| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/04/2007 12:23:22 PM · #1 |
I am trying to decide between these 2 lenses as an affordable(almost cheap) way to add a macro lens to my gear bag. I am looking specifically at the older, non-D version of the 60mm f/2.8 so, please bear that in mind.
I know that the 55mm(I hope I mentioned the right one, there is also a 55mm/2.8) is VERY highly regarded and I've heard it called one of the sharpest pieces of glass Nikon ever made. Of course the 60mm f/2.8 is also very highly thought of in it's newer D version(I rarely see the older, non-D version mentioned).
I will be using it to shoot close-up macro stuff but, also would like to be able to use it for some portrait work(as I see done quite frequently with the 60mm/2.8D) and plan on bringing it to the Canada/Europe workshop next summer.
Can someone please shed some light on this for me and help me make my decision? It would be greatly appreciated.
Message edited by author 2007-10-04 12:27:24. |
|
|
|
10/04/2007 12:32:50 PM · #2 |
| I think I may have been confused and meant that the 55mm f/2.8 was the high-quality lens. Can someone confirm this? |
|
|
|
10/04/2007 01:18:10 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by doc_gonzo:
I think I may have been confused and meant that the 55mm f/2.8 was the high-quality lens. Can someone confirm this? |
The 55mm f2.8 is a great lens, but is just a shy less sharp than the 55mm f3.5. That is nothing against the 2.8 as the 3.5 is one of the sharpest lenses ever made.
You do need to be careful getting a good copy of the 2.8 as they are sensitive to developing two problems. One and the most problematic is that the aperture blades are prone to oiling up and sticking. Evidently the lens doesn't like to be left in high heat area like car trunks. The next problem (same cause?) is that the focusing mount can be sometimes quite stiff. Of course neither common problem effects optical performance, in fact my 2.8 is so stiff that I set focus with two hands before mounting and move the camera for fine focusing.
The 60mm is a good lens for macro, but it̢۪s not great at near infinity. Also like a lot of modern macros, Nikon uses focal length shortening to achieve 1:1; so working distance near maximum magnification is minimal. Not the best lens for shy bugs, etc.
edit to add: I've recently seen 55mm 3.5s in near excellent condition for less than $100, so it is by far the best value.
Message edited by author 2007-10-04 13:20:55. |
|
|
|
10/04/2007 02:30:53 PM · #4 |
I don't have any of these lenses but I do have a couple of AI/AIS lenses and find them much nicer to use (smoother focusing, DOF scales, metal construction) than the newer lenses.
I'd go for the 55mm f3.5 based on what I've read comparing these. But, frankly, they are pretty short for macro use. Even the AF 105 (which I've got) is very close to the subject near 1:1. And none of these have very attractive bokeh for portraiture. |
|
|
|
10/04/2007 02:39:12 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by talmy:
....And none of these have very attractive bokeh for portraiture. |
I know it's the D version(same glass with distance sensing ability built in) but, I don't know that I can agree with that statement....
60mm f/2.8D macro examples from DPC |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 06:56:39 AM EST.
