Yes, I can see the flash relection on the ladybirds. Unfortunately I don't have an external flash yet, just the onboard one so it goes wherever the camera does!

Thanks for the helpful advice and encouragement.

Very, very tempted......

Nice shot - great detail. What lens are you using?

Thanks. The extension tube definitely gives better images when I compare it with the teleconverter, but the teleconverter gives a better working distance and the ability to alter the magnification when it might be a tight shot with the fixed magnification of the tube. It's a bit of a trade off, but ultimately I'd prefer fewer good images to lots of mediocre ones.

What I can't decide is whether a older proper macro lens would give me much of a step up in image quality and would appreciate any advice.

Thanks for the 2nd Jim and congratulations to Sally. I thought it was a great shot and was amazed to see it was taken with the 55-300mm - had prime written all over it.

Great idea this fortnightly competition - I'm learning all the time as it pushes the boundaries.

Some more macro attempts from today. Whilst still nowhere near the standard of other member's images that have been posted I think these are the best I've managed so far. All shot with the Pentax K-r, M 50mm 1.7, 50mm extension tube and onboard flash with a little material over it to diffuse it a little. All f16, around 1/100 sec and hand held using 'catch in focus'

My feeling is that the 50mm with tube is sharper than the 50mm with the macro teleconverter and, my own inexperience and technical limitations aside, this is getting on for as good as it can get with the £30 M lens and tube setup.

Considering how cheap this setup is I think the combination works pretty well. Obviously it's nowhere near the standard of some of the magical shots from Malaysia recently, but I'd be interested in people's opinions about how much better off I might be upgrading to say a Pentax 100mm f4 or a Tamron SP 90mm adaptall. Working distance aside I'm not convinced the extra cost would be worth it and that I perhaps ought to wait until I can afford a D FA 100mm macro?

My rosemary plant was infested with ladybirds earlier so it would have been rude not to take some pictures. Both uncropped with minor PP.

[IMG]http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp15/chriseast/ladybird-1.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp15/chriseast/ladybird2.jpg[/IMG]

I think this is a bee fly. First one uncropped - second one cropped about 50%. Both with slight contrast adjustment and sharpening applied.

[IMG]http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp15/chriseast/beefly.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp15/chriseast/beefly2.jpg[/IMG]

Lastly one for when you have eaten! I saw this spider eating a fly, though it might not be obvious that's what it's doing because of the limitations of the DOF. Second one is a crop of the first. Contrast and sharpening adjusted PP.

[IMG]http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp15/chriseast/spider.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp15/chriseast/spidercrop.jpg[/IMG]

pm sent ref Cosina macro

Thanks.

Bill, if you can't focus at 1:1 because you are slightly too far away can you adjust the magnification to say 1:1.5 rather than move the whole setup. The earlier replies imply not, but yours seems to suggest you can. That's what I can do with the teleconverter which is very useful, but at a cost optically.

I had considered a focusing rail, but the ability to alter the magnification on the teleconverter had done away with that need temporarily. Looks like I might need to start looking again.

I can't afford a new macro lens so am looking at older manual ones. Probably a choice between the Pentax M f4 or a Tamron SP90 2.5 adaptall. Any thoughts between the two or other suggestions for around the £120 mark?

When I use my 2x macro teleconverter with my 50mm lens I can adjust the magnification in small increments from 1:3 to 1:1. I find this particularly useful if using a tripod so I can make minor focusing adjustments by altering the magnification, rather than shifting the tripod a few mm each way.

When I use the extension tubes with the 50mm I'm stuck with a fixed 1:1 magnification with a tiny focus throw which inevitably means difficulty placing the tripod exactly.

Does a dedicated macro lens allow slight adjustment to the magnification as well or is a 1:2 lens fixed at 1:2 when the macro facility is used?

Whilst the teleconverter is easier to use the image quality does suffer a little compared with the tubes and I wondered if a proper macro lens would give me the best of both?

If I thought it was just the lens I'd get one tomorrow, but I suspect the lens is just a small part of the equation. I bet mine wouldn't come out like that with the same lens. There is an awful lot of skill here as well.