I was wondering if anyone is familiar with the Nikkor 60mm. It is supposed to be "their sharpest lens", or so says the guy at the camera shop. My real question is to you Nikon shooters, What macro lens do you use and are you pleased with it? Magick Michael

105 macro - have been considering a 200mm macro. It kinda depends on what sort of "macro" photography you're wanting to do. Pretty much, the shorter the focal length, the shorter your working distance at the same magnification and the more background area you're going to include. This is great if your shooting, say, a miniature set and want it to look life-size - but it's a bummer if you're shooting, say, a close-up of a flower and you want a nice, bland background to set it against. The more narrow the field of view, the easier it is to select the background for your subject. As far as the sharpness of the lens - lens technology has surpassed digital and, for that matter, film recording capabilities. i seriously doubt that you would ever see the difference between a technically well exposed shot with a 105, a 200, or the 60. Just my 2 cents. Wolf

I think you already know I use the 105 macro from Sigma. I've been extremely happy with mine, but YMMV, most who have it are very pleased with it, but I think Thomas (Raven_427 has some issues with his. I believe I've read in various places that the shorter focal length macros are not as useful as the longer focal lengths, and I agree with all Wolfsnap has said. When I was looking to buy a macro I focused my research on the 90-200mm lengths. And invariably ended up with the 105 because it also makes a nifty portrait lens... so it serves two purposes in my camera bag. Happy snapping Michael!

Hello Michael, "some issues" as dear Michelle stated :-). Yep .. listed them in another thread but to make that short, it comes to one point: you get what you pay for. The Sigma 105 2.8 EX is not at all a bad lens, you can do great shots with her (hey, my most successful ones - the droplets - were done with her) .. but you can't expect the (mechanical) quality of a canon L-lens (or the high-end Nikkors) for 400 Euros. So if this is what you are willing to pay, than get her and have fun! If there's more money to spend (or more quality wanted) .. sorry, can't help than as that's out of my league and i dunno nothing on the Nikkors. :-( The longer macros (180 / 200 mm) are hard to work with (in my humble opinion) .. and as Michelle and Wolf already said .. less than 100 is to short for some animals and for portraits, 100 is just fine. If there are some more questions .. please do not hesitate to ask! Tom :-)