Paratype's version of Centaur sports a beautiful "in style" @:
http://new.myfonts.com/fonts/paratype/venetian-301/

Centaur is too fine for the small text of a business card.
You might consider a more robust “Jenson”.

BTW, for a limited amount of text, e.g. stationery, you could borrow the @ from another font.

What Nick is saying: Centaur was a beautiful type in hot metal, but the digital version is far too light and definitely no good choice for small text sizes.

Thanks for the replies. Also, thanks Nick, for suggesting Jenson.

http://www.fontshop.com/fontlist/subclasses/serif_venetian/

This is what you need:
http://typophile.com/node/81129

hhp

Also, have a look at John Downer's marvellously quaint Vendetta (in the list Nick provided).

Speaking of Downer, I wonder why his Iowan isn't in that
list - it has some of the best caps in town. (On the other hand
personally I think a large x-height is anathema to Jenson.)

hhp

My thoughts exactly. I've never been a fan of Iowan for that reason alone (but the caps are indeed lovely). Satyr is a bit taller in the x-height than the classical Jenson model too, but the much sturdier and less sloping top serifs makes the ascenders appear somewhat taller than they really are, when compared to those of a Venetian typeface. It is also optimised for ten points, not twelve or fourteen. Then again, Satyr is not a Venetian, it just shares a few traits. I'd say it belongs to the non-existing category Nordic Old-style, if any.

Anyone know which size of Centaur was used for Monotype's digitisation, by the way? Why did it end up so disastrously thin and frail? Has anyone tried to redo it properly?

IIRC it was the 14. Which at such a small x-height would
sort of make sense. The anemia comes from digitizing
from the metal, thus failing to account for ink gain.

hhp