My best portraits are shot with my canon 100mm macro lens, while I do not own any of these lenses I can tell you that the longer the lens the more comftble you'll be shooting portraits. gives more working distance and a nicer bokeh on the background. I would personally go with the 85mm because of the fast aperture and because its longer.

you can take a look at some of the spontanious headshots i've done with the 100mm lens here http://corkscrew.cosmicdeathray.com/Maryam%20pictures/portrait/

I can't really speak about the 85/1.8, but my main lens is the Nikon 85/1.4 and I love it for portrait and low light concert photography. You DO have to back off a fair amount because, as you pointed out, with the crop factor it's a pretty long prime. And the minimal focusing distance is around 3', IIRC. But all that being said, if you've got the room to move around, 85mm is pretty nice.

Hi,
We have had the chance to play around with this 60mm lens before it was released. Our sample photos are available here: http://lensbuyersguide.com/en/lens/show/Nikkor/60mm_f2.8G_AF-S_ED_Micro#...

I hope they help a bit.

Best regards,

Tibor

As a Nikon Lover with a little bit of experience of taking portraits, I will definitely prefer the 85mm 1.8 if I had a large studio and the fast speed. But If I have a regular size studio or little space I will settle for the 60 mm. Currently I use the ever popular 50mm/1.8 which is amazing fast and sharp but for close ups I need to get really close to the subject.

You get a great macro lens AND a portrait lens combined.

I haven't got a chance to try it but it seems like my next lens for those exact purposes.

I've used 85mm and it is a joy to use with D80 and D200. The balance is great, lens is made for these two cameras. However, it will be long for a classic portrait fl.
Why not new voigtländer 58mm?

Hey - as I'm using a-mount, I haven't tried the new 60mm f/2.8 macro yet.

But for portrait and model work, it'd definitely not be on my wish list. Macro capability usually comes at the price of AF-speed, compared to a similiar lens without the macro capability - and in model shoots, one would loathe to wait the lens to get in place... the focus has more travel distance, so to speak...

As for the 85mm f/1.8 - that's a perfect choise in my opinion. IF you have the space! I've tried the Nikkor only once, and I myself uses a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 16-80 (also on a 1,5x crop camera). My main concern about this lens, is studio work - it'd simply be way too long, unless you wish only to capture the head, or the head and torso. For the entire body, you'll need approximately 10 meters in your studio, which is ridicilously far away from the model in my opinion.

Outside, however, the 85 f/1.8 would be fabolous! I've tried the Sony 85mm f/1.8 somewhat, and yes - outside it's truly magnificient. Outside, you have the space. Inside, however, is a totally different matter - it's simply too long for studio work (if you don't have a very large studio, that is).

As far as my model shots go, I tend to use between 40mm for full body - sometimes 16mm just for the fun of it, as wide angle can create some kinky effects. For head shots, I use 80mm... actually, I use my zoom capability of my Zeiss quite a lot - as you can see on my showcase at www.jakobdam.dk ....

Which brings me to this; are you sure you want a prime? Yes, they're sharper - but honestly, you'll only see it if you use the picture in 100%. My Zeiss can beat most of the zoom lenses out there, and actually some primes as well. Nikon has similiar lenses in their line-up, which I'd go for.

If I were a Canon-user, I'd choose the 24-105 f/4L for studio work. I'm not that acqainted with the Nikon lineup, but I've noticed that the new Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8G ED looks VERY promising. See the review here:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Nikkor%20/%20Nikon%20Lens%20Tests/46-nik...

In the end, I think you'll like the extra focal length you get from the 85mm lens (as well as the 1.8 option it gives you), especially if you already have a 50mm lens.

If the macro feature isn't a selling point for you, I say go for the 85mm. The 10mm you gain from the 60 wouldn't be worth the investment in the end.

If you already have a 50, I say definitely get the 85. This makes your overall kit more versatile, and I find that for head and shoulders or headshots, 85 is perfect. For natural lighting, f/1.8 is great, and for studio, it'll be a killer lens for head/headshoulder shots.

I personally am a Canon shooter, but I have to say my 85 f/1.8 is my favorite lens.

Firstly let me thanks you for helping me understand some of the factors involved in choosing my next portrait lens.

Mehran - Thanks for sharing your images, as you might have guessed, I love the bokeh on the 100mm.

Cyler, ChuckEYe, Owais, Szabolcs Csorge, Prashant, Matt, jerry, fork, Peter - Thanks for pointing out the numerous advantages and mis-advantages of the 85 f/1.8 . I like the bokeh the fact that it is fast and the good build.

