If you are looking for a standard lens for general use which is capable of the casual close-up, I would pick up the AIS 55/2.8 micro. Get one with a later serial number and you should be free of oily aperture blades - but always check the lens first. I tried using my AI 55/3.5 for the same purpose, it performs very well in this regard but I always had a feeling that f/3.5 was a bit too slow for a standard lens, while f/2.8 is just acceptable.
Shooting a standard lens less at than 3' (0.9m) is in what I would call the "close-up" range. All the 55 micros are perfectly capable here. In fact the AI 50/2 or 50/1.8 also do very well. It's only if you want to shoot closer than 1.5' (0.45m) that 50mm standard lenses stop and you need to consider a 55 micro. In this range the 55 micro is very handy, the shorter focal length compared to the 100mm class of lenses makes it easier to hold steady and frame accurately. However as you approach the close focus limit (10", 0.25m) you will find the working distance is very short, it may be difficult to approach the subject close enough without putting your shadow across it. If you intend to work more at higher magnification I would recommend something like the AIS 105/4 or AIS 105/2.8 micro to give you more working distance. These are great for general shooting but for higher magnifications you really need to use a tripod for best results. If you want to shoot hand-held, maybe something with VR like like the Tamron 90/2.8 VC would be a better option - but I get the feeling you want a classic lens instead
If you have your heart set on a 55/3.5 micro of some sort, it pays to know which is which. All have basically the same 5/4 optical arrangement although there is some suggestion the optics were tweaked and refined along the way, with early models better corrected for macro shooting, while the later ones sacrifice some close range optimisation for better all-round performance.
I wouldn't consider the very early 5.5cm preset models, they are really collector pieces these days, the handling is not so convenient, and no meter or aperture coupling so it is strictly stop-down metering.
Next come the "compensating" versions with the metal scalloped focus ring. The compensating aperture is designed to work with EXTERNAL light meters to ensure the light reaching the film/sensor is constant regardless of the amount of extension/focus distance. If you use one of these lenses on a camera with TTL metering, the exposures will be ok near infinity but become increasingly overexposed at close range. The TTL meter doesn't know about the compensating feature so you need to manually counter-compensate which is not so convenient.
Next comes the Micro-Nikkor-P versions with the diamond pattern grip. This is NOT compensating - by this time cameras with TTL light meters were more common, which automatically compensate for light lost due to extension. At this point it seems the optics were tweaked for better all-round performance at the expense of outright macro performance (although the manuals state it is optimised for 1:10 like the the older versions, which suggests they are the same ??) The same lens continued more or less unchanged with the Micro-Nikkor-P.C with mulicoating, the late pre-AI/K/New-Nikkor version with the modern barrel design, and finally the AI version. For convenience I would go for the AI version since it's compatible with all cameras, and is multicoated.
