portrait lens (although I prefer the 70-200 over it). I'll bet the 105/2.8 also delivers well for portraits and it will give you the benefit of being able to shoot macro as well. So, no easy decision (if it were me, I buy both, probably the macro first).

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I would not use 100mm+ lenses for portraits on a crop sensor body. Any of them would do well on a full frame, but you need to keep the crop factor in mind when shooting the D200, a 100mm lens gives you the same view as a 150mm lens on a full frame, rather long for a portrait unless you have lots of space to work with. I would recommend the 85mm F1.8 if you really want a prime. Otherwise, I would recommend a 70-200mm F2.8 as an excellent, and versatile choice.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

In the Film days the classic focal length for portrait lenses was 100mm. That means for a FF camera either the 105 or the 85 would be just fine. But for a crop sensor the 85 would probably be best as the 105's would translate to 150mm which would be a short telefoto.

ARC8809 Loc: Carrollton, TX

So, I'm hearing that it's better to go with the 70-200? I don't have this lense either (rather a heavy Sigma 135-400/3.5)... Opinions?

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The 85mm f/1.4D, the 85mm f/1.4G, the 85mm f/1.8G, the 105mm f2 DC, and the 135mm f/2 DC are all pretty special lenses that set themselves apart from others in terms of bokeh. (Note that the 85mm f/1.8D and the 105 f/2.8 VR are not on that list.)

The two DC lenses have a separate control; but frankly it is not of any great significance today with instant preview available. What it did was make it much easier to "calculate" where the edge of the DOF would land, and put a subject very close. With film, where you didn't get the developed negatives back for a significant time and there probably was no opportunity for a reshoot, that was important. Not so much with a digital camera. (Not that it isn't still fun to experiement with, though most people just get terribly confused about what it is or isn't doing.)

All of these lenses produce pleasant bokeh at any aperture, so they do not have to be used wide open to get the benefits. They cover a nice range of focal lengths for appropriate framing over a range of camera to subject distances that produce any desired perspective.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII is almost as good, but not quite, for bokeh. It of course has the advantage that no matter what distance and perspective you choose, with a zoom you can set the framing precisely as you wish.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Buy, rent, borrow or steal an 85mm f/1.4D lens. Go shoot a few people pictures with it. Look for one of two reactions...

If the bokeh just knocks you over, then consider making that a permanent addition, along with either or both a 105mm and 135mm f/2 DC. And maybe replace the D version with the 85mm f/1.4G.

If you can't see it, or wonder what the fuss is about... get a 70-200mm f/2.8. (I haven't tried it, but understand the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 is also a jewel.)

juicesqueezer Loc: Okeechobee, Florida

For most portraits, I use my 70-200 f2.8. However, this is on a FX not DX camera. Stunning! On your camera, this would give you 105mm field of view. Just right!

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

For portrait work, find it difficult to beat the 70-200 f/2.8. Sometimes I use the 105G f/2.8. With you subject placed 9' to 15' from the lens a 70-200 f/2.8 will knock them dead with proper exposure and white balance. This is the lens of choice for many, many, many professional portrait photographers.
Good luck.

ARC8809 Loc: Carrollton, TX

Thank you all for your insight! Maybe 70-200 is my best choice...

Paul D Loc: Rhode Island

I like my 85mm 1.8 and 105mm 2.8 for portraits. I like getting in close when I am shooting one person. Just this week I took my 35-70mm 2.8 and the 105mm with me. It was an indoor opportunity and the 105mm was useless because I couldn't get far enough away to frame the subject. The 85mm would have been perfect. I also lost out on an opportunity because there were three subjects together and I couldn't get them all in the frame because I also couldn't get far enough away before running into walls. My suggestion is that for indoor portraits the 85mm is safer, while outdoor shoots either will do.
Given the choice to buy either, I would go for the 85mm.

so it goes...

Curious, why didn’t you include the 85mm f/1.8D on your list?

Never mind, I just re-read your post and see the reason

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Just to make it clear, the 85mm f/1.8D does not have rounded diaphragm blades, and therefore has nice bokeh only when being used wide open at f/1.8. It is a much sharper lens if stopped down, but the bokeh is much harsher too. The f/1.4D lens has has rounded blades and the smooth bokeh is there at all apertures. The newer G versions of the 85mm both have rounded blades.

so it goes...

Thank you for the added info...

Bret Loc: Dayton Ohio

I just picked up a used 105 DC....and of all the lens I use for portraiture....this one is the finest. Here are a few samples I got with a D7100 http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-280730-1.html#4754233