I'm contemplating either a 105mm or 60mm Micro lens.Is the 105 lens better than the 60mm in terms of sharpness, or is the 60mm better. I know I can stand off further with the 105mm but as distance is not important i'm not sure which one to go for.Perhaps someone can help.
As far as sharpness is concerned I don't think there is much in it to be honest. The newer lenses are sharper than the older ones, but all are sharp and give great results. I have an older 60mm f2.8 AFD and it is an excellent lens for plants and portraits. The 105mm is better for insects.
Ok, gotcha. Well, I have an older non D 105, and it's a great lens. From all I have read you can't go wrong with either lens. To me it comes down to price and available deals, since you state you don't need increased working distance. I do with my lighting setup and the 105 is perfect.
Of the two current lenses, the 60 is sharper. But it's probably not better for most macro work due to the working distance. I don't know what kind of macro you are interested in, but working distance has a significant impact on pretty much all macro shooting.
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!
I would agree with (the other) Brian that the 60mm would probably be the best match for your particular requirement, and to choose between the alternhatives based on focal length rather than any slight difference in optical quality.
One thing is for sure - you won't see a difference in sharpness between images from any decent macro/micro lens by viewing web images - they are all at least very good performers