PDA

View Full Version : Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM


Pages : [1] 2 3

ChrisBlaze
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 22:11
Anyone have any shots with this lens?

angryhampster
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 22:27
I can't imagine having anything longer than a 150 for a macro lens, especially on a crop camera.

Check these samples out on pbase:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_180_35_macro_u

Indecent Exposure
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 22:33
ChrisBlaze's sig is exploding with gear.

Pics taken with the 180L macro (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sample-Pictures.aspx?Equipment=109&desc=Canon-EF-180mm-f/3.5-L-USM-Macro-Lens-Sample-Pictures).

Mikebethesda
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 22:41
Anyone have any shots with this lens?

Shot these today. I really like the lense on my full frame camera.

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/245/1bdn2449zr9.jpg

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/9940/1bdn2453jm1.jpg

mebailey
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 22:47
Here are a couple I have shown before. Shot with a 5D.

mebailey
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 22:49
Here are some with an XT.

ChrisBlaze
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 23:46
ChrisBlaze's sig is exploding with gear.

Pics taken with the 180L macro (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sample-Pictures.aspx?Equipment=109&desc=Canon-EF-180mm-f/3.5-L-USM-Macro-Lens-Sample-Pictures).

my fav

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Images/Pic/2004-02-21_17-17-14.jpg

Mzzzi99
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 23:57
Here is one.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/123/324219651_ce43fce792_o.jpg

Mzzzi99
15th of March 2007 (Thu), 23:59
And another one.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/119/305961875_f38b76876e_o.jpg

calicokat
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 00:52
http://calicokat.smugmug.com/photos/100929723-M-3.jpg

Ljung
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 01:27
Kross has some great shots with this lens, one of the threads for your reference....

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=151178&highlight=kross

dkangel
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 01:52
Here are a couple I took. Only thing is its with the Tamron 180 :p

dkangel
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 11:50
Hope you dont mind that I posted the Tamron 180 but your OP didnt specify which make ;-)

Jman13
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 13:08
Hope you dont mind that I posted the Tamron 180 but your OP didnt specify which make ;-)

Well, to be fair, the subject says 180mm f/3.5L

Tamron doesn't make L lenses....

Indecent Exposure
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 13:10
Awesome shot, Calicokat!

busterboy
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 14:34
http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/Macro/Catterpiller=60001.JPG

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/Macro/blowing-bubbles.jpg

http://www.timprocter.co.uk/photography/Macro/red-eyes.jpg

dkangel
16th of March 2007 (Fri), 15:56
Well, to be fair, the subject says 180mm f/3.5L

Tamron doesn't make L lenses....

Great Point. Ignored the L. Thanks for the catch. Must be more vigilant next time :p

digital_imagination
25th of May 2007 (Fri), 20:56
Nice shots all. I can't wait for mine to get here! I'll post some pics as soon as I get the lens...

scot079
26th of May 2007 (Sat), 03:19
Great pictures people! I'm trying to justify spending over $1K on this lens. Do ya'll use the canon ring lites for these sample shots or reg speedlite?

busterboy
26th of May 2007 (Sat), 04:52
Do ya'll use the canon ring lites for these sample shots or reg speedlite?



Natural light on my shots although I do have, and use a Canon MT-24EX.:)

Greg_C
26th of May 2007 (Sat), 05:32
As another recent member of this club I am just so impressed with this lens. I often use a 580EX on a flash bracket with it. I don't plan on buying the ring light or the twin light, happy with the results I'm getting from the 580.

No.1
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/image21249.jpg

No.2
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/image21382.jpg

No.3
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/image21406.jpg

No.4
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/image21472.jpg

No.5
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/image21703.jpg

jcw122
16th of July 2007 (Mon), 00:57
Wow some really stunning images here.

malla1962
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 05:30
Just got this lens not macro but I took a few shots with it.

Leorooster
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 09:21
A few recent ones. This is a great lens :)

http://www.pbase.com/leorooster/image/82001102/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/leorooster/image/80901017/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/leorooster/image/83140284/large.jpg

DavidPhoto
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 10:14
1.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1085/987246539_63f303f8b4.jpg

2.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1331/933224589_e4331b11df.jpg

3.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1280/980156239_50437432d4.jpg

4.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1312/884771807_e3082d73d9.jpg

ashdavid
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 10:42
Two pics I took when I was fooling around.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2344/1746002459_7c732ca964_o.jpg



http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2312/1746001419_d854ad8232_o.jpg

silvex
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 11:17
Is it me or does it look like the 100mm f2.8 is sharper ?

ashdavid
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 11:27
Is it me or does it look like the 100mm f2.8 is sharper ?
Tested it and no, but it is close. The problem with the 100mm is the lack of color definition compared to the 180mm.

Leorooster
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 11:31
Tested it and no, but it is close. The problem with the 100mm is the lack of color definition compared to the 180mm.

Exactly.......and the contrast is better ;)

silvex
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 11:32
Tested it and no, but it is close. The problem with the 100mm is the lack of color definition compared to the 180mm.

I agree. I rented a 180 in july and the color contrast it is much better. I've also noticed that my 100-400 portraits/macros have much better saturation and colors.


We forget that it is not JUST about LW/PH, but also contrast, clarity and color.

GregFarz78
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 12:52
A few recent ones. This is a great lens :)


http://www.pbase.com/leorooster/image/83140284/large.jpg

WOW that is really cool :shock:

DavidPhoto
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 13:03
I love this lens. I'm torn between buying my own copy of it or the mpe-65.

Leorooster
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 13:15
I love this lens. I'm torn between buying my own copy of it or the mpe-65.

You need both :)

180L ==> up to 1x life size
mpe65 ==> 1x to 5x life size

If you can only get one. Get the 180L and save for the MPE65. With a 2x TC, you would get 2x life size with the 180L.

