The macro gods have been very, very good to me, and I have a couple of fine Pentax lenses. While preparing to do a close-up of a three dimensional object the thought crossed my mind that a macro lens is best suited for flat objects, like stamps and documents, rather than something with greater depth like the small toy car I was photographing. Using the A100/2.8 macro and the K105/2.8 on the same subject, there didn't seem to be any observable difference between the two photos.
So, what do the macro and close-up gurus have to say about this? Under what circumstances would a macro lens be the better choice, and when might an ordinary lens be a better option? Shel
