-= 70D owners unite! Post up pics and discuss!

It's a hard lens to use, I would recommend it as a supplementary lens.

Paul.

Paul Iddon wrote in post #17450823
It's a hard lens to use, I would recommend it as a supplementary lens.

Paul.

Are the issues due to its manual nature, or are there larger usability issues that you are talking about? I am actually completely comfortable shooting fully manual lenses and am pretty familiar with their pitfalls, such as viewfinder darkening and modern focusing screens not being the most accurate tools in the world.

I know you mentioned that it is possible to get so close with this lens that it can be hard too light your subjects. Is that the larger issue?

solepatch wrote in post #17450931
Are the issues due to its manual nature, or are there larger usability issues that you are talking about? I am actually completely comfortable shooting fully manual lenses and am pretty familiar with their pitfalls, such as viewfinder darkening and modern focusing screens not being the most accurate tools in the world.

I know you mentioned that it is possible to get so close with this lens that it can be hard too light your subjects. Is that the larger issue?

It's mostly light, yes. Being 2 inches from the subject causes problems, but if you worked with manual, then you'll be fine.

Paul.

Paul Iddon wrote in post #17450986
It's mostly light, yes. Being 2 inches from the subject causes problems, but if you worked with manual, then you'll be fine.

Paul.

Thank you for your insight! My current macro setup is my old manual C/Y mount Zeiss 50mm 1.4 on a set of tubes. I will have to take the lighting issue into consideration when I make my decision.

Here are 5 crocus images that show the different f/stops on the Venus 60mm lens.

The images are at f/2.8 Differential focus (leaf in grass), @ f/2.8, @ f/2.8 with a house in the background, which is wonderfully blurred, @ f/5.6 so you can see the depth of field on its way upwards, at lastly at f/8, expanding the depth of field a little more.

Try to see the detail in that fallen leaf, and the droplets of water on some of the petals - all of which are resolved extremely well by this lens.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

Just received my 70D a couple days ago and my initial impressions are really positive. And for those wondering about the AF system, this thing focuses faster than my aging 7D and is in every other way an improvement over it. I'm also quite impressed by it's video capabilities as I expected.

SmugDesigns wrote in post #17451101
Just received my 70D a couple days ago and my initial impressions are really positive. And for those wondering about the AF system, this thing focuses faster than my aging 7D and is in every other way an improvement over it. I'm also quite impressed by it's video capabilities as I expected.

Nice one

Just a springtail today:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

They are the thin tiny yellowish wireworms as I called them as a kid, more legs than a millipede, and actually a centipede. But they always move, never in a predictable way either. This is a very small one - probably juvenile, as it was under 2 inches at it's most fully extended. It has about a one millimetre wide body - perhaps double that at the head and tail.

The best I could manage, manually focusing and relying on a light to illuminate where it was at any given moment, these are the best I could manage. Not much, but it gives you an idea of what it is, though I'm sure many of you will recognise it anyway from the pictures of various angles and directions. The photos are not rotated, they were either landscape, or portrait orientation.

This is the longest centipede found in the UK, it is creamy white and up to 70 mm long. It has between 77 and 83 pairs of legs. (It was previously called Haplophilus subterraneus). It is a 'geophilid' centipede which lives mainly in leaf litter but can also be found under stones. Latin mane now Stigmatogaster subterranea.

These are cropped though - a higher mag meant I had nil, zero, zilch chance, so had to dial the mag back a bit.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

Paul, be careful, I'm catching up!

My first ever bug photo (silverfish?)

cubatahavana wrote in post #17453356
Paul, be careful, I'm catching up!

My first ever bug photo (silverfish?)

A silverfish indeed! They are amazing insects - and can be so fast. We used to fnd them around the hearth by the coal fire when I was a kid.

Great subjects.

Paul.

These are already at 2:1 magnification - and the fly was so tiny I could barely see it, let alone focus on it. I'm assuming it is newly born(?) as in the first image, one of it's wings is still furled under, and over the next minute or two, that wing straightened like the other wing.

Not sure if it is a barkfly or something else. Size? To small to suggest, but maybe ½mm to 1mm?

@1338hrs

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

Paul Iddon wrote in post #17453560
These are already at 2:1 magnification - and the fly was so tiny I could barely see it, let alone focus on it. I'm assuming it is newly born(?) as in the first image, one of it's wings is still furled under, and over the next minute or two, that wing straightened like the other wing.

@1340hrs

IMAGE LINK: http://www.pauliddon.c​o.uk

Paul.

Wow, Paul I think this may be the best example yet of the quality of the lens. Although he's somewhat camouflaged, the detail on this little guy is incredible.