> The major difference between the macro lenses and the non-macro > lenses is that the macro lenses allow you to focus a lot closer.
Agreed. For most of us (who usually would be shooting small and/or close-up 3-dimensional objects, and not just pieces of paper, for example), I suspect that the flat-field characteristic of a macro lens would be less important than the close-focusing ability. > If you're far enough away from your subject that both lenses can > focus then I wouldn't expect to see an appreciable difference in > the images at f/8 or f/11. I would agree. The K 105/2.8 is a pretty sharp lens and the A 100/2.8 Macro certainly is, and their focal lengths are almost the same (so that their depths of field should be very close). Even at f/2.8 or f/4, I would think that the differences would not be large. Fred
