Ok, then I'll have to buy the MT-24 EX if I'm buying the tubes...thanks for all the help, I'm gonna buy all I can in a few months.
Anyway, it was your pictures that made me buy a 550D and an EF-S 60, and [link] is the first picture I uploaded. Unfortunately I just missed the face focus.
Your tutorials about not focus stacking and learning how to approach insects and to get more emotion and purpose in pictures rather than depth are amazing, and I hope I'll get some great pics, even at 1x, when I start going out for them next month.
I like the light and angle in this shot [link] but the light in these images [link] and [link] looks a little harsh. What are you using for a light source (flash / diffuser / how is it mounted, etc.) and how far away is it from the subject?
If you're going to shoot the whole insect don't clip the legs or antenna, and don't center the subject. For the high mag head shots study human portrait photography to get a feel for how to frame them.
Thanks! The one titled Antheaded was taken undiffused , I know I shouldnt have uploaded it. All other pics after (and including) 'The Weirdest' were taken with the built-in flash and a diffuser I made at home, which fits over the flash, extends forwards, and then points downward over an intended subject at 1x with the 60mm. I guess that's a little unusual. I don't know why the spider picture's harsh, i took it with the same lighting. Probably it's because I'm not used to changing the FEC, I keep it at 0. Is that bad?
Changing the Flash Exposure Compensation (FEC) will just change the exposure -possibly making the shot over or under exposed. Specular highlights, the shiny areas that the flash is reflecting off of, are determined by the size of your diffuser and how close the diffuser is to the subject. If those reflective areas look harsh then either use a bigger diffuser, get the diffuser / flash closer to the subject, or both.
I have a question along the same lines as TheGift73, but i'm using a canon 40d... I really want to try some macro photography, but initially don't want to shell out £400+ for a lens. I currently have an f3.5 18-55mm lens, this one to be exact [link] I have been looking at my options for macro work and also came across the Raynox DCR-250 [link] the images shown on amazon seem pretty impressive for a £33 bit of kit but could i get the similar results with the lens i have?
or would a 50mm prime with a lower fstop be better, such as [link] (i've been thinking about getting this lens anyway as i've been haveing lots of light problems trying to take close ups with the 17-55m, such as smoke shots)
I'd really appreciate your opinion on these, or any alternatives. If the only answer is to get saving then so be it, my long term goal would be to buy the 65mm you use for most of your shots (same as a lot of people i'd bet), but this being my first slr i don't really want to shell out that much cash right away.
i've ordered a macro book [link] which may well answer this but it's taking ages to arrive