Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Macro Talk
Thread started 22 Sep 2017 (Friday) 13:58
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

New Yongnuo YT24 EX diffusers

 
JasonC007
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Post has been edited 2 months ago by JasonC007.
Sep 22, 2017 13:58 |  #1

I've just bought the Yongnuo YN24EX flash as I've had a few requests for the diffusers I've made for the Canon MT-24EX. I've not switched it on yet but on first impressions it seems fairly well made, however I don't like how much the adapter ring spins on the metal ring adapter that fits to the lens, its very loose.

Once plus point, or maybe another bad point, I'm not sure yet is that the adaptor ring is quite a bit larger than the MT-24EX version which means the flashes are further away from the subject, which also means I can create bigger diffusers. The bad point is that it makes it more bulky.

I've only printed out a prototype so far but I think the bigger version is going to work better. I could adjust the mounts to suit but they seem usable.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4332/37249133881_dd01581a2e_b.jpg

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4354/36579721863_152e13a6fa_b.jpg

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4371/37391618015_c2f17c6f5c_b.jpg

Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
SteB
Member
SteB's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
Whitchurch, Shropshire, United Kingdom
Sep 22, 2017 14:25 |  #2

It was the same with my Yongnuo YT24EX. The bracket turns rather too easily. It will just about hold the flash heads in my diffuser in place, but the slightest touch and they rotate. However, I just used the bracket from my now no longer working MT24EX and the heads work fine with that. The YT24EX actually click into the MT24EX bracket just like the Canon heads. As you say though the YN24EX bracket is bigger. This is the other reason I mainly use the Canon bracket with it. As I primarily use it in the field the Canon bracket is better as you can get it closer to the ground.




LOG IN TO REPLY
costojanku
Member
90 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Post has been edited 2 months ago by costojanku.
Sep 22, 2017 17:24 |  #3

Slight OT: I find it interesting that the only link Google offers for "Yongnuo YT24EX" is your post. Not a single hit anywhere else, at least from where I search.


flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 22, 2017 18:04 |  #4

SteB wrote in post #18458042 (external link)
It was the same with my Yongnuo YT24EX. The bracket turns rather too easily. It will just about hold the flash heads in my diffuser in place, but the slightest touch and they rotate. However, I just used the bracket from my now no longer working MT24EX and the heads work fine with that. The YT24EX actually click into the MT24EX bracket just like the Canon heads. As you say though the YN24EX bracket is bigger. This is the other reason I mainly use the Canon bracket with it. As I primarily use it in the field the Canon bracket is better as you can get it closer to the ground.

Yes its a slight annoyance, I'm going to try and fix the problem with a printed part somehow. Using the Canon ring is an option for me but not everyone has the MT-24 so they won't have an option :(


Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 22, 2017 18:07 |  #5

costojanku wrote in post #18458179 (external link)
Slight OT: I find it interesting that the only link Google offers for "Yongnuo YT24EX" is your post. Not a single hit anywhere else, at least from where I search.

Ah yes because it is the YN not YT, I got the letter wrong! I've changed the post but can't change the header :(


Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
SteB
Member
SteB's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
Whitchurch, Shropshire, United Kingdom
Sep 23, 2017 02:12 |  #6

JasonC007 wrote in post #18458208 (external link)
Yes its a slight annoyance, I'm going to try and fix the problem with a printed part somehow. Using the Canon ring is an option for me but not everyone has the MT-24 so they won't have an option :(

I appreciate that most people won't have the MT24EX bracket. However, I've just identified the problem with the YN24EX bracket, and the problem is not the bracket itself, but the adapter rings. I've also got a Yongnuou YN14EX, which I designed the macro lite/ring lite diffuser for. There was no problem with that rotating, so I was just trying to compare the two to work out why the YN24EX bracket rotates and the YN14EX doesn't. When I dropped the adapter ring from the YN14EX into the YN24EX bracket, it was hey presto problem solved. On close examination the reason for this was immediately self-evident. The YN14EX adapter rings are very slightly thicker, or the YN24EX adapter rings slightly thinner, depending on how you want to look at it. I've only got some cheapo digital calipers so I couldn't get a precise reading as you'd need a micrometer, which I don't have to get that. However, it confirmed that the adapters sent with the YN24EX are ever so slightly thinner than those supplied with the YN14EX.

