Reply to Crossed over to Nikon from Canon with a D3500- Macro photography Lens suggestions?

Well, first of all, it would help a lot if you used some punctuation when you write. You know, commas, periods, that sort of stuff… because, let me tell you, reading and understanding your message above was worse than going through a typical page of James Joyce’s Ulysses…

Anyway, in the world of Nikon, it is very simple: the lenses are all named “Nikkor”. Many camera manufacturers that make their own lenses give them such a name: for example, Minolta lenses used to be called “Rokkor”; Fujifilm call them “Fujinon”, etc. Quite a few manufacturers even use several names to distribute their lenses between various families: Leica do this (Summilux, Summarit, Elmarit, etc.), so do Zeiss (Batis, Milvus, Otus, etc.) —but Zeiss only makes lenses nowadays.

So, all Nikon lenses are “Nikkor”. Amongst them, those that have been designed for macrophotography are called “Micro–Nikkor”, so those will be the ones you want. Nobody really knows why they haven’t been called “Macro” to begin with, instead of “Micro”, but it’s the way it is, just a Nikon quirk.

Now, if you’re only looking at the current lineup of new lenses for your DSLR, you have two choices: the 105mm and the 60mm, both f/2.8. The 105 will give you a little more reach, which implies that you may be able to stand a bit further back from your subject. This may be important in the case of very shy insects, for example. Both lenses are of equivalent quality, and both are excellent. The 105, being longer, will give you shallower depth of field as well, that goes without saying. If your camera has a cropped sensor (which I think it does), the 60 will be equivalent to a 90mm on a full–frame sensor, and the 105 will be equivalent to a ±150mm lens. I have them both and use them indifferently:

With the 105:
One dead bee

With the 60:
Nike Air custom macrophoto

Hope this helps. Good luck!