Raynox baby : Super macro: Just out testing it. Gipson, you're in trouble son. lol

[LightSpeed]

Raynox 250 on a Pentax 100mm maco WR, with a 25mm extension.
LOOK OUT BUGS!! HERE I COME!!!!!!!!

Seriously though, it seems to be a fairly impressive piece of high def glass. Pretty damn sharp.
Could have been better. I'm gonna tripod this thing with a mirror up and see what happens.
This is just some hand held stuff. I just wanted to try it out.
The images are of some extremely small winter flowers that I got into the buds of.

Whatever this thing is..............I have no clue.

 

[cgipson1]

1.. sweet!

#2.. blaeh!

 

[LightSpeed]

1.. sweet!

#2.. blaeh!

This was number 2.

 

[blackrose89]

1.. sweet!#2.. blaeh!

This was number 2.

Light, take a GOOD look at the face on the dime. Do I have to say it?

 

[LightSpeed]

Rose, I just took that real fast to show Gipson how small the inside of that thar flower is..
It's out of focus! SHot it at f2.8 indoors under tungston at iso 1250 and 1/15.

 

[cgipson1]

1.. sweet!

#2.. blaeh!

This was number 2.

Lots of magnification on #2.. but not pretty... not like #1!

This is an Alyssum flower...less than half the size (.20 ") of the #2 flower.... shot without a Raynox, and no extension tube.. just a standard 100mm macro.. and then cropped heavy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobularia_maritima

you can still see detail.. and it is pretty...

 

[blackrose89]

Rose, I just took that real fast to show Gipson how small the inside of that thar flower is..It's out of focus! SHot it at f2.8 indoors under tungston at iso 1250 and 1/15.

You missed my point.

 

[LightSpeed]

Rose, I just took that real fast to show Gipson how small the inside of that thar flower is..It's out of focus! SHot it at f2.8 indoors under tungston at iso 1250 and 1/15.

You missed my point.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

[Ballistics]

Rose, I just took that real fast to show Gipson how small the inside of that thar flower is..It's out of focus! SHot it at f2.8 indoors under tungston at iso 1250 and 1/15.

You missed my point.

Nope, you missed Light's. He was showing gibson the scale size of the flower.

 

[cgipson1]

Rose, I just took that real fast to show Gipson how small the inside of that thar flower is..It's out of focus! SHot it at f2.8 indoors under tungston at iso 1250 and 1/15.

You missed my point.

Nope, you missed Light's. He was showing gibson the scale size of the flower.

Yes.. i get it that.. but there is no detail.. it just isn't clean. The flower I posted was shot with just a 100mm Macro.. nothing else.. and is well under half the size of the flower that LS shot! I don't think I am in trouble! lol! His flower would cover half the dime.. my flower would only cover quarter of it!

 

[cgipson1]

#1.. I like.. that is gorgeous! You should print that puppy!

 

[MK3Brent]

#1 is my favorite

 

[blackrose89]

Rose, I just took that real fast to show Gipson how small the inside of that thar flower is..It's out of focus! SHot it at f2.8 indoors under tungston at iso 1250 and 1/15.

You missed my point.

Nope, you missed Light's. He was showing gibson the scale size of the flower.

Nope no point missed! I'm bringing up a new point. There is a flaw with the dime that seems to be a repeating pattern in Lights photos. Almost as bad as my pine cone monstrosity.

 

[LightSpeed]

I still don't get it. You're over my head.

 

[cgipson1]

You missed my point.

Nope, you missed Light's. He was showing gibson the scale size of the flower.

Nope no point missed! I'm bringing up a new point. There is a flaw with the dime that seems to be a repeating pattern in Lights photos. Almost as bad as my pine cone monstrosity.

ITS FACING THE WRONG WAY!!!!! LOL!!!!