These adapter rings are identical to Cokin P filter holder adapter rings, which are pretty cheap. In other words you just need some new adapter rings of the right thickness. The rotation doesn't seem to be a design fault. They were probably designed it with the thicker adapter ring, by the adapter rings they shipped them with were slightly thinner than usual.

I hope you don't mind me making a few suggestions.

1) For field macro photography you could probably do with the option of a smaller diffuser face. This is because whilst these will give good lighting they will have similar limitations to the lens mounted light tent type diffuser such as my original cup diffuser. That is they are more likely to scare some insects (it is not such a problem as people tend to think as long as you are aware of it - there are several solutions such as shooting against the sun, so it is shining underneath the filter, and or lifting it up and putting it down over the subject - doing it slowly, increments), and they are likely to get in the way with some vegetation and some surface structure.

2) I'd design the diffusers so they fit together in the middle and give a seamless catchlight in the eyes of jumping spiders etc.

3) Ideally the diffuser housings and diffuser faces would be curved. I appreciate this may make them more difficult to design and possibly print.

4) I'd change the design of those bounce flash shoes, and make them with adjustable height. My idea for this would simply be a bar with a clamp for the female part of cold shoe. It may not need to have a swivel part on this, and just use the swivelling mechanism on the flash to tilt the flash heads up and down. Certainly with these diffuser prototypes you need the option of lifting them up higher. In other words the bar part would just have a male cold shoe at one end, and the clamp holding the female cold shoe would slide up and down the bar. It would be great if the female cold shoe holder could have a mechanism where it clicks into place like with the flash bracket.

As I say these are just general suggestions, which you might not think are worthwhile yourself, would make the design and printing too difficult etc. I also appreciate that possibly you are designing these diffusers more from the perspective of "studio" macro photography, stacking, rather than field use. One problem with the field use of diffusers are flat surfaces such as the ground, or the top of wooden posts or stumps for photographing springtails, jumping spiders etc. They can limit how close you can get, or the angle you can get. This is why being able to raise the flash heads up would be useful, to give more clearance.

When using the YN24EX in the field I've found it better to put the right flash on the left hand side and vica versa. This is because the flash head cables come out of the wrong side of the head, droop down and tend to get tangled in vegetation etc. I rarely use power ratios, but if you do, you just have to remember they're the opposite way round.

In addition, as regards the lens mounted light tent type diffuser. I've found it more practical if they are actually conical i.e. wider at the end than where they attach to the lens. My diffuser for the YN14EX is now like that and it makes it so much easier to get close to the subject.




LOG IN TO REPLY
racketman
Cream of the Crop
racketman's Avatar
20,645 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Joined Oct 2005
Richmond Surrey
Sep 23, 2017 05:33 |  #7

For field use the diffusers do get too close to the surroundings, the best bet by far is to have them firing through a lens mounted diffuser (not my idea of course).

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4471/37260723571_de7947d923_o.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/YLAW​Yt] (external link)IMG_0242 MT-24EX (external link) by tobyjug5 (external link), on Flickr

Toby
6D, 80D, 100D & Olympus EM-1 MKII
Flickr collections (external link)
Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
SteB
Member
SteB's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
Whitchurch, Shropshire, United Kingdom
Sep 23, 2017 06:29 as a reply to racketman's post |  #8

Yes, and your set up illustrates how ideally it should be possible to position the flash heads behind the front of the lens or the flash bracket. It should be possible to make risers for the flash heads that put the heads in that position without the need for the extra arms. When I mentioned a riser with a bar and a clamp with the female cold shoe on it which could be slid up and down it, it would be helpful if there were 2 designs. One with a horizontal bar, and one tilted back at an angle. Both could utilise the same sort of clamp so it would fit on both. The idea with the bar tilted backwards at an angle would be that as you raised the flash heads up they would be pushed further behind the front of the lens.

