I recently set up a studio at home and started shooting portraits. I do mostly head shots and head and shoulder type portraits, and find myself wanting something in the 105mm range. I currently do have a 85mm f/1.8G and a 135mm f/2 DC and love both, but I feel that the 105 would get me just at the right distance from the subject. I can't decide between the 105 DC lens and the 105 Micro-Nikkor. I would use this lens for studio portraits, and will be using it mostly between f/5.6-11. In this case I care for the DC feature just as little as the macro. I mostly read that the Micro-Nikkor is ever so slightly sharper than the DC, and since I already have the 135 DC lens, I would be leaning towards the Micro-Nikkor, but I do have a couple of concerns: I have used a macro lens for portraits before, and it didn't work for me, because there was too much hunting. However, that was a much cheaper lens, an old version of the Sigma 105 macro, but I am still concerned that macro lenses in general do that. Has anyone used this lens for portraits? I'd also like to hear more comments on their sharpness. Some say they are the same, most say the Micro-Nikkor is a little better, and I also read one or two comments that said the DC was nicer. I love the 135 DC, so I know I can't really go wrong with its little brother, but then the Micro-Nikkor is a much newer design, and I'm pretty sure it's also a stellar performer. So I guess it mostly comes down to its focus accuracy and amount of hunting at portrait shooting distances. Right now I am using a D700, but I would also like to hear thoughts on using them on a higher resolution camera. Any comments are welcome. Thanks!