100/2.8 WR macro

<p>Does this lens make a good portrait lens? I tend to longer focal length. The 77/1.8 is better but still... (I need a macro lens too)</p>

<p>I have the lens and use it *occasionally* for portrait work. You need a bit more working room and it doesn't focus as fast as a more typical portrait lens., but the images are nice. For macro work it is stunning, and very light weight, I love the 49mm filter thread. Mine was damaged due to stupidity but it still takes beautiful images.</p>

<p>Let us consider what your light set toward 5% cost to no good portrait glass !?..</p>

<p>Agree with Douglas, 100/2.8 macro is a bit long and slow-focusing for portrait duty. I don't own many third-party lenses myself but would suggest you investigate Sigma 70/2.8 EX Macro if you're looking for something double-duty. I don't know a lot about it but believe it at least offers a focus limiter which may improve AF when you don't need super-close focus. It's also cheaper than either the FA77 or the 100 macro.</p>

<p>It's a shame the Tamron 60/2 Macro isn't available for K-mount as that might have been another good option.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Andrew, I don't understand what "slow-focusing" means with staged portraits outdoors. I used to shoot a lot with 40-years old legacy lenses on my current Olympus. </p>

Tendency to hunt slowly due to long focus path -- if camera decides to rack focus towards minimum it can take a while to

hit minimum and return to desired distance. Can be annoying if subject is person who has to wait for that.

<p>Ruslan, I like your portraits very much. I mostly use my 50-300 for outdoor portraits. I've been trying to use my Rokinon 85mm Manual Focus but getting accurate focus at a distance is really difficult wide open - nice bokeh, though. I have the Tamron 9omm f/2.8 macro which I have not really used for portraits, but I'm going to try it, given the focus issues with the Rokinon. One has to watch out for too sharp portraits with a macro.</p>

<p>Oh yes, the Tamron has a focus limiter to cut down on lens travel.</p>

<p>I had the older 100mm macro and loved it. Best lens so far. With the focus limiter on it I felt no issue with AF speed compared to other glas I had.- Having no limiter on my older 50mm f2.8 sucked once in a while.<br>

Side note: the Pentax macros are what I'd call "male portrait lenses" or killer sharp; they aren't flattering at all, even wide open. - My ex girlfriend liked the 50mm f1.4 over the 2.8. - I heard the 70mm f2.4 would be flattering too. No clue about the current WR lens, mine was even optically a generation earlier.</p>

<p>On a cropped camera you are talking about a 150mm lens. Traditionally a portrait lens is 80-105mm but some photographers seem to be pushing that tradition. I would say it might make a good head and shoulder lens. Right now that lens is selling on Amazon for about $225 cheaper than on B&H and elsewhere.</p>

<p>I understand that hunting may ruine that decisive moment, but this may be with any lens, if hunting. When used with newest cameras like K-3 - will it hunt under good lighting conditions? </p>

<p>I don't havve a K3. - When I put my K20D on center AF and point it on a less contrasty subject, I have my 50mm f1.4 hunting. - I am not sure what can happen in a portrait session but I guess hunting is an option as long as Pentax have not integrated something that uses all non selected AF points to find something to auxillary-lock on and limit the hunting range that way.<br>

If your current lens hunts sometimes the 100mm will hunt too.<br>

The more control you take the more you risk hunting.<br>

The big issue with hunting is not that it happens; its that a unlimited macro lens performs it probably 2.5x as slow as an ordinary lens.</p>

<p>OK, when I said it was really hard to get a non-blurry picture from my 85mm it's at f/1.4 with DoF probably the length of a short eyelash. I'm wondering if Jochen's 50mm 1.4 is hunting for that reason.<br>

<br />I took some photos with my Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 macro. Depending on the light and how close I got, the shots were fine. The lens was not emphasizing lines or irregularities if I stayed out of macro range. I have a K-5 so the lens is equal to a 135mm, allowing me plenty of distance, even for closeups.</p>

<p>And hunting was not an issue.</p>

<p>I say K-5ii has far batter AF than K-20.</p>

<p>I really like the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro for portraits.</p>