Lester Wareham
25th of October 2007 (Thu), 13:49
I am hankering after the 180 too although I already have the MP-E and the 100mm. The 100mm is probably the most versatile but the 180 would be handy on occasion. BTW a stack of 65mm tubes on the 100mm will get you to over 2:1.

My advise is to go with either the 180 or 100 to start and look at the MP-E after. Also consider flash, the MT-24EX is the biz with the 100 and specially the MP-E, don't know about the 180, should work but you might want to separate the heads a bit more.

ashdavid
26th of October 2007 (Fri), 06:49
I am hankering after the 180 too although I already have the MP-E and the 100mm. The 100mm is probably the most versatile but the 180 would be handy on occasion. BTW a stack of 65mm tubes on the 100mm will get you to over 2:1.

My advise is to go with either the 180 or 100 to start and look at the MP-E after. Also consider flash, the MT-24EX is the biz with the 100 and specially the MP-E, don't know about the 180, should work but you might want to separate the heads a bit more.I would get it if I were you, as I have the 100mm and will soon be getting the MP-E, it serves a different purpose to the other macros.

Lester Wareham
26th of October 2007 (Fri), 09:16
I would get it if I were you, as I have the 100mm and will soon be getting the MP-E, it serves a different purpose to the other macros.

It is a question of funds being allocated by my financial director or to give her other title the wife! I am sure she things I have plenty of photo kit already but she needs another ring etc. ;)

Canon Bob
26th of October 2007 (Fri), 12:08
It is a question of funds being allocated by my financial director or to give her other title the wife! I am sure she things I have plenty of photo kit already but she needs another ring etc. ;)

Lester,

Trying being a little smart about it....

I have the EF200L and the EF180L...they look pretty similar so as long as my wife never sees them together, she doesn't know that I have both.
Similarly the EF300, EF400, EF70-200 and the EF35-350....only produce them one at a time and she thinks I get so much use out of IT that IT was good value for money. The MP-E65 is quite small....therefore cheap...voila.
I'm still working on the plan for the 600/4....this is a taking some time to crack :confused:

Bob

Leorooster
26th of October 2007 (Fri), 12:27
Lester,

Trying being a little smart about it....

I have the EF200L and the EF180L...they look pretty similar so as long as my wife never sees them together, she doesn't know that I have both.
Similarly the EF300, EF400, EF70-200 and the EF35-350....only produce them one at a time and she thinks I get so much use out of IT that IT was good value for money. The MP-E65 is quite small....therefore cheap...voila.
I'm still working on the plan for the 600/4....this is a taking some time to crack :confused:

Bob


.........but once you crack it, you could also have the 500/4 and the new 800/5.6, on top of the 600/4 :lol::lol:

Greg_C
26th of October 2007 (Fri), 15:22
Lester,

Trying being a little smart about it....

I have the EF200L and the EF180L...they look pretty similar so as long as my wife never sees them together, she doesn't know that I have both.
Similarly the EF300, EF400, EF70-200 and the EF35-350....only produce them one at a time and she thinks I get so much use out of IT that IT was good value for money. The MP-E65 is quite small....therefore cheap...voila.
I'm still working on the plan for the 600/4....this is a taking some time to crack :confused:

Bob
Does the MP-E65 double as a 50 F1.2:D;)
We could start a whole thread on this, look alike lenses

ashdavid
27th of October 2007 (Sat), 00:27
Lester,

Trying being a little smart about it....

I have the EF200L and the EF180L...they look pretty similar so as long as my wife never sees them together, she doesn't know that I have both.
Similarly the EF300, EF400, EF70-200 and the EF35-350....only produce them one at a time and she thinks I get so much use out of IT that IT was good value for money. The MP-E65 is quite small....therefore cheap...voila.
I'm still working on the plan for the 600/4....this is a taking some time to crack :confused:

Bob

The exact reason why I bought the battery grip for my 5D, so the other half dose not realize the difference between my new 1Ds MKIII when I get it.:lol: Lester, I feel your pain! Goodluck with the negotiations.;)

jra
27th of October 2007 (Sat), 00:34
Lester,

Trying being a little smart about it....

I have the EF200L and the EF180L...they look pretty similar so as long as my wife never sees them together, she doesn't know that I have both.
Similarly the EF300, EF400, EF70-200 and the EF35-350....only produce them one at a time and she thinks I get so much use out of IT that IT was good value for money. The MP-E65 is quite small....therefore cheap...voila.
I'm still working on the plan for the 600/4....this is a taking some time to crack :confused:

Bob

LOL...never thought of it that way :) Now I can buy 1 lens and then all of its look alikes with no questions asked....just remember to only take one out at a time. :D

Lester Wareham
27th of October 2007 (Sat), 02:59
Lester,

Trying being a little smart about it....

I have the EF200L and the EF180L...they look pretty similar so as long as my wife never sees them together, she doesn't know that I have both.
Similarly the EF300, EF400, EF70-200 and the EF35-350....only produce them one at a time and she thinks I get so much use out of IT that IT was good value for money. The MP-E65 is quite small....therefore cheap...voila.
I'm still working on the plan for the 600/4....this is a taking some time to crack :confused:

Bob

Sneaky, but she is way too smart for that, and she is the one the writes the cheques on the credit card. Also I rely on mail order here in the back-of-beyond, so both she and my nosy 15 year old will wonder what I have.

She has been very generous on the photography up to now, all comes to he who waits. ;)

scottyo
17th of November 2007 (Sat), 17:20
Is it me or does this lens have the best MTF chart around

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=7324

ben_r_
18th of November 2007 (Sun), 17:34
The 180 is a great lens. I had both it and the 100. But for the 3 times the price of the 100 I did not feel the images looked that much better. Also the working distance at 1:1 on the 180 is 9.5", while on the 100 its 5.5" and being that I will be using the MT-24EX twin light flashes most of the time at smaller apertures to help increase that DOF the added working distance will only lessen the amount of light reflected off of your subject.