Nice to see the sort of cone I was referring to as it makes it so much easier to get something underneath this type of end of the lens diffuser.




LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 23, 2017 07:45 |  #9

SteB wrote in post #18458438 (external link)
I appreciate that most people won't have the MT24EX bracket. However, I've just identified the problem with the YN24EX bracket, and the problem is not the bracket itself, but the adapter rings. I've also got a Yongnuou YN14EX, which I designed the macro lite/ring lite diffuser for. There was no problem with that rotating, so I was just trying to compare the two to work out why the YN24EX bracket rotates and the YN14EX doesn't. When I dropped the adapter ring from the YN14EX into the YN24EX bracket, it was hey presto problem solved. On close examination the reason for this was immediately self-evident. The YN14EX adapter rings are very slightly thicker, or the YN24EX adapter rings slightly thinner, depending on how you want to look at it. I've only got some cheapo digital calipers so I couldn't get a precise reading as you'd need a micrometer, which I don't have to get that. However, it confirmed that the adapters sent with the YN24EX are ever so slightly thinner than those supplied with the YN14EX.

These adapter rings are identical to Cokin P filter holder adapter rings, which are pretty cheap. In other words you just need some new adapter rings of the right thickness. The rotation doesn't seem to be a design fault. They were probably designed it with the thicker adapter ring, by the adapter rings they shipped them with were slightly thinner than usual.

I haven't measured them myself but yes your are probably right about the ring being thinner. I'll have to see if I can make a new ring that is still strong enough otherwise I'll think of another way of tightening it up. If people want to buy these diffusers from me then I wouldn't expect them to have to buy something else so I'll try and supply something with them to fix the problem.

I hope you don't mind me making a few suggestions.

1) For field macro photography you could probably do with the option of a smaller diffuser face. This is because whilst these will give good lighting they will have similar limitations to the lens mounted light tent type diffuser such as my original cup diffuser. That is they are more likely to scare some insects (it is not such a problem as people tend to think as long as you are aware of it - there are several solutions such as shooting against the sun, so it is shining underneath the filter, and or lifting it up and putting it down over the subject - doing it slowly, increments), and they are likely to get in the way with some vegetation and some surface structure.

Ideally I'd rather not make the face any smaller as diffusion would reduce. I've also been testing these in the field and they don't scare the bugs any worse than any other diffuser I have tried so, for now I think the size is ok.

2) I'd design the diffusers so they fit together in the middle and give a seamless catchlight in the eyes of jumping spiders etc.

I have looked at this but that is not possible to do with 2 separate diffusers unless you restrict the angles of the heads, which you don't want to do because you need to adjust the angle for different magnifications. You can adjust the shape of the catch lights with the oval diffuser faces in with the kit, I'll also be doing other shapes for more interesting reflections :)

3) Ideally the diffuser housings and diffuser faces would be curved. I appreciate this may make them more difficult to design and possibly print.

I've not found the need to make them curved so I've not designed any that way. As I've mentioned before, I don't want to over diffuse my subjects so wrapping them in light is the opposite of what I want to achieve.

4) I'd change the design of those bounce flash shoes, and make them with adjustable height. My idea for this would simply be a bar with a clamp for the female part of cold shoe. It may not need to have a swivel part on this, and just use the swivelling mechanism on the flash to tilt the flash heads up and down. Certainly with these diffuser prototypes you need the option of lifting them up higher. In other words the bar part would just have a male cold shoe at one end, and the clamp holding the female cold shoe would slide up and down the bar. It would be great if the female cold shoe holder could have a mechanism where it clicks into place like with the flash bracket.

I have an idea for making them flexible rather than just being rotatable/height adjustable, I just need to draw up my design and test it out. These would be more versatile than just having adjustable rotation/height.

