Hi--

>I have found your lens ratings on the web very useful and have refered
>to them in the past. Thank you.
>
>I now am in the market for a high quality micro lens and have noticed
>in your ratings that you say the Nikkor 105mm f 2.8 micro AF "is too
>difficult to focus manually at infinity". I have looked at the 60mm f
>2.8 and have the same concern about this lense, the focus goes from
>infinity to .7m very quickly. Did you feel that the 60mm was better
>in this regard? Any other advice?
wahoch@students.wisc.edu

Nikon made a switch between the MF and AF versions of the
55/60 and 105 macros - with the MF's, the infinity performance
is excellent, and focus is easy (and the macro performance is good,
but it is somewhat compromised); with the AF's, MF is more difficult,
the 60 is poor in the corners until well stopped down, the 105 often
shows bad optical alignment (but the macro performance of both is
excellent). If you must stay with AF, you may prefer to (also?) have
non-macro versions of the lenses... (and Nikon has left glaring gaps
in their AF line - the choice is either expensive, awkward, or specialty
lenses like the macro and defocus (? - can't think of the word...)
lenses (or the expensive, heavy, excellent 80-200mm f2.8), or
relatively poor zooms . No slower 105, 135, or 200mm lenses, or
constant-f4 zooms. Ah, well, I will stick with MF lenses...;-)