Also if you intend to ever get the MP-E 65mm for some serious macro work youd better get used to being up close and personal as that lenses working distance it only around 3" at 1:1.

So yea I returned my 180 and kept the 100. Ill wait for Canon to come out with a f/2.8L 180mm hopefully with IS. THEN I think it would be worth the additional money.

ed rader
18th of November 2007 (Sun), 19:51
Shot these today. I really like the lense on my full frame camera.





what f-stop were you using?

ed rader

Lester Wareham
19th of November 2007 (Mon), 14:22
The 180 is a great lens. I had both it and the 100. But for the 3 times the price of the 100 I did not feel the images looked that much better. Also the working distance at 1:1 on the 180 is 9.5", while on the 100 its 5.5" and being that I will be using the MT-24EX twin light flashes most of the time at smaller apertures to help increase that DOF the added working distance will only lessen the amount of light reflected off of your subject.

Also if you intend to ever get the MP-E 65mm for some serious macro work youd better get used to being up close and personal as that lenses working distance it only around 3" at 1:1.

So yea I returned my 180 and kept the 100. Ill wait for Canon to come out with a f/2.8L 180mm hopefully with IS. THEN I think it would be worth the additional money.

Yes that's right, the 180 WD is probably useful sometimes but a problem other times, the most difficult to approach insects are usually large enough to deal with using a 200/300 telephoto plus a stack of tubes.

An exception is if you want to work with insects using a tripod, you really need the WD then mostly so you don't disturb the subject with the tripod legs. ;)

So I think the 180 is more of a speciality lens, the 100 is the workhorse and the MP-E follows closely on. BTW I think the MP-E is the sharpest of the three from what I see and hear.

When you have used the MP-E at 5:1 with a working distance of 44mm you find it a bit daft that people say they can't cope with only 143mm from the 100mm macro and must have the 180L. :rolleyes:

scot079
18th of April 2008 (Fri), 19:36
Here's a shot from my first outing w/ the 180L. Super-flippin-duper.
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u264/scot079/7S8F9962email.jpg

Here's one from the same day...used AF. Tack sharp
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u264/scot079/7S8F9955email.jpg

Greg_C
18th of April 2008 (Fri), 21:19
Here's a shot from my first outing w/ the 180L. Super-flippin-duper.


Here's one from the same day...used AF. Tack sharp

Great shots, welcome to club180:D.

I love the Backgrounds this lens produces.

MaDProFF
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 09:12
Just wondering about this lens, how sharp is it at f3.5, does it lose anything over high f stops??

Larry Weinman
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 09:17
I can't imagine having anything longer than a 150 for a macro lens, especially on a crop camera.

Check these samples out on pbase:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_180_35_macro_u

I sometimes use mine with a 1.4 TC. Some subjects just won't let you get close

MaDProFF
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 09:20
I sometimes use mine with a 1.4 TC. Some subjects just won't let you get close

TBH this is the reason why I am interested, I shot a very small spider on my car the other day, and I could not get close enough with a 100mm, the hood would have covered it up, but I am worried about it being f3.5, not that fast, though I don't doubt for one minute you need it faster for macro as it would be a too shallow DOF, but for normal use, I would prefer a faster, like f2.8 on my 70-200

What do the users think?? who own this lens

ben_r_
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 09:40
TBH this is the reason why I am interested, I shot a very small spider on my car the other day, and I could not get close enough with a 100mm, the hood would have covered it up, but I am worried about it being f3.5, not that fast, though I don't doubt for one minute you need it faster for macro as it would be a too shallow DOF, but for normal use, I would prefer a faster, like f2.8 on my 70-200

What do the users think?? who own this lens

For macro the f/3.5 or f/2.8 wouldnt really matter anyway as a majority of the time (say for that little spider) you would need to be shooting at f/8 or more just to get that tiny spider all in focus.

gasrocks
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 10:37
F2.8 vs F3.5, etc. does come into play when we consider how bright the image is in the viewfinder for composing and focus issues. And there are some people who shoot macro at 2.8 for a whole different effect.

W84ME
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 13:01
Aside from slow focusing, this is a good lens.

Lester Wareham
23rd of April 2008 (Wed), 13:43
F2.8 vs F3.5, etc. does come into play when we consider how bright the image is in the viewfinder for composing and focus issues. And there are some people who shoot macro at 2.8 for a whole different effect.

Although not strictly macro I use f2.8 all the time with flowers, mostly with the 100mm macro.

This with the 200mm f2.8L
http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Flora/Flora%205/Flora%20Daf%20E%20007%20120408.jpg

and this with the 100mm macro
http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Flora/Flora%201/Flora%20Flower%20F%20001%20130607.jpg

Sharp performance and pleasing bokeh is essential in a macro lens wide open for me.

ashdavid
24th of April 2008 (Thu), 03:46
Aside from slow focusing, this is a good lens.
Great pic! I love the boarder too.

DonG
25th of April 2008 (Fri), 17:29
Hi everyone, I just received this lens a few days ago and wanted to show a couple shots I took.

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/283918388_wbjWS-O.jpg

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/284970551_EDJvJ-O.jpg

ashdavid
25th of April 2008 (Fri), 19:57
Love that first shot!

MaDProFF
26th of August 2008 (Tue), 18:15
I spent quite a while with this lens the other day on a South East POTN meet up, 2 of my favorite shots of the day

DavidPhoto
26th of August 2008 (Tue), 18:35
Really love that first shot of the man. Wish I still had this lens in my possession.

MaDProFF
27th of August 2008 (Wed), 04:51
Really love that first shot of the man. Wish I still had this lens in my possession.

Many thanks, it is a great lens, many uses, but as a macro it is quite a big lens to hand hold, so quite difficult.

I have ordered some tubes as sometimes you cannot get close enough it has a 0.9 min focus distance.

