Trad Gang
Main Boards => Photography/Video Q&A Board => Topic started by: hawk22 on October 29, 2009, 12:35:00 PM
-
Anyone had any experience with these two lenses. Both are 2.8 and both have VR. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks!
-
The longer lens will give you more working distance, which can be a factor, especially if you are photographing something alive.
-
I used to have the 60mm macro and it was a fun lens. I didn't really use it all that much because the working distance was so close. If you are after insects or anything alive I would go with the 105mm. Both lenses are excellent optics and scary sharp!
-
I own the 60mm AF version and the 105manual focus. Both are super sharp and both make me happy. With my D300 -- or any camera that has less than a full-frame chip -- the multiplication factor makes the 60mm into something more like a 90mm.
As for the differences, I find that the reviews on each on the kenrockwell.com website explain the pros and cons pretty accurately.
His review of the AFD 60mm is at http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/60mm-afd.htm
His review of the AFD 105mm is at http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/105af.htm
For a list of all his Nikon lens reviews see http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikkor.htm
-
From what I hear, take Ken Rockwell with a grain of salt. Check out Nikon Cafe...lots of information over there.
-
dpreview.com is another good sourse of info
-
I'll second that on Ken Rockwell...
Nikonlinks.com is also an excellent source of info on all things Nikon.