Hopper ?

Could only get in as far as 3:1 because of the suround plants so this is still a bit of a crop.

Most bugs ignore the flash but this little chap didn't like it one bit!

A leaf hopper perhaps, 1.5-2mm long, any ID suggestions?

#1

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Good pictures but the sharpness is not very good...

Nice pics I like #1

Actually, #1 and #3 are pretty sharp, with reasonably good DOF, these hoppers look pretty "soft" and it's hard to make then really appear pin sharp from my experience.

Good stuff Lester, I presume that these images are heavily cropped?

Dave

Thanks everyone, funny little chaps arn't they.

Dave: The crops are not too heavy:
#1 ~ half the frame width
#2&3 ~ 1/3 the frame width

The magnifications were about 2:1 and 3:1, I would have gone to 5:1 but the undergrowth made it hard. I suppose I could have snipped the grass stalk out and held it in my plamp but by that point I felt the flash light had disturbed him enough.

Good shots lester- I assume it maay be a leaf hopper nymph as it's wings do not seem full size yet
Brian V.

Thanks Brian.

Looks like a species ID will be hard to come by. I have notices a weakness in field guides when it comes to non-adult stages.

So not that heavily cropped. The only reasonable shot I've got of one of these shows heavy pixelisation if I crop it at 1:1. Oh well...

Dave

Nice series! can't help you with the id though

Do you mean a magnification of 1:1, that would be too little I think, you would end up using about 10-15% of the frame width.

As I say these were shot at 2:1 and 3:1, 5:1 would have been nice.

You need an MP-E ideally, you could try a 2X + some tubes on your Sigma, that would get you to more than 2:1.

Leorooster wrote:
Nice series! can't help you with the id though

Thanks Leo.