I am 35 years in photography, - One lens, in unfamilar territory where anything could pop up - Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 OS . Reasonable cost ($469) , reasonable reach, reasonable macro - goodly sharp ( on Canon D60 ).

I agree with jackinKC - I use the Manfrotto 222 grip action ( joystick ) but make sure you get the rotate mount to go on top of it as seen in my photo. This shows the top of my Manfrotto grip release monopod. I also have this set-up on my tripod.

The IS version of the F4 L has a different optical formula in addition to having IS . Ken Rockwell claims it is slightly sharper ( if that is possible ! ).

Anyone dealing with Canon 70/80 -200 zooms needs to read Ken Rockwell's reviews at kenrockwell.com - very thorough and unbiased !

Nikonian72: So you shot the fly at 1:1 and did a 16X digital zoom ?

If I had $1000 to spend - I would take a trip to Yosemite - Ansel adams had maybe 2 lenses that he used and neither was a zoom ! But he also had a tripod.

Also, are you using any filters on the lens and is there a possibilty of haze or other atmospheric condition you are shooting through ??

What actual shutter speeds are you using ? And what actual LENS and F stop are you using ? And, how are you focusing ? I believe the Vivitar is made by Tamron - so I really do not think it is all that bad ?

I use a recommend Tamron converters - they seem to work with ALL lenses and the price is reasonable. I use the (cheaper )4 element 1.4X Tamron and the PRO 2X Tamron ( somewhat expensive). 1.4X are not as crtical as to quality loses as 2X's. I am a picky long time shooter and I am happy with these :-)

TraceyG : Be sure not to miss the glowing review Ken Rockwell gives on the 150-500 Sigma ! Also, he says he plans on doing the 50-500 in the near future !

Well, I have finally decided what I am going to do. I am a long time Canon user and I do Nature / Birds. I am not a "PRO" and I am financially challenged. I have used many Sigmas until recently I aquired the 70-200 F4 L non-IS Canon. I also did a controlled test recently using the Canon 70-200 with Tamron 1.4X ( the cheaper 4-element version )against all my other lenses of equivilency, mostly Sigmas. The difference was astounding !( to me anyway )The Canon WITH extender at 200mm wide open blew them all away - this is with a 60D body ! As an example, shooting the same highly detailed subject, I got 7+ MP worth of image with the Canon and 4+MP with all the others ! Night before last I went onto Ken Rockwell's website ( kenrockwell.com) and lo and behold he had just posted his latest lens review - of the OLD Canon 80-200 F2.8 L. If you are a Canon user I highly recommend you view this along with all his other reviews of Canon 70-200 F2.8 and F4 L's ! It is what convinced me to get the 80-200 used off e-Bay ($800 ) and use it with my Tamron 1.4 and 2X extenders. Will I be keeping my liteweight F4L ? - not sure yet. I will also be keeping my 300 F4 and 400 F5.6's - So, that is where I am at.

Again, one of my points is I felt like showing the detail of the flower BUDS were more important than having the WHOLE flower in focus. With autofocus I would have gotten the flower in focus but lost the buds .....My other point is you do not have to spend $400-500 on the latest "macro" fully auto lens just to do good close-up/macro work !

Reversing a lens is most usually reserved for higher - 1:2, 1:1 and greater magnifications. At these magnifications you should also be using a bellows and a camera/lens positioning device for maximum quality and convience. So, it is not exactly a cheap (er) way to go.

Point is, - it gave me what I wanted and had envisioned. - I did not want EVERYTHING in focus.

For high quality macro work on mostly static type subjects you should be manually focusing at taking aperture. Attached is a recent image from a Canon 60D with 55mm F2 SMC M42 screw mount Takumar in an adapter - manual focus and manual diaphram hand held. So, the answer is no - you don't need AF or auto diaphram ! - except for very fast moving subjects and then I would also use high speed muti-shot bursts in oder to make sure a got the most pleasing focus point.