MaDProFF
16th of September 2008 (Tue), 04:34
a Few more shots from the 180mm the more I use this Lens the more I appreciate it

MaDProFF
16th of September 2008 (Tue), 04:35
2 more

Shuko
21st of September 2008 (Sun), 08:04
Only 50% 0,3 USM applied on the first one

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4593.jpg

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4589.jpg

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4574.jpg

MaDProFF
4th of October 2008 (Sat), 15:21
Another one with this lens

Greg_C
5th of October 2008 (Sun), 15:20
Some more from me, I love this lens, gotta be my fav to use.

No.1
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/image32504.jpg

No.2
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2008/image36557.jpg

No.3
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2008/image37311.jpg

S.Horton
24th of December 2008 (Wed), 12:20
Excellent archive thread overall.

As usual, POTN has the examples of all the glass when I need it to make a selection.

A bit OT, but, if I may, for those who do own this lens -- In daylight, Is a macro ring light recommended when using this lens?

Shuko
24th of December 2008 (Wed), 13:11
Not owning a macro flash of any kind, but Id imagine it depends on the target size. Ive been fine without a flash for dragonflies etc.

scot079
24th of December 2008 (Wed), 13:29
Excellent archive thread overall.

As usual, POTN has the examples of all the glass when I need it to make a selection.

A bit OT, but, if I may, for those who do own this lens -- In daylight, Is a macro ring light recommended when using this lens?

I used to own this lens w/ the MT-24EX. It's difficult to get a soft light no matter how you diffuse the twin-light because the MFD is so long and the lights are so far away. I got much better results using a speedlight w/ macro bracket and Lumiquest softbox..much larger light source....and cheaper!

Not sure about the MR-14 though

EDIT: oh and it depends on what aperture you want to use. If you're using f/16 for max DOF then yes you'll probably want to use a flash

Sculthorpe
12th of February 2009 (Thu), 17:37
This lens is amazing. It's difficult to hand hold but with a focusing rail, it's delightful.

airbutchie
3rd of April 2009 (Fri), 12:15
Revisiting this piece of glass...

"Sleeping Snail"
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3619/3408944655_4864aa8648_b.jpg


"Bursting with Colors"
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3594/3408943211_593a754e08_b.jpg


"Follow the Lines"
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3350/3408941013_9b150736c7_b.jpg

- airbutchie ;)

Jacobredphoto
13th of April 2009 (Mon), 21:39
This is a D-SLR rookie question. What is the minimum focusing distance for this lens?

scot079
13th of April 2009 (Mon), 22:24
It's just over 18":-)

Goincarcrazy
13th of April 2009 (Mon), 23:12
This may be a question that has already been answered as I just skimmed through here. Some spectacular pictures in here truly!

Basically I'm looking to get a macro setup that's great for close-up (super macro stuff), but also not loose the option for infinity focus. That being said, I use a 100mm macro now and generally pair it with Kenko tubes (all 67mm worth). I find that this allows me to get up close and personal with the little fellas, but at the same time, it sometimes gets me TOO close and scares the little buggies away. I was wondering what type of magnifications this thing could get with all 67mm of tubes on it and how close/far you would have to be from the critters for max mag (since focusing changes it).

Sorry for being a bit vague as I'm not a macro guru yet, but hopefully you guys can fill in when necessary!

BTW, any examples would be wonderful!

Lester Wareham
19th of April 2009 (Sun), 13:45
This may be a question that has already been answered as I just skimmed through here. Some spectacular pictures in here truly!

Basically I'm looking to get a macro setup that's great for close-up (super macro stuff), but also not loose the option for infinity focus. That being said, I use a 100mm macro now and generally pair it with Kenko tubes (all 67mm worth). I find that this allows me to get up close and personal with the little fellas, but at the same time, it sometimes gets me TOO close and scares the little buggies away. I was wondering what type of magnifications this thing could get with all 67mm of tubes on it and how close/far you would have to be from the critters for max mag (since focusing changes it).

Sorry for being a bit vague as I'm not a macro guru yet, but hopefully you guys can fill in when necessary!

BTW, any examples would be wonderful!


You can figure magnification using the equation E/F where E is the extension and F is the focal length, this gives you the minimum focus at infinity. So you can see the longer focal length lens gives you less magnification for a given amount of tubes.

A rough estimate is for a whole stack of tubes the 100mm gives a magnification range of 0.6-2X with working distances of 162-110mm and the 180mm magnifications of 0.38-1.5X with working distances of 690-200mm.

Most of us wanting to get in close use the the MP-E 65mm, this give the following magnifications and working distances:

1X 101mm
2X 63mm
3X 51mm
4X 44mm
5X 41mm

A lot of approaching insects very closely is down to technique and practice.

With the 180mm you could use the EX 2X TC to get to 2X at the same working distances as it manages without a TC for 1X, but of course image quality will suffer to some extent. A downside I have found to working with longer lenses (300mm+) at high magnification is it becomes increasingly difficult to locate the subject in the viewfinder.

timnosenzo
1st of May 2009 (Fri), 10:44
Just got this lens yesterday after months (years maybe?) of deliberation. Here's a quick shot from yesterday afternoon--really looking forward to using this lens!

http://www.timnosenzo.com/photos/525513015_ubcwj-L-1.jpg

timnosenzo
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 09:57
From yesterday:

5D MKII + 180L Macro

http://www.timnosenzo.com/photos/526222678_TFuNd-XL.jpg

Greg_C
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 16:08
^^^ Nice work Tim

eth3rton
6th of May 2009 (Wed), 19:13
First two are with the Canon 1.4 TC attached. Last one is just the 180L.

http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p519479331-5.jpg

http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p742778690-5.jpg

http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p787266011-5.jpg

timnosenzo
8th of May 2009 (Fri), 07:09
From yesterday, 5D MKII + 180L Macro:

http://www.timnosenzo.com/photos/531201049_6u4V8-XL.jpg

Two
8th of May 2009 (Fri), 09:41
cool stuff. keep 'em coming!

