A Fat Weevil

Amazing details for this shot. Well done here.

Nice !!! I found and raised a Weevil larva a few years back. Interesting metamorphosis...

What are you fine folks using for macro setups? anybody use a canon mpe-65?

Personally, I'm using an older manual focus 105 macro lens from the 80's along with a similarly aged ring flash.

Screamin Scott wrote: Personally, I'm using an older manual focus 105 macro lens from the 80's along with a similarly aged ring flash.

I love it. What lens?

Lester A Dine. Made for the Dental Profession.It was made by Kino Precision (AKA Kiron). The ring light is another Dine product made by Sunpack for the Dine Co.

Screamin Scott wrote: Lester A Dine. Made for the Dental Profession.It was made by Kino Precision (AKA Kiron). The ring light is another Dine product made by Sunpack for the Dine Co.

Interesting. I know canon i mentioned was made for medical dentistry.  I'm going to look into the one you listed.

Difficulty go up when you throw extension tubes on that lens?

While I have them, I don't use them...

Screamin Scott wrote: While I have them, I don't use them...

Which ones you have? i've always wanted to get into macro. Tapping your knowledge.

To be honest, they are older MF style tubes made by Kiron...Quality is only as good as the lens it's used with. They are best used with true macro prime lenses. Your close working distance drops a lot with shorter focal length lens (DOF decreases as well)

Screamin Scott wrote: To be honest, they are older MF style tubes made by Kiron...Quality is only as good as the lens it's used with. They are best used with true macro prime lenses. Your close working distance drops a lot with shorter focal length lens (DOF decreases as well)

So what advantages does it provide?

Primarily it was the cost. I have about 9 different Prime macro lenses. Some are autofocus, others are manual focus, they range from 55 to 180 mm focal lengths. They all take sharp images (all macro lenses are designed for close focusing). There are some differences though. In terms of optical performance, there may be some differences, but they will be minor that most people would not be able to discern. The biggest differences will be in features. If you want to use the lenses for other than macro shooting then things like AF & vibration control may be more wanted (neither of those features are effective the closer you get to life-sized images). The biggest feature maybe resale value when one compares brand name lenses compared to 3rd party lenses

Screamin Scott wrote: Primarily it was the cost. I have about 9 different Prime macro lenses. Some are autofocus, others are manual focus, they range from 55 to 180 mm focal lengths. They all take sharp images (all macro lenses are designed for close focusing). There are some differences though. In terms of optical performance, there may be some differences, but they will be minor that most people would not be able to discern. The biggest differences will be in features. If you want to use the lenses for other than macro shooting then things like AF & vibration control may be more wanted (neither of those features are effective the closer you get to life-sized images). The biggest feature maybe resale value when one compares brand name lenses compared to 3rd party lenses

lol i was asking about talking about the tubes.