:thumbup: :thumbup: What I once thought were great photos I see quite differently now....still in progression mode even now. But it was encouragement that kept me loving photography and as I developed my eye and looked at endless photos from numerous photographers I kept growing. A little truthful nudge is better than a kick in the pants no matter how truthful it might be. Everyone has different goals in mind, too.

Looks like a nice cat. An angry, frightened cat would not have let you do that. From this one's expression it looks like it would love a little petting. I notice that people often leave out the brand of camera....don't know what an sx50 is.

Looks good. I will check out that helicoid along with some other extension rings. More to play with.

While on the subject of macro photography in particular, I realize that I do not fully understand the process. This comes after watching a youtube video (lost my notes so don't remember who was on it) but it appears that macro focusing is not simple. And digital photography is a different experience than film and so have new things to think about especially where noise is concerned. Been at this "serious stuff" for only three months and most of my problems have to do with me, not the equipment.:roll:
I also learned from a photographer at an art festival today,... he had some pretty huge prints...that I should anticipate doing some post processing to get the quality that I'm after.....so RAW, here I come.

Thank you for taking the time to do your test. I will repeat your test when I get the helicoid.

bad macro shot...used tripod, shutter release cable, good light, had on f/22, but my distance from the bug was probably incorrect which created to much softness...not to mention 1/13 second (dark inside that flower) with slight breeze didn't help

A couple of other examples.....

Perhaps the pastel quality of the flowers just fit well with soft focus.

taken at f/5.6 with Zuiko 60mm macro


taken at f/16 with Zuiko 60mm macro


tried entirely manual focus...not sharp...aperture at f5.6


entirely manual focus...still not sharp at f/22...zoom lens at 200mm

New post with photos.......

cactus flower at f/5.6, @200mm with zoom lens..straight OOC


cactus flower at f/8 @200mm with zoom lens....straight OOC


minor Photoshop levels adjustments to f5.6 image

Thanks to Screamin Scott and G Brown for your input, too. I was back to the Desert Botanical Garden again but this time using my tripod and shutter release cable. Took photos at various f stops....came home and made more detailed notes. I brought my 60mm Zuiko macro and my Panasonic 40-200mm zoom. The zoom took tighter shots than the macro lens. I'm wondering if I am using that macro properly. I would have thought it would have magnified more than it did. As far as image quality went, there was no winner....the image quality was the same from both lenses....not as sharp as I was hoping....soft focused edges.....passable but not crisp. I have added a photo of a portion of one image to show the noise in it. I took all photos at ISO 250 to increase shutter speed a little. I will have to add the rest of the photos in another post because I messed up my attempt in this one.

enlarged portion of image to show noise

Give it a try. I'm all for interesting studies. Is that extension tube strictly manual?

I'd love to see your photos. Here is as magnified as I could get of aphids on flower stems.....ever so slightly cropped. It was taken with my 60mm Zuiko macro which has several distance settings. I increased the ISO up to 500 in order to get the shutter speed up to 1/160s because of a soft breeze, and aperture at f8.0. I didn't use a flash but had the camera on a tripod. From what I've seen on youtube f16 seems to be a recommended aperture because of macro's shallow depth of field.

This photo was horizontal but shows up vertical. Don't know why.

I'm wondering how many Olympus users or other 4/3 camera users have used extension tubes on their lenses. I'm still trying to master macro photography but am still not getting the results that I am looking for. I have a 60mm macro 4/3 Zuiko lens and a 35mm micro DSLR Zuiko with adapter ring plus a couple of zooms. Have tripod, cable release, (not sure I still have my ring flash). Hand holding in natural light with macros isn't working so well for me so far. The view finder shows a perfectly sharp image with good contrast but photos are mushy looking and dull and subjects not magnified enough. Want to see bugs eyes filling the frame. Saw one youtube video where this guy had spectacular photos hand holding his camera with a hand made diffuser flash. Sharp as a razor. Certainly the Olympus should be able to match this.

If this is not the post processing inquiry by Cdouthitt on March 19, then I missed the post regarding that poll. Sometimes the wording of the initial post can end in varying degrees of accuracy. I never thought of a minor tweak of a photo in Photoshop as post processing nor was I aware of what the camera itself was doing until I joined this forum. Now I am also aware that cameras internally process differently which I have noticed when I take images from two different cameras into Photoshop. I will assume that the post referred to post processing beyond what the camera did.

So who gets to decide what "perfect" is! Good grief! I won't say whose pp photos I looked at but I noticed a couple of issues. One photo had a bit of noise in it and the pp sharpening only enhanced it. Might think of that as artistic or just distractingly grainy. Another one had a somewhat blurred background but the post processing put a harder edge to the softened pattern and made the pattern stand out.....did'nt look artistic to me....just like someone was focusing on the major subject and not realizing what was happening to the background. Post processing is one of those things that can turn into an addiction to the point that one looses their perspective. If plant life were as sharp as I see in some of those photos you wouldn't want to run your skin against them in real life for fear of slashing yourself! Keeping things "real" in my opinion is important unless you are pretending that you are photographing on another planet or making some type of emotional statement. I don't usually get this carried away with my opinions, but I see too much post processing anymore and in my opinion it seems to deny the actual essence of what was being photo'd.

After checking the mogopod on Youtube I got distracted and learned some interesting things about macro photography from one of B&H's webinars. Funny how one subject leads to another. Your responses have been quite insightful so thanks so much for replying.

You will be learning new things about your camera for months to come. I have the E-M1 and was totally overwhelmed by the menu settings because the PDF manual wasn't all that well organized. Don't know how much is similar or different between the two models but the manual on the biofos.com website saved me from either returning the camera or flinging it out the window in frustration. People on this website were great support.

Once you understand the menu options and have your settings saved, using the camera becomes quite a pleasure.

Sixty seven is NOT too old to change. Sticking to your Nikons is fine, but don't blame your decision on your age. I haven't used a view finder for years but when I purchased my Olympus E-M1 I found using the viewfinder surprisingly the better option....curious to know what you didn't like about it. And when weight becomes a handicapping issue you might change your mind. ;)

Good to know. The focus issues must be a characteristic of this lens. I see a new invention here....or maybe it is already out there somewhere....a camera support that would attach to the waist/chest that would allow the whole body to move while eliminating hand shake.