Greg_C
8th of May 2009 (Fri), 16:12
Ok, from this week.
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2009/image43464a.jpg

Shuko
16th of May 2009 (Sat), 11:54
f5.6
http://derfel.org/kuvia/2009/05/UZ3J1692.jpg

f8
http://derfel.org/kuvia/2009/05/UZ3J1661.jpg

wide open bokeh
http://derfel.org/kuvia/2009/05/UZ3J1652.jpg

Jannie
16th of May 2009 (Sat), 11:57
Ohhhhhhh, I've got to get one of these.

Greg_C
16th of May 2009 (Sat), 15:49
Ohhhhhhh, I've got to get one of these.
will go very well on your 1D3 Jannie.:D

eth3rton
16th of May 2009 (Sat), 19:22
http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p790587694-4.jpg

http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p637342804-4.jpg

DonG
27th of May 2009 (Wed), 17:14
A couple recent shots.

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/544778458_v2yGv-X2.jpg

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/544778049_hUuSb-X2.jpg

Shuko
28th of May 2009 (Thu), 03:36
With 1.4x

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2009/05/UZ3J1846.jpg

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2009/05/UZ3J1852.jpg

eth3rton
29th of May 2009 (Fri), 21:25
http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p223304126-5.jpg

http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v6/p190856224-5.jpg

http://eth3rton.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p254602672-5.jpg

timnosenzo
6th of June 2009 (Sat), 09:22
Mmmmmm, beer. 5D MKII + 180L Macro :)

http://www.timnosenzo.com/photos/556000325_9TcuZ-L.jpg

thewiz4u
10th of June 2009 (Wed), 07:22
Only 50% 0,3 USM applied on the first one

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4593.jpg

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4589.jpg

http://derfel.org/kuvia/2008/syys/UZ3J4574.jpgThat butterfly is just stunning!!!!bw!

timnosenzo
13th of June 2009 (Sat), 08:07
My first attempt at shooting bugs. I don't know how some of you guys get such tack sharp bug photos... between the wind blowing the glass and the bug moving, I was lucky to get what I did here. Oh well, keep practicing. :)

5D MKII + 180L Macro

http://www.timnosenzo.com/photos/562364724_mV6uj-XL-1.jpg

Goincarcrazy
15th of June 2009 (Mon), 22:24
Just got mine in the mail today and I gotta admit, I LOVE the sharpness. I do have a question though about the focusing.

I know many say its slow (which, yes, it is), but I was curious how you find it in low-light (and by that I mean a medium sized room with a 60 watt lamp on). Mine was having THE hardest time try to figure out what to focus on and I was trying it on multiple things, especially things with text or textures.

I did try it outside in dusk light (not direct bright sun, but evening light if you will), and it seemed to be ok, so I just wanted other peoples thoughts/opinions about the focusing on this bugger. Thanks!

Shuko
16th of June 2009 (Tue), 06:00
99% manual focus for me on this lens. Though, for a "normal" tele I use a 200mm.

eth3rton
16th of June 2009 (Tue), 13:29
99% manual focus for me on this lens.

Same here. Almost always MF unless I'm using it for a telephoto shot.

Goincarcrazy
16th of June 2009 (Tue), 23:14
Alright, had my first go at it tonight, and the DOF is going to take some getting used to, but other than that, pretty easy to use. Yes, very slow focus, but in the light it does well, and it adjusts very nicely when you decide to manually adjust it. Great lens overall!

http://fc00.deviantart.com/fs46/i/2009/167/3/c/Nature__s_Mosaic_by_NC_Photography.jpg

DonG
17th of June 2009 (Wed), 03:51
Some recent shots of mine.

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/564425342_Mk9jS-XL.jpg

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/559956083_F2aXx-XL.jpg

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/564687852_YKLqJ-XL.jpg

http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/photos/559957110_vBXyV-XL.jpg

thejager
24th of June 2009 (Wed), 14:32
one of my favorite lenses!

scot079
29th of June 2009 (Mon), 16:41
If a kind soul wouldn't mind helping taking a quick measurement:

How long is the ET-78 hood that comes w/ the 180L? I need to see if this will fit w/ my new bracket. Love this lens, sold it once. Regret:-(

eth3rton
29th of June 2009 (Mon), 18:55
If a kind soul wouldn't mind helping taking a quick measurement:

How long is the ET-78 hood that comes w/ the 180L? I need to see if this will fit w/ my new bracket. Love this lens, sold it once. Regret:-(

According to Amazon - Product Dimensions: 4.3 x 4.1 x 3.2 inches ; 3.2 ounces

scot079
29th of June 2009 (Mon), 19:09
According to Amazon - Product Dimensions: 4.3 x 4.1 x 3.2 inches ; 3.2 ounces

Thanks eth3rton, forgot to check there

Goincarcrazy
19th of July 2009 (Sun), 01:06
A few from this weekend:

This one is pretty heavily PPed, and I still have to work on the noise, but here it is anyway.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3535/3731883765_b0cd05a3f5_b.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2648/3732682474_4b2dd5808b_b.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3612/3731883551_4fbf2e6b48_b.jpg

kozmix
19th of July 2009 (Sun), 14:44
Duck Magret with Raspberry Sauce.

Click to enlarge.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_eoKhUgL9WJA/SddPAlo1F7I/AAAAAAAAAK8/307KiWtFuE0/s320/_MG_0249.jpg (http://www.ruben-vicente.com/galleries/food/10.html)

kozmix
23rd of July 2009 (Thu), 06:35
Baked Codfish with Spinach, Peanuts and Raisins Stir Fry

Click to enlarge.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_eoKhUgL9WJA/SeBv4z3mDNI/AAAAAAAAALE/9VgiQUTQz3s/s320/_MG_0254.jpg (http://www.ruben-vicente.com/galleries/food/11.html)

scot079
9th of August 2009 (Sun), 19:51
Here's some from my 180L. Love her to death! :-):-)

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/photos/607704591_c3Ctr-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/photos/611015297_avCPK-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/photos/613546288_uCgE3-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/photos/615357539_5mznL-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/photos/615356997_mf2VE-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/photos/615357385_pf5Rc-O.png

Lester Wareham
10th of August 2009 (Mon), 08:27
Here's some from my 180L. Love her to death! :-):-)


Great shots. Very sharp.

