...but the 105 gets you a few more inches of distance, which can come in handy at times.
Just out of curiosity I know it might sound dumb (very new to this), but when you get that close to a subject will there be enough room for the flash to light up frame?. Assuming that the lighting condition and not ideal? Since the angle of the flash cant go below 45 degrees.
Sometimes its better to take the flash off camera, bounce, diffuse or to use multiple flashes...
Yes it is a sharp lens, not sure if I agree that it is sharper than the 105 though. I have both the 55/2.8 AF Micro and the 105/2.8 AF Micro and they are razor sharp.
--
--
--
BUT, the 105, with an effective focal length of 157.5, is a bit too long to be an ideal portrait lens. The 60mm will make an excellent portrait lens, as well as being an excellent macro for all but bug work. That's my take on it, and I'm planning on buying the 60 as soon as I can convince Aunt Nancy
.
And probably much too sharp to be an ideal portrait lens.....;-)
The selection of a micro lenses does not only depend on sharpness but also the working distance. I used virtually all Nikon MF and AF micro lenses in the past 20+ year, from the MF 55mm F3.5 to AF 200mm F4. In terms of sharpness, I believe the 60mm is indeed slightly ahead of the 105mm in close range shooting (close-up and macro). The decision must also be based on the working distance. With the 60mm, the working distance is less than about 15cm for 1:1 and the working distance of the 105mm will be less than 30cm. With about 15cm working distance, it is difficult for lighting and composition. The 105mm will provide you with a longer working distance. This is an advantage not only for lighting and composition but also good for shooting wary and small animals. If you really like the 105mm focal length, try the Tamron 90mmSP or even the new Di version. The Tamron 90 is cheaper and as sharp as or even sharper than the Nikon.
If both lenses were used to capture the same field of view, we'd need to be closer to the subject with the 60mm lens. So if everything else is held constant, the ratio of (distance to subject) (distance to background) would be lower for the 60mm lens. Wouldn't that result in a more blurred background for the 60mm?
I've generally heard that 80-135mm is ideal for head shots, but wider focal lengths are suggested if you're going to show more more of the subject. Under dimensionally constrained conditions, such as an indoor setting, it might be impossible to to get a half body shot with a 157.5mm lens...
... there's no such thing as too sharp as long as I have Photoshop at my disposal
. It's always desireable to have sharpness in elements such as the eyes and teeth. Using a layer adjustment mask, you can always apply a touch of gaussian blur to areas where sharpness isn't advantageous. And it's much easier to blur than it is to sharpen. The field of view of a 60mm and the field of view of a 105mm cannot be equal. The field of view of a lens is fixed once its focal length is given.
No. Please refer to the "Russian 14X vs. CrystalVue 8X ...." page of my 4500 user guide for more details. On that page, the size of the subject is kept constant using various lenses, and longer focal length lenses provide more "blurred" background. This is the effect of perspective. Don't want to get into the detailed optic theory; but, you can get the feeling from looking at the images on the above mentioned page.
The 180mm is a legendary portrait lens for long subject distance, say for cat walk and fashion shooting. It was very popular in indoor available light photography (fashion, sport, etc). Many consider the 180 as the longest available portrait lens. The beauty of having various focal length portrait lenses is that one can choose the right one for different shooting occasions. My AFD 105mm F2DC gave me about 1.5m on F5 for a head-shoulder shot. It is about 2m on a D70/D100. It is uncommon for a portrait photographer to back away from the model. A very close shooting distance CAN make many models feel uncomfortable. This is especially true for non-professional models. Of the three popular portrait lenses, 85mm, 105mm and 135mm, for half body shots, I particularly like the 105mm. I used MF 105mm F1.8, MF 105mm F2.5 and AFD 105mm F2DC to make $$$ for many years, and they became my own preference. Other people may like 85 while some others may prefer 135. This all boils down to personal preference and environmental constraints.
