It's BS, IMO.
The only reason that you wouldn't use a macro lens for portraits is that many
of them, especially the 90-100mm lenses, are startingly sharp and potentially
unflattering for portraits. The Zuiko 90/2 Macro, Contax Zeiss 100/2.8
Makro-Planar T*, and the Leica 100/2.8 Apo-Macro-Elmarit-R are all so sharp
that it's scary.
You could put a Zeiss Softar on one of these if you want to soften the
highlights, or some panty hose across an empty filter.
Sorry if I seem presumpuous, but I don't think that your friend has tried a
good, 90-100mm macro lens for a portrait.
Skip
>
>Subject: [OM] Macro lens for portraits?
> From: Albert <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 09:44:33 +0800
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>I have a Tokina 90mm macro, and I use it a lot for portrait work, as I
>think it has great Bokeh..
>
>My friend however says that macro lenses used as portrait lenses aren't
>that great; BS or true?
>
>If true, reasons why? Or just personal preference on his part?
>
>Albert
>
>
>< 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 >
< 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 >
|