Out of interest are you working handheld with flash or ion a tripod?

scot079
10th of August 2009 (Mon), 09:02
Great shots. Very sharp.

Out of interest are you working handheld with flash or ion a tripod?

IIRC the 3rd w/ the bee is the only photo I used a tripod for...longer shutter to get the ambient light in the BG. Normally it's handheld and flash though. Thanks

Goincarcrazy
22nd of August 2009 (Sat), 21:30
Well, for the short time that i've had this lens, it's been super sharp, but I just don't get that much use of it for what it truly can do, so it must go (anyone interested? haha).

Keep up the great pics!

kozmix
9th of September 2009 (Wed), 16:18
Barcelona port vell:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2450/3874211358_6383aa1ed7_o.jpg

kozmix
11th of September 2009 (Fri), 05:42
And a painter from Las Ramblas, Barcelona.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2488/3873773503_4f42c8b0f5_o.jpg

id400mm
18th of October 2009 (Sun), 08:46
:cool:

Oliviero
18th of October 2009 (Sun), 12:20
Wow, that flower pic is amazing, lovely colours. Perhaps it would've been even better without the insect... hmm, not sure.

scot079
4th of November 2009 (Wed), 15:57
Just browsing through my macros, here's a few more from the 180L...excellent lens.

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/Macro/Insects/IMG0256/615357142_8RTEZ-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/Macro/Insects/00038/617416887_YWHZG-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/Macro/Dragonflies-and-Damselflies/BlueDamsel/620712780_midrB-O.png

http://www.timadkinsphoto.com/Macro/Dragonflies-and-Damselflies/00021/616457837_LRfos-O.png

brownbugger
18th of November 2009 (Wed), 14:58
would love to see more non macro shots by this lens , anyone ?

Leisa
20th of November 2009 (Fri), 16:17
Fantastic shots Tim!! Did you use flash, if so, what kind? Are these done without any cropping? I am looking to buy a macro lens (dont know much about them) and cant decide between the 180 or the new 100 f.2.8L. Any advice? It's shots like these that make me want this lens but is it achievable for us mere mortals new to macro?

scot079
20th of November 2009 (Fri), 17:27
^thanks Leisa. Yes they're all flash only except the damselfly which was lit with natural light with just a little fill flash. The fly shots are approx. cropped down to 2/3 of the original frame. My handmade diffuser only works with the 180L, but the 100L looks nice. You might want to check that out.

I learned everything I know from your countrymen like Brian Valentine (LordV) He has some great tutorials on the web.

Have fun and good luck!

Leisa
21st of November 2009 (Sat), 16:54
Thanks Tim. I am now the proud owner of a new 180mm f/3.5L Macro lens! Not an easy monster to use! Crikey, its hard enough to get in focus with an inaminate object, let alone insects. How do you do it?

meta4
23rd of January 2010 (Sat), 22:11
5d2 - iso100 - f/9.1 - 1/250sec

http://ih2.redbubble.net/work.4529034.2.flat,550x550,075,f.jpg

WA Tiger
21st of April 2010 (Wed), 11:33
I have the 100mm but I love the look of this lens, the clarity is excellent. Shopping soon..:cool:

Greg_C
11th of May 2010 (Tue), 04:43
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2010/image50014.jpg

Kirke
16th of August 2010 (Mon), 04:13
Exquisite picture, Greg.

Greg_C
16th of August 2010 (Mon), 04:18
Exquisite picture, Greg.
Thanks

porco
7th of September 2010 (Tue), 16:43
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2010/image50014.jpg

Very nice picture. Can you tell the details/informations of the shooting? Did you use flash?

Greg_C
7th of September 2010 (Tue), 22:55
Very nice picture. Can you tell the details/informations of the shooting? Did you use flash?
Thanks,
180mm 1/50s at F11 with ISO 400 + MT-24 Twin Lite set at FEC -2/3. The 180L was on a tripod but the lens collar and ballhead were kept loose so I could reposition things. I kept the shutter speed low (hence the tripod) to get the colour back into the background.

porco
7th of September 2010 (Tue), 23:19
Thanks,
180mm 1/50s at F11 with ISO 400 + MT-24 Twin Lite set at FEC -2/3. The 180L was on a tripod but the lens collar and ballhead were kept loose so I could reposition things. I kept the shutter speed low (hence the tripod) to get the colour back into the background.

Thanks Greg for the details. It should be early in the morning when you took this picture, right? How's the nature light? I don't have twin lite, but I do have 580 exII, do you think an O flash ring with the flash can make similar effects?

Sorry for so many questions since I've never used flash in Macro shooting. But I am going to have a try after seeing your amazing picture.

Thanks again.

porco
7th of September 2010 (Tue), 23:27
love this lens. So sad winter is coming:(

Greg_C
7th of September 2010 (Tue), 23:37
Thanks Greg for the details. It should be early in the morning when you took this picture, right? How's the nature light? I don't have twin lite, but I do have 580 exII, do you think an O flash ring with the flash can make similar effects?

Sorry for so many questions since I've never used flash in Macro shooting. But I am going to have a try after seeing your amazing picture.

Thanks again.

Yes it was early in the morning, 7:15am on 14/03/2010. Sunrise would have been before 5am at that time of year. It was very overcast and had just started to rain (the drops on the eyes). The natural light was very soft as the sun was behind the clouds. The trick was to add enough flash to fill the shadows but not make the flash too obvious.