As I say these are just general suggestions, which you might not think are worthwhile yourself, would make the design and printing too difficult etc. I also appreciate that possibly you are designing these diffusers more from the perspective of "studio" macro photography, stacking, rather than field use. One problem with the field use of diffusers are flat surfaces such as the ground, or the top of wooden posts or stumps for photographing springtails, jumping spiders etc. They can limit how close you can get, or the angle you can get. This is why being able to raise the flash heads up would be useful, to give more clearance.

When using the YN24EX in the field I've found it better to put the right flash on the left hand side and vica versa. This is because the flash head cables come out of the wrong side of the head, droop down and tend to get tangled in vegetation etc. I rarely use power ratios, but if you do, you just have to remember they're the opposite way round.

Yes any suggestion is appreciated. These particular diffusers have been designed for field use more than stacking but I also get very good results when I use them to stack, especially when used my my extensions. You can also twist the flash heads to provide a nice top/flat diffuser from above without the extensions. I've not had any problems using them in the field up to 5x magnification but it does depend on the subject position. I've had more trouble getting the camera in position due to the adaptor ring sticking out at the bottom,especially when the subject is on a flat, hard surface like you say. There is not much you ca do about this though.

Good tip about the cables. Wireless would be great if it was reliable enough!

In addition, as regards the lens mounted light tent type diffuser. I've found it more practical if they are actually conical i.e. wider at the end than where they attach to the lens. My diffuser for the YN14EX is now like that and it makes it so much easier to get close to the subject.

Like I said above, I've not really had any problems with getting close enough to subjects, you just have to angle them at the correct angle.


Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 23, 2017 07:50 |  #10

racketman wrote in post #18458500 (external link)
For field use the diffusers do get too close to the surroundings, the best bet by far is to have them firing through a lens mounted diffuser (not my idea of course).

QUOTED IMAGE
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://flic.kr/p/YLAW​Yt] (external link)IMG_0242 MT-24EX (external link) by tobyjug5 (external link), on Flickr

I guess it depends on your situation and I see that raising the heads is going to let you get closer, although the tent would then get in the way as far as I can see. The only problem with doing this is that the light is much further away and is reflecting of the top of the tent so a lot of light is lost. That may not be an issue in a lot of cases so it's fine, but to be fair, if you going to diffuse like that you'd be better off with some type of ring flash as the 2 small flash heads aren't being used as they were designed, which is to provide light form different angles, thus giving more artistic/contrasty images.


Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 23, 2017 07:58 |  #11

To get closer at higher mags I just tilt the flash heads like the below, I don't have any trouble doing it this way but I'm sure there will be situations where even this isn't possible.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4481/36575078493_82e95f41f6_b.jpg

Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
SteB
Member
SteB's Avatar
Joined Oct 2008
Whitchurch, Shropshire, United Kingdom
Post has been edited 1 month ago by SteB.
Sep 23, 2017 10:27 as a reply to JasonC007's post |  #12

Hi Jason

These adapter rings are cheap off eBay. You can buy single ones from between £1.92 and £2.99 including P&P and a full set of 9 from 49mm to 82mm with a square filter holder and hood for £7.69 inc. P&P. Obviously there's a question of whether these are the thicker or thinner ones. What I can say for certain is that in the past when I got them for a P holder, they were the thicker ones. This is because I used them on the Yongnuo YN14EX and they were a perfect fit. Indeed identical to the ones Yongnuo supplied. Just saying, because it would surely be cheaper to replace the adapter rings than try to produce an engineering solution, when it's the adapter rings that are the problem.

The idea of curving the diffuser is one of subject clearance, not just wrap round light.

I've been using these end of lens diffusers for the best part of 10 years for photographing pollinators and I've been photographing insects in the field for over 30 years. I can guarantee that the moment you cast a shadow over an active feeding pollinator in direct sunlight that it will fly off. It's not so bad if it's overcast or in the shade, but unfortunately pollinators only tend to mainly feed in direct sunlight. The only way around it is to carefully line up the feeding pollinator with the sun on the other side of the subject so the light is shining underneath the diffuser. I can do it as here in 2009. However, it takes a lot of practise and most attempts fail. This is why you need a diffuser option with a smaller footprint.

