HOME | DD
dalantech — Freckles IV
by-nc-nd
Published: 2009-08-31 13:50:05 +0000 UTC; Views: 3503; Favourites: 108; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
I baited some pumpkin flowers with corn syrup so the honeybees would let me get close.Tech specs: Canon 40D (F13, 1/250, ISO 100) + a Canon MPE-65mm macro lens (@ 3x) + an MT-24EX macro twin flash (-1 FEC).
Related content
Comments: 45
amazing details ! superb, love so see the dart (?) into the syrup
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks
It's a proboscis -kinda like nature's drinking straw
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
How far away from the bee are you when you take these kind of pictures? Very amazing art by the way!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
For that image the front of the lens is only about 2" (5cm) away from the bee.
Thanks
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You've been featured here . 
Do fave the article and check out the other features.
It'd be greatly appreciated.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks
That bunny is cute
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah... i know... it's pretty adorable
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
you cheater! you're not allowed to use such an awesome and expensive lens as the 65mm super macro! ahah jk, I know it takes tons of skill to even get a clear shot with that thing! When you do tho, it doesnt even matter what your composition is it looks kick ass! I saw this pic on the macro beginners wasp and bees gallery... where I have this pic:
:thumb136851765: best shot in the gallery besides yours of course!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I'd have to disagree -the gear isn't enough. Composition, even in macro, is still king and often the difference between a good image and a great one is how it's composed and lit. The average person out there looking at your work neither knows now cares how you took a shot -all they care about is what they can see in a print or on a monitor. So it's the final image that counts -the gear and the technique are completely irrelevent...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ya I see what you mean I was just exaggerating out of awe at the lens. I actually sat through a slideshow of your gallery and was of course really impressed, however I found there was a definitely similarly framed shots which seemed to me redundant in relation to the rest of your gallery. Don't get me wrong theyre all good... but like you said yourself the small differences in one bumblee portrait in terms of composition focus and finished look are enough to make a lesser photo of the same angle/subject unnecessary. Don't take offense because I'm comparing them to the rest of your gallery. Even the best photographer in the world has photos which are worse than others in his porfolio.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Actually I agree with you, and one of the things I'm working on is looking for new compositions and to get better at how I light a scene.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have to rescind part of my statement because I later realized you actually have a portfolio section of your gallery with your best, which are indeed some of your best stuff... keep it up! Just curious are you currently an employed photographer?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In my day job I'm a network engineer -photography is just a hobby
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
should have posted the link here [link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thoughtful critique...well...focus, sharpness and colours are as ideal as can be.
Of course you could win some more 'terrain' with a larger DOF ,so the other eye would be more in focus, too. But....I'm not sure if it would be a real improvement. Plus the fact that a higher F might have a price...
Actually the only serious critique I could come up with is that it's just way too perfect...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks
DOF is always at a premium when shooting macro...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
UN-FREAKING-BELIEVABLE!!
When you write (@3x) does that mean your using an external magnifier? Or is that the magnification of the lens itself?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The MPE-65mm macro lens let's me set the magnification just by turning a ring in the lens.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sweet, thank you for the clarification.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Amazing.... that gold tongue, pollen all over... great shot!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
