Micro-Nikkor 60/2.8D vs. 60/2 AF-S G FX

[ruslan]

<p>What could you tell me about those both? I wonder if Nikon <em>have improved</em> specs of this macro lenses. Did any of you compare them optically? Has nano-crystal coating improved anything? Would you suggest any of them for portraits or street photography? What about accuracy, speed... etc? I understand that thr new one is quieter, and it can not be used on old film cameras. I have read a review on photozone, but I am interested in personal opinions. </p>

[Jerry_]

<p>If you go portrait with any Micro-Nikkor lens, you may consider getting a couple of Tiffen Soft-FX filters at the same time. The details are great for bugs and flowers, but each and every pore on a ladies face may be too much detail... If you go digital, the 60mm becomes like a 90mm lens with a DX Nikon body (the D90, the D3100, the D80, the D40/D40x...) and the AF-S lens is something to consider as well.</p>

<p> </p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The AF-S version is much better at long distances and wide apertures than the old one, which had a weakness there. The AF-S version is also easier to focus both manually as well as using AF. The bokeh of the old version was somewhat harsh and also its rendition of skin accentuated blemishes, whereas the bokeh of the AF-S version is beautifully smooth and it gives a nice rendition of skin also. The colour rendition is richer with the AF-S as well. Te AF-S version won't work with those extension tubes or bellows that do not support electrical communication. Also it can't be reversed easily (you need something that will hold the aperture at the desired value). Optically the 60 AF-S is one of Nikon's finest achievements in the FX era (IMO). AF with the new lens is fast, functional and accurate.</p>

[kohanmike]

<p>The new Nikon AF-S 60mm Micro is also f/2.8 not f/2. You may be thinking of the Tamron 60mm macro, it's f/2. It also has a built in focus motor.</p>

[ruslan]

<p>Oh, I made a mistake, being very unattentive! Of course, f2.8! Thank you, esp. Ilkka, but what is known about their optical designs? According to theirs exteriors, the old one has something like a hood...whereas on the new one the front lens is visible. (?) <br>

<strong><em>also its rendition of skin accentuated blemishes </em></strong>doesn't that mean it is sharper at close-ups? </p>

[martin_neu_1]

<p>Ruslan,<br>

both lenses have been tested by "the digital picture". My impression is that the D Nikkor is slightly sharper than the G Lens, especially if it is used wide open.<br>

Try the following link: <a href="http://www.lreviews.info/test/reviews.php?direct=866;865">http://www.lreviews.info/reviews.php?direct=866;865</a><br>

Regards,<br />Martin</p>

[peter_eisenburger]

<p>Look at Ken Rockwell's site for information about these two lenses. I wanted to post the link, but photo.net said: "We are blocking links to Ken Rockwell's site." Ridiculous.<br>

Personally, I always liked the bokeh of the 60 mm.<br>

Maybe you should also consider the 105 mm Micro-Nikkor.</p>

 

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Another review site, of Bjørn Rørslett who also posts here regularly, has reviews on them both, and rates the new AF-S as one of Nikon's best lenses, period: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_spec.html and http://www.naturfotograf.com/bestof.html.<br>

As you will see, his findings are very much in line with what Ilkka wrote above.</p>

[detlev_behrens]

<p>Deciding between these two lenses is very difficult as both have their strengths and weaknesses. I have compared them and did not find the AFD less sharp at infinity compared to the AFS. The AFD is also very slightly sharper at close up distances and has more working distance. Vignetting is also slightly less wide open even on a DX body. But I have found the AF on the AFD very slow and noisy. The AFS is much better. Very fast and silent. Also it´s bokeh and color redition is slightly better than the AFD.</p>

[philip_tam]

<p>I have the 60 AF-S, and it's one of my favorites although it's used in really specific circumstances. I have never used the AF-D version.</p>

<p>Let me say however, that this lens focuses *fast*. I have lenses where people say it focuses reasonably fast, but the 60 AF-S beats them all. It just zips into focus.</p>

<p>Speed wise, like photozone said, it doesn't need a focus limiter. But functionally, I wish it did, because when the lens searches for focus, if it guesses the wrong way, the viewfinder goes completely blurry to the point where you can lose your subject/composition.</p>

<p>I do use it for portraits. Indoors, I found that f/2.8 is simply not enough, so I also have a Sigma 50 1.4. However, the Nikon 60mm simply embarasses the Sigma in the sharpness department, so with enough light I always default to the 60mm. If you want to have a sharp portrait lens, another consideration might be the Tamron 60 f/2, but reviews say the corners are soft wide open. I think the 60mm would make an outstanding studio lens. Street photography: if you like the 60mm focal length then it would be good. For street photography for me, it seems 'stuck in the middle'. Wider or longer seems more useful for street photos in my opinion.</p>

<p>The 60mm is different in that regard: it's sharp, corner to corner, f/2.8 to f/11.</p>

<p>The nano-crystal coating: I don't know. It might reduce flare, but it won't work miracles for you. Shooting into sunsets I can still get situations with flare.</p>

[ruslan]

<p>Thank you, I have just seen their results on the digital picture com., and the new one has won, especially wide open at borders (corners) and mid frame the new one is sharper. </p>

[zack_zoll]

<p>The older version is definitely sharper pre-infinity, but I agree that the new one is a much better all-around lens. If you were only doing close-up work with it, I would recommend the older version. As a general-purpose lens, you're right to select the new version.</p>

[ray_rg]

<p>Check the review of Tamron 60mm vs Nikon G0mm AF-S at tamron lens review (site url has been blocked here)</p>

<p>I have Tamron 60mm and very happy with it. I purchased it for macro + portrait option and so far I have used it for portrait. It gives sharp picture wide open and AF reasonable, definitely faster then Tamron 90mm which I had earlier</p>

<p>Hope this helps</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>the tamron seems like a great lens, but it's DX-only. so, if you eventually migrate to a FF camera, where larger pixel sizes make a difference in macro details, that lens will be a disadvantage. also, the tamron's AF speed is not as fast as AF-S, so if you're planning to shoot portraits as well, the nikon would be the better choice.</p>