I agree it may not be the optimal tool for indoor photography. It looks like I will continue to use my 50/1.8 indoors and will move to use the 85 outdoors.

quilmore - Thanks for pointing out the CA issue, do you have a link that shows the severity of this issue? I really love the blurring on this lens and if CA is minor, I may swallow the frog.

Tibor - Thanks for the sample shots, They helped me to verify what I thought about this lens - sharp!
Mike - YES!! have them both. Sadly the boss will not approve. she wants a new dish washer :)

Thomas - thanks, the nikkor 85 f/1.4 is out of budget for 1024 USD.

Yuval - Thanks for pointing out the Tamron option. Old school like me... I want a Nikkor.

Jakob Dam - Thanks for pointing out the Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED as an option. I will check it out.

Raffi - Cannon rocks but their lenses wont fit my D70 ;)

Again, thanks to all for sharing and helping me take this hard (yet fun) decision.

Just a little nitpicking: You said you were concerned about the macro lens' 60mm working distance - that's focal length. "Working distance" and "focal length" aren't the same. You know what focal length is, of course, but working distance is a specific term describing how near/far your macro lens is from your subject when closely focused. A 105mm focal length macro lens has a greater working distance than a 60mm macro lens, making it better for things like bugs that you might scare away.

Of course, none of this is relevant to your portrait lens, but I hope you keep this in mind (:

I think this is pretty dead, but I'll add my $0.02 in anyway: my primary portrait lens for my D80 is a 50mm 1.8. The price of the 60mm macro is all in the macro function. If you aren't going to use the macro, I would personally save the cash and get the $115 50mm 1.8. Assuming you already have that gem (which you DEFINITELY should!!!!) I wouldn't spend too much time looking at the 60mm and would go right for the 85mm.

I have used an old 85mm 1.4 AIS lens for a few baby pictures with my D80, and though the metering is non-existent (other than looking at the histograms), I love the pictures I get. I would run and get the 85mm 1.8 in an instant if I didn't already have the 1.4 AIS. The sharpness is there, and the 1.8 gives you appreciably more DOF control than the 2.8 of the 60mm micro.

I personally have always liked 85mm on film for portraits, and the 90mm equivalent of the 60mm/2.8 is right within spitting distance of that, making it initially look like a quick pick. There is, obviously, an appreciable difference in the 15mm equivalent distance between the 75mm effective of the 50mm/1.8 and the 90mm effective of the 60mm/2.8, but for my money I would make the jump to the ~130mm effective of the 85mm/1.8 for the same price and have more striking a distinction between the 50mm and my "other" portrait lens.

My quick back-of-the-envelope math also says that you can get both the 50mm/1.8 and the 85mm/1.8 for less than what the 60mm micro should be selling at when it comes out. For my money, the combo of the 50mm and 85mm for short and long portrait lenses gives you the best of both worlds for the same price as the 60mm (assuming, again, that you really don't need the macro!)

Again, just my $0.02, but since we are on a web page for $$$ conscious photographers and all, more bang for the buck is always my motto.

You HAVE to buy the 85mm 1.8, probably the nicest lens I have ever used....

In the interest of full disclosure, I should let you know that I'm an employee of B&H Photo, in NY. I'll also tell you that I work up in the used department, where it gets rather slow during the week, allowing me to spend a good portion of my time testing lenses and gear. It's not a bad gig, though a little mind numbing....for a shooter, the worst thing in the world is sitting behind the desk, selling the gear you'd give your pinkies to own. I just thought I'd lay it out so you know where I'm coming from.

Having played with both lenses, I'd have to go with the 85mm 1.8. Aside from the 105 2.8 Macro, it's really Nikon's best portrait dedicated lens....super sharp optics (sharper then the 1.4!) great contrast, great depth of field....if I didn't just have to spend my paycheck on stupid things like food and rent, it'd probably be my next lens.

The 60mm's a great design, and super useful...but for portraits, nothing's gonna beat out the 85mm. The only other thing I'd suggest in that price range, if you don't mind using a manual focus lens, would be a 50mm 1.2....a spectacular, if finicky lens. Modern Nikon's come with a focus assist light, making it's usage a lot easier...but if you're using an older camera, it's going to be tough. The super narrow depth of field makes precise focusing difficult.

Anyways, good luck!

I know you are set on a Nikkor... but the Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro is an amazing bit of kit, even if you don't factor in its low cost. The bokeh is really beautiful. The AF limiter is a nice touch, and the AF/MF mechanism is really intuitive. I was a little leery of going off-brand, but I saw nothing but very positive reviews for this Tamron, and after my own experience with the lens, I can see what they were raving about.

is 85mm doing? Any new images made? impressions?

I got 50mm 1.8 E series manual lens and a 50mm 1.4 nikkor manual lens. planning to buy a tamron 90mm 2.8 for portraiture and macro. is it worth it?