Originally posted by DogLover The reason I hold the FA77 in such high regard as a portrait lens is because of it's somewhat un-conventional character. It has a warm, romantic style of rendering that is perfect for a lot of portrait work. It also has the sharpness that I consider a portrait lens must-have. You can't fake sharpness later in PP. I would much rather have the best possible image to work with. I also don't think you're going to find too many folks using a soft focus filter in the digital age. The FA43 is about the widest lens I use for portrait work (though when I get an FA31 eventually I'll probably use that, too). The 43, the 55, and the 77 have all served me very well in my portrait work (and twitch is right, the 50-135 is no slouch, either) and all 3 of these are known for their sharpness. The only other lens I am tempted to add (besides the 31) is the Sigma 85 when it becomes available in K-mount, but I'm not really sure I need it.
I'm sure your lenses are just fine for the sort of work you like to do. I'm just encouraging the OP to think outside the box. I realize that, if you are doing portraits for money, many customers have certain expectations and assumptions. Presumably people hire you because they like a certain style of portrait. There is lots of admirable work done by the tack-sharp school of portrait photographers, but that ain't the only way to go.
If the OP indicated that he or she wants to do commercial portraiture of a certain type, I've missed it.
Therefore my suggestions were based on encouraging the individual to explore the creative potential of a less regimented approach to the field.
I like sharp lenses too, having worked many years as a technical photographer.
However, there is something to be said for exploring the potential of lenses with quite different character. (From my perspective, while the FA77 may have characteristics that make it an admirable portrait lens, it is not "different" in the way that a 1930s Leica 90mm is different.)