First butterfly shots.....

Well, maybe not the first, but certainly the first time I ever went out specifically looking for butterflies. Here are my favorites. As you can tell, I like warm, rich colors as well as butterflies, and luckily they work together. I used my 300/4, which is an incredibly versatile lens, but clearly not the lens of choice for these sorts of shots. I'm interested in butterflies, small flowers and maybe other insects, and thinking of getting a versatile macro. Which one? Why? Your feedback would be really helpful!      

Thanks,
Gordon

#1



#2

View attachment 13627

#3

View attachment 13628

#4

View attachment 13629

 

Thanks Lisa. I'm working on a few more to post tomorrow - if my PS skills have gotten good enough. These shots are straight from Capture.

Gordon

 

Thanks Scott. I fully intend to keep going out for these guys, and luckily there is an arboretum that specializes in butterflies about 20 miles from home.

Gordon

 

Thanks Gordon. I had a laugh this morning when I got a post addressed to Gordon L. One of us may have to change our name. Wanna volunteer?
     

Gordon L

 

Thanks Frank! You did what I have to do - try them all! But my thinking is that the longer macros are what I need, either the Tamron 180 or the Nikon 200. All Nikon glass makes me think about a bankruptcy filing. :lol:
So I'll take a hard look at the Tamron.

Gordon

 

Thanks Mike. You are right - the 300/4 does a pretty good job on butterfly sized stuff, and it is a very versatile lens. If you are into birds at all, it is a killer flight shot lens. I'm interested in either the Nikon 200 macro or the Tamron 180, because I think it would have been easier to get those butterfly images, plus it would open up the real macro world.

Gordon

 

Thanks Kevin -

The 300/4 is a pretty amazing lens when you consider that it's good for everything from BIF to flowers and butterflies. But maneuvering around to get butterflies that don't stay put for more than a few seconds was a bit tough, and I'm thinking a long macro would be better. Plus it would open up the real macro world and let me take pictures of spiders, little slimy things and all the other good stuff that gets posted here. :lol:

Gordon

 

Thanks, Greg, but I think they are just different and each has their strengths and weaknesses. I deliberately went for color and overall impact rather than real macro detail. Except for the first image your butterflys and their backgrounds have pretty dull colors, but WOW what detail. I hope that someday I'll capture an image that combines both.

Gordon

 

Thanks Giles. I'm not ready to shell out any $$$ for a micro until I am satisfied (or dissatisfied) the my current kit does what I want. The combinations I'm playing with boggle the mind - at least mine. Combine the 300/4, 70-200/2.8VR, TC-14 and 17, and 12mm and 25mm Kenko extension tubes and you've got a whole lot of possibilities. The only place I would really have trouble with is the super-macro world, and I'm not sure I need or want to go there. I need to get my hands on a 200macro and play with it for comparison.

Gordon