Earwax69 wrote in post #14733937
I see a lot of flash macro photos here and while some of them are great, a big amount is, in my view, somewhat ruined by the big white harsh light of a flash. If there's a tripod available, I dont see much use for a flash except for moving target or some subtil light adjustement. I do understand that the more you magnify, the more the light entering the lens decrease.
Is a flash absolutly mandatory for serious macro work or can you get away with a longer exposition?
Flash ruining a photo is not confined to macro photography. Flash photography in general is not an easy subject to master. Flash adds a level of complexity that newbies avoid like the plague, amateurs dabble with in an attempt to learn, and serious amateurs & pros use effectively to create stunning images.
Flash or no flash - photography is all about light. It's one of the few absolutes. Flash is the same as any other light - it can be used effectively or used poorly.
In some situations, yes, flash is absolutely mandatory, in others, not so much. Not using it because you don't like how some other people use it poorly is a pretty bad excuse.
It's the nut behind the camera that really makes the difference.