In article
>Hi netters, I am trying to decide on one of these lenses for taking >macro photographs and also doubling at times as a normal lense for >taking pictures of people or nature.
>Reading various articles on the net (and elsewhere), it seems that
>people consider the 55/2.8 as the sharper of the two. It also seems true
>that 55/2.8 is not as sharp at infinity as it is in its macro range. >Also, 55/2.8 needs an extension tube to go 1:1. On the other hand, >60/2.8AF goes 1:1 without any extension tubes, has autofocus (which will >be useful to me when I am taking pictures of people), and is not too bad >at infinity. None of them seems like a clear winner to me. (..)
O.K., here it is:
>>>55mm f2.8 Micro-Nikkor - Superb at infinity, even wide-open (with slight illumination roll-off toward corners - gone by f4); excellent
at mid distances; very good near minimum focus, but best when stopped down to mid apertures; good on tubes, but the floating element design
is not optimized for this use and the lens needs to be stopped down a
bit; very good on converters from about f5.6 (not near minimum focus).
>>>60mm f2.8 Micro-Nikkor - Poor at infinity at wide apertures (most
of frame is nice by f5.6, but for clean, superb center-to-corner
performance, use f11); very good to excellent mid distance performance;
superb macro performance (the best macro lens I have seen); very good
to excellent on tubes or converters in macro range.
So, there you have it: near infinity, choose the 55mm; for macro, choose the 60mm. Judging from what you said, it looks like the 60mm
is the one for you.
Hope this helps.