85 1.8G or 105 2 For Portrait

I shoot my kids a lot (5 and 10 months). Which lens would be better? I already have 24-70 2.8 ED, so am leaning toward the 105, but I don't shoot macro at all. The 105 images online look better than the 85 images do IMO.

Thanks.

What sort of distance from your subject do you prefer?

BTW the 105mm & 135mm f2 DCs are worth considering.

spooky action wrote in post #17837965
I shoot my kids a lot (5 and 10 months). Which lens would be better? I already have 24-70 2.8 ED, so am leaning toward the 105, but I don't shoot macro at all. The 105 images online look better than the 85 images do IMO.

Thanks.

You've answered your own question there I think. You don't have to shoot macro to own a macro lens but having it there for the odd occasion you might want to I think is more valuable than not.

Thanks for your replies. This was posted at a time when I was still pretty new to Nikon lenses (still am, but have learned a lot since then). The thread should have read 85 1.8G or 105 f/2 DC (not to be confused with the 105 macro). In any event, I ended up buying a Zeiss 2/135 APO, as I have always wanted a 135 prime and I figured that 85 was close enough to my 24-70 2.8 (I know, the Zeiss is not necessarily an optimal portrait lens, but it should be adequate in that regard). At some point I will likely pick up the 85 1.8 to have a small fast prime on hand.

I did look into both the 105 and 135 DC lenses, but was not confident enough in how they would perform on the D810. That said, it was difficult decision to go with the Zeiss as the DC's render beautiful images.

Thanks again.

Pleased you got something & sorry that I woke up an old thread. FWIW I understand that the DC lenses are pretty good. Renting lenses is sometimes a consideration which can help a future purchasing decision.