HI everyone I'm just starting with Macro photography, and I'm enjoying A LOT!!!. I have a 550D, canon 15 85 IS, 70 200 f/4 L IS, canon 1.4X II, 500D filter with an adapter ring from 72mm to 67mm and a Kenko extension tubes set. then here it comes my question, should I step up and buy a real macro lens? of course this is a not objective question, but I just want to hear some opinions from more (much more actually) experiences users. About what I would like to do, it's mostly nature macro photography, A LOT of bugs, and some flowers and because the lenses I have now are really sharp, I think I would only use a macro lens for macro work, other important point is that I'm lazy and I hate to use tripods, that's why I was thinking in the canon 100 2.8 L IS, but on other hand most of the people here shooting bugs are using flash then maybe the IS is not that important and I can get the canon 100 2.8 only?. maybe a Nifty Fifty just because it's so cheap and I already have the tubes set? right now I'm getting 0.65X only with the 70 200 at 200 with the 500D filter, and I get more than 1.0X magnification with the extension tubes. Then what would I gain with a real macro lens? maybe I should just wait till I learn more? how far can I get with the gear I have now? in terms of quality and general possibilities?. thanks!!!!