IMAGE: https://farm7.staticflickr.com/6189/6043618893_c0e94a93cc_z.jpg
Click below for full resolution image
https://farm7.staticfl​ickr.com ...43618893_ab41e4c8f6​_o.jpg (external link)

The only reason I'm making these points is that I know from experience that people will have difficulty using diffusers with such large faces so near the subject. It's not just shading but they will catch the vegetation, causing the subject to flee etc. As you say modularity is good, and you do need a way of rapidly changing to a diffuser option which doesn't get in the way so much. My solution was to use an end of lens light tent for maximum diffusion, but to make it so it pulled off if it gone in the way, and I could instantly revert to diffusers with a much smaller footprint.

My own suggestion, and maybe you have a better one is this. You're already used magnetic catches for attachments. You could make it so the housing detached near the base of where it clips to the flash head using a magnetic catch. Then if you suddenly needed a smaller footprint because your diffusers were getting in the way you could rapidly switch to a diffuser/housing which was far smaller, but enough to provide adequate diffusion. The thing about field macro photography, and photographing stuff in situ is that it must be versatile so you can rapidly adapt it to different scenarios. You can just resort to using the bare heads, but some degree of diffusion is a big advantage.



LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 24, 2017 03:23 |  #13

SteB wrote in post #18458653 (external link)
Hi Jason

These adapter rings are cheap off eBay. You can buy single ones from between £1.92 and £2.99 including P&P and a full set of 9 from 49mm to 82mm with a square filter holder and hood for £7.69 inc. P&P. Obviously there's a question of whether these are the thicker or thinner ones. What I can say for certain is that in the past when I got them for a P holder, they were the thicker ones. This is because I used them on the Yongnuo YN14EX and they were a perfect fit. Indeed identical to the ones Yongnuo supplied. Just saying, because it would surely be cheaper to replace the adapter rings than try to produce an engineering solution, when it's the adapter rings that are the problem.

Hi Stephen,

Yes those seem cheap enough, however I prefer to make use of what we already have and like you say, I can't guarantee that the rings will be thicker so it might be a luck of the draw thing! If I can produce something, it would be cheaper than those rings anyway as that amount of plastic and the simplicity would probably cost around 20-50p.

The idea of curving the diffuser is one of subject clearance, not just wrap round light.

I've been using these end of lens diffusers for the best part of 10 years for photographing pollinators and I've been photographing insects in the field for over 30 years. I can guarantee that the moment you cast a shadow over an active feeding pollinator in direct sunlight that it will fly off. It's not so bad if it's overcast or in the shade, but unfortunately pollinators only tend to mainly feed in direct sunlight. The only way around it is to carefully line up the feeding pollinator with the sun on the other side of the subject so the light is shining underneath the diffuser. I can do it as here in 2009. However, it takes a lot of practise and most attempts fail. This is why you need a diffuser option with a smaller footprint.
QUOTED IMAGE
Click below for full resolution image
https://farm7.staticfl​ickr.com ...43618893_ab41e4c8f6​_o.jpg (external link)

The only reason I'm making these points is that I know from experience that people will have difficulty using diffusers with such large faces so near the subject. It's not just shading but they will catch the vegetation, causing the subject to flee etc. As you say modularity is good, and you do need a way of rapidly changing to a diffuser option which doesn't get in the way so much. My solution was to use an end of lens light tent for maximum diffusion, but to make it so it pulled off if it gone in the way, and I could instantly revert to diffusers with a much smaller footprint.

To be fair I've had better luck with these split diffusers than I did with tent types because of being able to split them apart and not create a shadow over the subject. I've only being doing macro for 5 years but I've taken hundreds of pollinator shots and to be honest, when they are pollinating is when they are less scared. It is when they are resting I find they are more skittish and react to shadows more, everyone has different experiences though I guess. Flies are probably the worst for being scared and I have shot more of these than any other bug (they are my favourite!), and although I don't catch every fly I see, my success rate is pretty good considering how close you have to get with the MP-E65. I also like hoverflies like yourself and found these very easy to photograph, I also like photographing them in flight, but for those I use a 100mm lens and a different diffuser setup!

