One lens has to go but I do not want to make a BIG mistake: I am going to have to part with one of my lens to finance a new camera body. I know the decision is mine but a little input...

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

I am going to have to part with one of my lens to finance a new camera body. I know the decision is mine but a little input is always nice. Here are the 2 lens.

1: Nikon 60mm 2.8D in like new condition

2: Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5D in like new condition

Both lens do a nice job for me. Which is the keeper?

Any and all comments welcome ..............

Catherine

Keep both lenses and put off the new camera until you can afford it. The lenses are more important and you won't be able to get what they are worth if you sell them.

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

That was the plan. The person selling the camera is offering me a super deal NOW. Nikon D700 in like new condition, original box with everything it came with and camera has 9000 shots. $1000.

Curve_in Loc: Virginia

The value of the body will go down over time. The price of the lens stay about the same. I bet in 6 months, the $1000 for the D700 will be the used street price.

authorizeduser Loc: Monroe, Michigan

thanks for all the comments I've decided to keep both lenses since I've realized I will never get what their worth

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

authorizeduser wrote:

I am going to have to part with one of my lens to finance a new camera body. I know the decision is mine but a little input is always nice. Here are the 2 lens.

1: Nikon 60mm 2.8D in like new condition

2: Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5D in like new condition

Both lens do a nice job for me. Which is the keeper?

Any and all comments welcome ..............

User, unless you only shoot macro, if you keep the macro, you'll be left with a one-trick pony.
Get rid of the macro. Plus at 2.8, I'm sure it will bring in a lot more money for the new body. And 60 is pretty short for macro. Down the road replace it with a longer macro if you do macro. Good luck. ;-)
SS

amehta Loc: Boston

authorizeduser wrote:

I am going to have to part with one of my lens to finance a new camera body. I know the decision is mine but a little input is always nice. Here are the 2 lens.

1: Nikon 60mm 2.8D in like new condition

2: Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5D in like new condition

Both lens do a nice job for me. Which is the keeper?

Any and all comments welcome ..............

I would say the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D, though I'm not sure you'd really get much for it. It's an okay lens, but it's not particularly special. Getting the D700 in like-new condition for $1000 is a good deal, I would go for it. You really can't get a full frame camera for comparable quality for less.

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

The 60mm is not just a macro lens. it is a 60mm PRIME lens, with a 1:1 ratio.

dandi Loc: near Seattle, WA

I remember my friend let me use his 60mm for about 2 weeks. I was VERY impressed by the sharpness of the lens, even comparing to another couple of primes I have. It's built to last for a long time. Since then I want this lens.
Photozone speaks highly about the lens.
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/219-micro-nikkor-af-60mm-f28-d-review--test-report?start=1

It's distortion free. I would keep it.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

authorizeduser wrote:

I am going to have to part with one of my lens to finance a new camera body. I know the decision is mine but a little input is always nice. Here are the 2 lens.

1: Nikon 60mm 2.8D in like new condition

2: Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5D in like new condition

Both lens do a nice job for me. Which is the keeper?

Any and all comments welcome ..............

Which lens do you use the most?

amehta Loc: Boston

amehta wrote:

I would say the Nikon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D, though I'm not sure you'd really get much for it. It's an okay lens, but it's not particularly special. Getting the D700 in like-new condition for $1000 is a good deal, I would go for it. You really can't get a full frame camera for comparable quality for less.

I see I picked a lens, but didn't say if it should stay or go. I think the zoom can go.

amehta Loc: Boston

LFingar wrote:

Which lens do you use the most?

Or which lens produces more "keepers"?

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

authorizeduser wrote:

thanks for all the comments I've decided to keep both lenses since I've realized I will never get what their worth

Plus, you'll pay a lot more when you go to replace them! Just saying, I think you made a great decision.

Michael O' Loc: Midwest right now

authorizeduser wrote:

I am going to have to part with one of my lens to finance a new camera body. I know the decision is mine but a little input is always nice. Here are the 2 lens.

1: Nikon 60mm 2.8D in like new condition

2: Nikon 28-105 3.5-4.5D in like new condition

Both lens do a nice job for me. Which is the keeper?

Any and all comments welcome ..............

There is not much difference amongst the myriad camera bodies -- its all just mechanics, electrics, and electronics. What enables the best in capture is the LENS !!!!!! Forget a different body and keep your good lenses !!!!

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

never, never, get rid of a lens that will fit all your cameras. as soon as you do, you'll find an urgent need for it. the "need" sits around waiting for you to get rid of the lens, before popping up.