Some further ruminations prompted by your question and the many replies:
Portraiture is the most personal kind of photography. Hence what people
like and dislike in portraits varies a great deal. Hence the lenses they
prefer differ a great deal, perhaps more than in any other area of
photography.
If you happen to have a medium tele zoom, like the Zuiko 75-150 or any
of the ubiquitous 80-200s, why not try taking a roll of test portraits
to find which focal length(s) you like for perspective, working
distance, etc. That might cut down the range of choices a bit.
I'm fascinated by all the member comments on lenses they recommend.
Particularly in the area of sharpness, they are often contradictory.
This brings up the complex issue of percieved sharpness vs. measured
sharpness. Contrast and resolving power can be measured separately, but
are inextricably interrelated in the way humans percieve "sharpness".
Take lens 'S', which can resolve the little black and white line pairs
on a test target in the 60 lpmm group, but where the black lines aren't
very black and the white is a bit grayish and lens 'C', which only
separates the lines in the 50 lpmm group, but where the contrast between
the black and white lines is great. Go out and take a bunch or paired
pictures of different types and show them to a group of experienced
phtographers without identifying the lenses. You will not only find that
some will say 'S' is sharper and others 'C' and, almost certainly, some
will pick one lens as sharpest for some subjects and the other for other
subjects. Then you will get a few comments like "Lens x is sharper, but
I like the results from lens y because of the superior ________." When
you mix in all the other factors of how out of focus areas appear
(Bokeh) subtle differences in color rendition, etc with the personal
nature of portraiture, you can see why there are so many opinions. It's
an area where there is no substitute for experience, trying out a couple
of lenses, swapping the one that pleases least for another prospective
one, etc. Or, of course, there is the true Zuikoholic's solution, try
them all at once and keep even the ones that please the least, 'cause
there is certainly a subject or situation out that there that they will
be perfect for!!
I remember reading decades ago about a famous portrait photographer who
said he didn't even put film in the camera he used for the first part of
a session. No point in wasting film until the personal interaction
developed and the subject started to ignore the distraction of the
camera work part of the process. Equipment is only tools, the art occurs
in who uses them and how.
Good luck resolving the confusion.
Moose (the hence man, heh, heh, heh)
Scott Gomez wrote:
It's nice to see so many replies, and it's food for thought, thanks Zuiks!
However, so far the consensus appears to be that I have to have all of them,
in true Zuikoholic fashion. :-) Everyone has great reasons for each of their
recommendations, and those reasons even have some practical basis. So far
I'm leaning towards the 100/2.8 and (thanks Barry, I'd overlooked it!) the
85/2. Maybe both. :-/,
<modest snip>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|