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4456/37279595311_a2869764dc_b.jpg

IMAGE: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2839/9473001416_f1c684d760_b.jpg


My own suggestion, and maybe you have a better one is this. You're already used magnetic catches for attachments. You could make it so the housing detached near the base of where it clips to the flash head using a magnetic catch. Then if you suddenly needed a smaller footprint because your diffusers were getting in the way you could rapidly switch to a diffuser/housing which was far smaller, but enough to provide adequate diffusion. The thing about field macro photography, and photographing stuff in situ is that it must be versatile so you can rapidly adapt it to different scenarios. You can just resort to using the bare heads, but some degree of diffusion is a big advantage.

I have been thinking about this idea, but there are a couple of reasons holding me back from doing it this way.

1. Producing a second set of diffusers at a different size would double the production time, currently it takes 36 hours to produce one set and that is continuous printing, then you have installing the magnets, packing them up, postage etc, etc and because I already run another company I don't think this would be feasible for me.

2. I am not totally convinced different sized diffusers would make much difference. I've been using these split diffusers for quite a while now and if there is a situation/angle where I can't get to photograph the subject I either move the subject or move on. And I'm talking where the subject is right inside a bush or something where using no diffusers would be possible. At least with these diffusers being so solid I can push my way into most places without them moving. Whereas with a floppy tent or homemade thin plastic diffusers would just bend.

For these particular Yongnuo diffusers I may revert back to the original size I made them at for the MT-24 but just make new mounts which hopefully I can make flexible. This will allow more flexible positioning of the heads which would help due to the extra large size adaptor ring. I need to test it first though.


Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
racketman
Cream of the Crop
racketman's Avatar
20,645 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Joined Oct 2005
Richmond Surrey
Post has been last edited 1 month ago by racketman. 3 edits done in total.
Sep 24, 2017 09:32 as a reply to JasonC007's post |  #14

The lens diffuser definitely doesn't get in the way like the flash head diffusers, I can get close to subjects on flat surfaces like fences even at full mag. The light diffusion may be too flat for your liking but its effective even on shiny ants and ladybirds.


Toby
6D, 80D, 100D & Olympus EM-1 MKII
Flickr collections (external link)
Gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
JasonC007
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Oct 2012
Derbyshire
Sep 24, 2017 11:55 |  #15

racketman wrote in post #18459292 (external link)
The lens diffuser definitely doesn't get in the way like the flash head diffusers, I can get close to subjects on flat surfaces like fences even at full mag. The light diffusion may be too flat for your liking but its effective even on shiny ants and ladybirds.

Like I say, it does depend on the situation and angle you want. I have more problems with the darn ring getting in the way when using it on flat surfaces! For those subjects I usually coax them near the edge of the surface, move it or find another in a better position. I've not shot many ants as they've not been of much interest to me, they are also tiny rockets! I just wish we had the more interesting, bigger ants here in the UK, like those that Alex Wild finds :)

I've shot quite a few ladybirds and although they are not 100% diffused (the way I prefer them) those diffusers work pretty well. This was shot using an older version of the diffusers which were not as good as you can see the hotspot, which the new ones no longer have. Angle and composition help a lot though, its not all about diffusion, its a case of eliminating hot spots which cause the un-sharpness, which you can see highly exaggerated when just using the Sun for your light.

IMAGE: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4204/35113068366_b95d08afd5_b.jpg

Canon 80D | 24-105L | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | MP-E65 f/2.8 1-5x Macro | Tamron 150-600 | Sigma 10mm Fisheye | EF 24mm f/2.8 Pancake | MT-24EX | 600EX-RT |
Flickr (external link) | Google+ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

4,269 views & 3 likes for this thread
New Yongnuo YT24 EX diffusers
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Macro Talk


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00111 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is Columbia
857 guests, 438 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016