Nikon New Lens Choice?

[ubique]

I'm trying to decide what lens to buy between these 2 and need some advice....


Nikon Nikkor AF-S 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR Micro

Nikon Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S Zoom


Clearly with the zoom I get the 28-300mm range, but can it take good quality macro shots at say 105mm or do I need a dedicated 105mm macro for the best results?

[jdepould]

The 28-300 isn't a macro, and isn't really designed to be used that way. If you need that kind of thing, the 105 is really your best choice.

[ubique]

I get the general zoom and macro lens features - if I shoot both lenses at 105mm, what are the differences between them? I can only afford 1 lens.

[kirbinster]

These are VERY different lenses, I have both and the only similarity is both cover 105mm. The 28-300 is a great general purpose walk around lens - but is not a macro lens - you can't get very close to the subject with it. The 105mm is a great macro lens, super sharp but you can't take a wide shot with it and it does not give you the long end that the other does. I don't know what your specific goal is, but if you want a general lens go with the 28-300, while you can't take true macro shots with it you can get some very nice shots at the minimum focus distance setting it at 300mm.

[ubique]

@kirbinster

I might go for the 105mm based on what you are saying as I want to start experimenting with macro shots with my D300 - oil in water, splashes, rain drops, jelly beans, berries etc...

I already have the 24-85mm f3.5 which will keep me going for a while more and will look at the 28-300mm for 2013!

Thanks

[kirbinster]

Don't know that you need a macro for that, the shots below were taken with my 24-70 f/2.8 lens on my D300:

[ubique]

Hi - I meant this kind of 'oil and water' macro photography.

[kirbinster]

That is exactly the same as my shot - its just many thousands of them stacked vertically