[oppitronic]

[quote name='AAC7man' timestamp='1307556889' post='9077']

Nice pics



The review does the lens credit, it has seemed a little oddball. A bit expensive though....



That third pic is like my wife giving me a hard time

[/quote]



Thanks.

I don't think it is expensive (compared to the rest). It is considerably cheaper than the 105VR and still below the 60mm/2.8.

So it is the cheapest makro lens you can get for the small DX cams without AF motor.

The only other option I see here is the Tamron 90/2,8, which is nice for portrait as well.

I can't help with your wife <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



[quote name='mst' timestamp='1307557266' post='9078']

Nice pics, oppi, the dragonfly is awesome.

Also have some from my private collection to share.

*

[/quote]



Thanks. (I don't have too many of those shots...)

So you are into crab spiders? I love spiders too.

And I have one to show that was taken with a 55-200VR and a Raynox 150, my ultimate low cost macro solution.







It was much harder to shoot with that combination. Focus was only possible within a certain distance, a lot of light was needed, and picture composition was minimal, not to speak about the poor out of focus blur. But center sharpness was ok. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



The only advantage of using the 55-200VR and a Raynox 150 or 250 was that I could go beyond 1:1.