not bad for the plastic fantastic

sineadw

The canon 50mm, with a LOT of help from Julie's tubes. I'm quite pleased with my little self though This guy was teensy!

elven

I'm veering between 'woah!' and 'eeew!'

5uspect

Thats cool! Ugly little bugger isn't he?
How did you get so close without scaring him away?


I should get out with my tubes more.

Ruu_Old

Brilliant stuff, well captured.

sineadw

I especially like the back hairs - most attractive

I had both the 31mm and the 21mm tubes on, and he was far too busy sucking nectar or whatever he was doing to notice me. This is a pretty tight crop too - more or less actual pixel size.

I was just very surprised at the clarity of it with such a cheap little lens. Who needs L glass! (me...:rolleyes: )

5uspect

The back hairs are something. (I don't know if attractive is the right word)

Fionn

ahh yes Fannia canicularis i kid you not! the lesser housefly

very good macro!


although..

should be killed on sight :eek:

magicbastarder

if you *rally* want to have fun (no camera involved), buy a binocular microscope, about 20x magnification - forget the monocular ones which promise 600x. you'll never look at a spider the same way again.

Borderfox

Superb shot, great use for the plastice fantastic

Carrigman

Fine shot.Well done.

311

Supa Fly !

thebaz

is that a blue bottle ??
the eyes are surreal , man made goggles -- very nice (is that appropriate)

the only thing i'd do is reduce size of image , or maybe its my monitor !

Kilree

Excellent shot. What speed/aperture did you use?

Dilbert75

elven wrote:

I'm veering between 'woah!' and 'eeew!'

Well put!

Fantastic shot though - forgive my ignorance, but what do you mean by "plastic fantastic"?

Fajitas!

Is Canon's cheap as chips but pretty sharp 50mm 1.8

Can be got for 60 quid online!

Nice shot Sinead! Maybe a bit more black in though? The darkest dark still seems a bit bright?

rahtkennades

Great shot all right. Just echoing Kilree above, what was the aperture/speed used? I understand that the macro tubes have a varying effect depending on what ones are used? That could be bunkum though!

sineadw

TBH I did no processing on it at all. I was more amazed at the clarity of it with a cheapo lens than thinking it was a good shot per se. I might mess about with the blacks later though, it does need it Al you're right. I have 2 gigs of gig shots to go through for later though.

It was shot at 4.5 at 100 iso, 1/640 sec. I'm not sure how the tubes affect the aperture though? Until recently I thought the tubes meant you were shooting wide open automatically (which explains all my macros with a mm of Dof - I didn't bother changing from 1.8 :rolleyes: ).

Here's the original for a sense of scale - as I said this guy was teensy - the flower is a little bigger than a daisy if I rememer correctly.



Is it just me or is boards running like a dog today?