Perfect response… 100% correct.

Excellent, let us know how you make out

Nice, glad you liked it!

Hmmm, perhaps your extension tubes do not have electronic contacts to talk to the camera? It’s possible the camera isn’t getting the aperture information fed to it through the tubes? Check your manufacturers info and see what the manual says about that.

Who cares!? That is not the point of the article. He could have called them horses, but the point he makes is still valid. Stop worrying about your UVA degree and pinpoint accuracy and listen to the actual meaning of the article. Thanks.

Cool, have fun with it

Extension tubes work much better in my opinion than close-up diopter rings. I took pictures of 2mm graph paper straight on with both close-up rings and extension tubes. This is a great way to see barrel/pin-cushion distortion, common with close-up rings, and to measure magnification factor. Some combinations caused vignetting, too. I also tried the reverse-lens technique, which is effective, but you have to get in real close and manual focus.

I got into macro photography to copy film negatives and slides. It’s best to fill the frame with a slide or negative. When copying 35mm film, that means a 1:1 magnification factor on a full-frame DSLR. Smaller film sizes (like 110) require magnifying the image. Also, my camera (Panasonic Lumix G5) is a micro 4/3, so the crop factor is 2x, further complicating magnification. Copying 110 is 1:1, while 35mm is a 2:1 reduction.

I’m still looking for a good macro lens for the Lumix system.

Sorry, Darlene… but if I recall my studies in botanical biology correctly (willing to ‘bet’ on it – I majored in botany at University of Virginia); mosses do not have any stems, roots, or leaves… as any of those three structures would mean it would be a vascular plant. A moss does contain rhizoids which are root-like structures, but roots are defined as having xylem and phloem, which mosses certainly do not have.

I think it does, they are just really tiny to see by our eyes. https://www.google.ca/search?q=macro+of+moss&espv=2&biw=1267&bih=761&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=7Pc_Vb2gDJLHsQTz0ICQBA&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

That shot absolutely does NOT depict “moss”. Moss does NOT have “leaves”… anywhere on this planet!

Yes it defaults to wide opened. There is a trick for doing reverse lens that might work – you have to put the lens on normally, close down to say f/11, hit the depth of field preview button to close it down and hold that while you remove the lens. It’s tricky and not sure it will work with extension tubes as well

Thanks for joining in the conversation David and thanks for reading!

Well photography is subjective and if the photographer achieved their goal for the image then I’d say it was a success. We each see things differently and have different tastes and styles. So there is no right or wrong.

Any comments from you our thoughts?

Nice shot,,, the moss down here doesn’t look like this. South Louisiana.