Thanks for all the help on my thread about inexpensive options for macro. I might have the opportunity to buy either the Nikon 55mm f/3.5 or the f/2.8, the former for $100, and the latter for $120. Any thoughts on which one to go for, if condition is equal? Thanks!
Easy, go for the Nikkor 55/3.5. It has more contrast, is sharper for macro and close-ups and the 55/2.8 has a real risk of acquiring oil on the aperture blades.
I'm not in the US, but my gut feeling is that it's a fair price but not a real steal. In Europe a good sample would go for € 50 to € 90, depending on condition and exact model, so $100 (€ 75) seems OK.
Those are about fair U.S. prices, as long as the lens is in good condition. Basically, the guy knows exactly what his lenses are, which could be a good thing for you, as they were likely maintained better.
Some more help please! Okay, so I just checked out the Nikon 55mm f/3.5 AI, and the focus seemed a little stiff to me. Unfortunately, I don't have another to compare it to. I did compare it to a 28mm f/2.8 which was also there, and that one was at least twice as loose when focusing. I definitely had to put some energy into the turning, slight tension on my elbow as I did it. The 55mm f/2.8 did not move at all, so definitely a stiff focus problem and let that one go. Is it because of the longer throw of the 55mm being a macro, or is it actually a problem? I walked away, but wanted to hear from some of you actual 55mm f/3.5 owners to see.
The 55mm has a very long focus throw, so that's not something to worry about. The focus should be a bit stiffer than a normal lens so that critical focus doesn't slip, but not so stiff that it requires effort. It sounds as though the one you examined had something wrong with it.
