I don't have a macro to compare it to, but the K105/2.8 handles well, and is a nice focal length to work with, and is indeed sharp.
Bokeh can be pretty gruesome though, especially with any kind of out of focus specular highlights. More than any other lens I own (or have owned) I have to be careful of how I choose to use it, or it's pretty nigh useless. Closer to infinity or with a very subdued background it's nice enough to use however. William in Utah 9/3/2002 5:53:29 PM, "A K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 23:53:29 +0000 > > From: "A K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject:M100/4 macro Vs K105/2.8 for sharp portraitsHello again! > > > > I use M100/4 macro and M85/2 for portraits. > When I want more flattering look I use M85/2 wide open > because of it's lower resolution and general softness. > When I want wrinkles and sharp skin pores I use M100/4 macro. > I missed one opportunity to buy a K105/2.8. > It seems that PDMLers like this lens very much. > Does anybody know how does it compare to M100/4 macro in terms of sharpness? > When I use my macro lens for portraits I'm shooting at small apertures to > get greater DOF, > so bokeh is not that important to me since I'm looking for maximum > sharpness. > Thanks, > Aleksandar > > > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here