A good softbox type diffuser on the 580 will probably give better results than the O flash - not that I have any experience with the O flash. I've been experimenting with a 40cm softbox, it produces lovely light but can be a little cumbersome as I have to hold it in the left hand and the 1D3+180L in the right. It's probably too big.:(

A large, diffuse light source will produce a more appealing light and less hard reflections or shadows. A lot of the techniques portrait photographer use transfer across well into macro photography - it's just a matter of scale.

Glad we are in spring here now!!!
Another 180L shot from recently.
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2010/image51983.jpg

porco
8th of September 2010 (Wed), 00:03
Yes it was early in the morning, 7:15am on 14/03/2010. Sunrise would have been before 5am at that time of year. It was very overcast and had just started to rain (the drops on the eyes). The natural light was very soft as the sun was behind the clouds. The trick was to add enough flash to fill the shadows but not make the flash too obvious.

A good softbox type diffuser on the 580 will probably give better results than the O flash - not that I have any experience with the O flash. I've been experimenting with a 40cm softbox, it produces lovely light but can be a little cumbersome as I have to hold it in the left hand and the 1D3+180L in the right. It's probably too big.:(

A large, diffuse light source will produce a more appealing light and less hard reflections or shadows. A lot of the techniques portrait photographer use transfer across well into macro photography - it's just a matter of scale.

Glad we are in spring here now!!!
Another 180L shot from recently.
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2010/image51983.jpg

Waaaaaaaa~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ really impressive.

Greg_C
8th of September 2010 (Wed), 00:09
Waaaaaaaa~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ really impressive.
Thanks, should have included the details.

handheld 180mm + 56mm tubes 1/160s at F8 with ISO 800 + MT-24 Twin Lite with -1 2/3 FEC.

porco
8th of September 2010 (Wed), 15:31
Thanks, should have included the details.

handheld 180mm + 56mm tubes 1/160s at F8 with ISO 800 + MT-24 Twin Lite with -1 2/3 FEC.

Thank you Greg. Have a great day

porco
26th of September 2010 (Sun), 17:05
two more
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4091/5026862333_4e24f2f722_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/5027478642_2dda58f236_b.jpg

porco
2nd of October 2010 (Sat), 15:16
:):):):):)

View_Finder
3rd of October 2010 (Sun), 16:19
I found a bush full of yellow-necked caterpillars this past week.

This one in its defensive posture.

View_Finder
18th of October 2010 (Mon), 22:54
Sorry about the last one - the compression killed that one me thinks :)

How about a stink bug from about the same time...

Indecent Exposure
3rd of December 2010 (Fri), 16:07
I can't figure this lens out. I see output coming from the 180mm f3.5L and am routinely impressed. It has a very attractive focal distance for macro work and it's reasonably fast. But what's the deal with the aftermarket. This lens doesn't hold its value like, say, the 100mm f2.8 (or even the IS L). Used copies don't sell as fast as other high-dollar L's. Why is that? Is there something about this lens that's given it a reputation one way or the other? Or is it just a case of esoteric lenses not being as popular as your more run-of-the-mill models and thus not sought after by as many people?

I'm dangerously close to pulling the trigger on one of these, but this has always had me wondering...

DavidPhoto
3rd of December 2010 (Fri), 16:11
I think its just a matter of the focal length not being as useful. It is a very nice high-quality lens.

Greg_C
3rd of December 2010 (Fri), 16:23
Or is it just a case of esoteric lenses not being as popular as your more run-of-the-mill models and thus not sought after by as many people?

I'm dangerously close to pulling the trigger on one of these, but this has always had me wondering...
Yep, I think this is it. If I talk to people about buying macro lenses I don't say buy at this longer focal length first - so even as as an owner I direct beginners away from this lens.

Over the last few years it seems to me macro photography as been in a "get closer" or more magnification phase. The 180L doesn't suit this style of macro photography as well. I disagree about the focal length not being very useful, this is tied up with what you are using the lens for. You don't reach for the 180L to take a 3x mag shot of a flies eye. There are certain types of subjects that it's more suited too. These are the larger subjects like Dragonflies and Butterflies and then shot from a little further away, but then that's what you buy a longer macro lens for isn't it - working distance.

If you do buy one I'm sure you will be pleased.

Indecent Exposure
3rd of December 2010 (Fri), 16:40
Yep, I think this is it. If I talk to people about buying macro lenses I don't say buy at this longer focal length first - so even as as an owner I direct beginners away from this lens.

Over the last few years it seems to me macro photography as been in a "get closer" or more magnification phase. The 180L doesn't suit this style of macro photography as well. I disagree about the focal length not being very useful, this is tied up with what you are using the lens for. You don't reach for the 180L to take a 3x mag shot of a flies eye. There are certain types of subjects that it's more suited too. These are the larger subjects like Dragonflies and Butterflies and then shot from a little further away, but then that's what you buy a longer macro lens for isn't it - working distance.

If you do buy one I'm sure you will be pleased.

That's what I figured. Thanks for the response.

Now, to decide...

DavidPhoto
3rd of December 2010 (Fri), 16:56
Over the last few years it seems to me macro photography as been in a "get closer" or more magnification phase. The 180L doesn't suit this style of macro photography as well. I disagree about the focal length not being very useful, this is tied up with what you are using the lens for. You don't reach for the 180L to take a 3x mag shot of a flies eye. There are certain types of subjects that it's more suited too. These are the larger subjects like Dragonflies and Butterflies and then shot from a little further away, but then that's what you buy a longer macro lens for isn't it - working distance.

Right but there are fewer applications for this lens which is why as a macro the FL is not as useful as a 100mm or even 60mm lens and for non-macro a 180mm fixed lens tends to be too long for most applications.

Rent one.

Greg_C
3rd of December 2010 (Fri), 17:08
Right but there are fewer applications for this lens which is why as a macro the FL is not as useful as a 100mm or even 60mm lens and for non-macro a 180mm fixed lens tends to be too long for most applications.
I agree somewhat, you have to factor in what you shoot. There is a good chance that viewers here are looking for something different to the 100mm and that is what the 180L offers.

Later today I want to take some watch photos and I won't use the 100 or the 180 for this. I prefer the 50mm macro for this. If I go out hunting dragonflies later this afternoon I'd reach straight for the 180L.

Like I said earlier I direct beginners away from the 180L as they they will probably get better use out of something in the 100mm range especially if they are purchasing their first macro lens. You don't get many people buy a long macro lens as their first lens, they usually purchase it later on for the advantages it offers.

Lester Wareham
4th of December 2010 (Sat), 08:55
I can't figure this lens out. I see output coming from the 180mm f3.5L and am routinely impressed. It has a very attractive focal distance for macro work and it's reasonably fast. But what's the deal with the aftermarket. This lens doesn't hold its value like, say, the 100mm f2.8 (or even the IS L). Used copies don't sell as fast as other high-dollar L's. Why is that? Is there something about this lens that's given it a reputation one way or the other? Or is it just a case of esoteric lenses not being as popular as your more run-of-the-mill models and thus not sought after by as many people?

I'm dangerously close to pulling the trigger on one of these, but this has always had me wondering...

I would hazard the following:

1) The lens is much more of a dedicated macro lens. The manual focus ring turns through a winder range than the two 100mm lenses, this part of the reason the AF is slow, and it is, very. The 100mm macros AF work very well for general work and is quick. Having said this I have tracked a Heron in flight with the 180mm, not so bad.

2) Another factor is some on line tests suggested less than razor sharp performance at normal distances. When I first had the lens I was shooting still with the 20D and found it was sharp but modestly so at normal distances but very sharp at macro distances using MF. Since using the 7D I have found the performance is much better at normal distances, perhaps this is due to micro adjust. I think there is some negative sentiment because of these tests and this is unfair.

3) The lens is much larger and heavier than the 100mm classic. I tend to find the 180L is great for butterflies and dragonflies handheld, but close to 1:1 handheld it gets a bit harder than the 100mm, partly due to the weight and partly due to the extra focal length.

To summarize its a gem, I have used mine a great deal since getting it.

vachss
5th of December 2010 (Sun), 01:35
For me the 180L occupies a somewhat awkward position between the MP-E and 300/4IS for small critter shooting. The 300 was my primary butterfly/dragonfly lens for years, with the MP-E pulled out for smaller/closer fare. This left a gap in the near 1:1 range for bugs that wouldn't tolerate having an MP-E shoved in their face. The 180L admirably fills this gap and, at least in my experience, is wonderfully sharp.

And yet, I don't find myself using it that much. The 300/4 (often with a 1.4x) gets down to about 1:3 with much longer working distance (and IS which the 180L could use), and it just seems that when the MP-E is too short/close the 300 is the better choice for me. Though I bought the 180 to fill this gap, in practice it's a gap that I don't seem to need to fill as often as I'd expected. It's hard to decide to sell the 180 as it really is a fine lens, but it just seems not to fit that well into my macro kit.

Lester Wareham
5th of December 2010 (Sun), 05:06
That's interesting Vachss, I had the opposite experience, I had the MP-E, 100mm macro and used the 300mm either with tubes or a TC if I needed more reach for a larger macro subjects like deagons and butterflies.

Now I use the 180mm for the longer reach situations and I find this gives me a more convenient setup.

View_Finder
6th of December 2010 (Mon), 20:29
...And yet, I don't find myself using it that much. The 300/4 (often with a 1.4x) gets down to about 1:3 with much longer working distance (and IS which the 180L could use), and it just seems that when the MP-E is too short/close the 300 is the better choice for me. Though I bought the 180 to fill this gap, in practice it's a gap that I don't seem to need to fill as often as I'd expected. It's hard to decide to sell the 180 as it really is a fine lens, but it just seems not to fit that well into my macro kit.

This is almost exactly my experience.

The 180mm was one of the first "L" lens I purchased many years ago. But the flexibility of the 300mm with tubes and teleconverters quickly made the 180mm a paperweight. Because the 180mm doesn't have IS, I typically leave it at home unless I only want to shoot macros with a tripod. But even "macro days" can often be done with the 300mm f/4L IS nicely unless I need magnifications in the 0.5x to 1.0x range.

And with the recent purchase of the 100mm L, I see me using the 180mm even less. Optically, these two lenses are near identical in performance.

View_Finder
15th of December 2010 (Wed), 17:17
But I still do use it. The extra reach is helpful for some subjects. For this shot of a water lily seed pod earlier this summer, a shorter lens would have disturbed the pod/stalk and might have made the one seed fall out.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5010/5264124823_d1e59f34b7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/domoarrigatomrroboto/5264124823/)
mfv-50D7_7487 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/domoarrigatomrroboto/5264124823/) by View Finder Photography (http://www.flickr.com/people/domoarrigatomrroboto/), on Flickr

View_Finder
16th of December 2010 (Thu), 22:38
A older shot captured with the 5Dc

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5089/5267753018_5f6812a340_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/domoarrigatomrroboto/5267753018/)
Bfly-5D1_0772 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/domoarrigatomrroboto/5267753018/) by View Finder Photography (http://www.flickr.com/people/domoarrigatomrroboto/), on Flickr

Greg_C
16th of December 2010 (Thu), 23:08
^^^ Lovely shot. Great composition and love the way it stands out against the background.

P1X4R
19th of February 2011 (Sat), 21:59
http://i1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa349/P1X4R_2011/Collectibles/IMG_2551.jpg

Greg_C
11th of April 2011 (Mon), 02:10
Red Rose
http://www.steadyhands.net/photogallery/albums/temp/2011/image55938.jpg

DonG
16th of May 2011 (Mon), 19:41
Spring Leaves
http://amtphoto.smugmug.com/2011Photos/Bellamy-River/i-GwjDq6J/0/XL/Spring-Leaf-05-16-01acr-XL.jpg